Landmark Communications, Inc. v. Sovran Bank, N.A.
Virginia Supreme Court
387 S.E.2d 484, 239 Va. 158 (1990)
- Written by Serena Lipski, JD
Facts
William S. Glennan’s will was probated in 1958. The will, which was executed in 1952, created a testamentary trust to hold stock in Norfolk Newspapers, Inc. Item 11 of Glennan’s will designated six income beneficiaries, including Allen Tyler (plaintiff). Item 12 of the will provided that the trust would terminate on the death of the last surviving income beneficiary, and item 13 designated the remainder beneficiaries. One-fourth of the trust remainder would go to Lena Allen Everett if she was living, and if she was not living, then the one-fourth share would be divided equally among two of Lena’s four children or their heirs. Another one-fourth share was to go to Genevive Parker Allen, wife of James E. Allen, Jr., if she was married to and living with James; or, if James predeceased Genevive, then the one-fourth interest was to be divided equally among their children or heirs. Another one-fourth interest was to go to William B. Clark or his heirs, and the last one-fourth interest was to go to J. Goodenow Tyler or his heirs. Decades after Glennan’s death, the last surviving income beneficiary, Allen Tyler, along with eight remainder beneficiaries (plaintiffs) (collectively, Tyler) organized the sale of the trust assets to Landmark Communications, Inc., and TeleCable Corporation (collectively, Landmark) (plaintiff), the successors to Norfolk Newspapers, Inc. Landmark conditioned the sale on the beneficiaries’ interests being vested, so Landmark and Tyler filed suit seeking a declaration from the court, naming as defendants Sovran Bank, N.A. (Sovran) (defendant), the trustee, and 36 adult and 29 infant, unborn, and unknown descendants of the named remainder beneficiaries. A guardian ad litem was appointed to represent the interests of the infant, unborn, and unknown beneficiaries. Sovran and the guardian ad litem answered, arguing that the beneficiaries’ interests were not vested but were alternate contingent remainders. The trial court agreed, and Landmark and Tyler appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lacy, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.