Kunce v. Robinson

Ruth Ulery, decedent, executed a revocable inter vivos trust in 1980 into which she placed all her real and personal property, naming Duane Robinson (defendant) as trustee. The 1980 Trust directed Robinson to make distributions to Ulery during her lifetime, and then to make distributions of trust income and principle to Ulery’s children and grandchildren in his sole discretion after her death. In 1981, Ulery executed a second trust that was identical to the 1980 Trust except for the addition of a clause stating that Robinson could distribute trust assets after Ulery’s death to “others as the Trustee in his discretion may deem appropriate.” Robinson procured the 1981 Trust for Ulery at her directive. Extrinsic evidence from witnesses to the 1981 Trust, as well as Ulery’s relatives, indicated that Ulery’s intention in establishing the 1981 Trust was to benefit a recently born grandchild. After Ulery’s death, her daughters, Thelma Kunce and Ruth Whitaker (plaintiffs), brought an action to void the 1981 Trust, arguing that (1) it was the product of Robinson’s undue influence and (2) the clause granting Robinson discretion to distribute trust assets to “others” was indefinite enough to be unenforceable. The trial court (a) ruled that Robinson did not unduly influence Ulery and (b) upheld the 1981 Trust as drafted. Kunce and Whitaker appealed.