Roberts v. Sarros

John McNeill and Louise McNeill executed a joint revocable trust in 1989. The 1989 trust stated that John and Louise maintained a life interest in the trust’s income and principal and that their children, Patrick and Annmary (plaintiff), would inherit the trust property in equal shares after John and Louise both died. Article XV of the 1989 trust stated that the trust was subject to written revocation or amendment “by the Grantors.” Article XII further provided that singular and plural pronouns and identifiers could be used interchangeably to interpret the trust instrument unless context required otherwise. Patrick died in 1999, and his two children, Kimberly Sarros and Michael McNeill (defendants), inherited Patrick’s share per stirpes in accordance with the terms of the trust. John died in January 2002, and Annmary was appointed successor trustee with Louise’s consent. In March 2002, Louise executed an Amendment to Trust Agreement stating that, following her death, Annmary would receive the entire trust assets, eliminating Patrick’s children as beneficiaries. After Louise died, Kimberly and Michael petitioned to declare the March 2002 amendment invalid and have the 1989 trust administered in accordance with its original distribution terms, arguing that the joint 1989 trust became irrevocable upon John’s death in January 2002. The trial court granted Kimberly and Michael’s motion and invalidated the March 2002 amendment. Annmary appealed.