Shenandoah Valley National Bank v. Taylor
Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia
63 S.E.2d 786, 192 Va. 135 (1951)
- Written by Christine Raino, JD
Facts
Charles B. Henry died with no children or close relatives, survived primarily by first cousins and other more remote heirs-at-law. Henry’s will devised his estate in trust to the Shenandoah Valley National Bank (Bank) (defendant) and directed that the net income be distributed each year before Easter and before Christmas in “as many equal parts as there are children in the first, second and third grades of the John Kerr School of the City of Winchester” by giving each child an equal share “to be used by such child in the furtherance of his or her obtainment of an education.” One of Henry’s heirs-at-law (plaintiff) commenced an action against the Bank as trustee and executor challenging the validity of the trust established by Henry’s will. The trial court and intermediate appellate court found that the will did not establish a charitable trust. The Bank appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia. On appeal the Bank asserted that while it was impracticable to distribute the income directly to the children, the charitable educational purpose indicated by Henry’s intent that the income “be used by such child in the furtherance of his or her obtainment of an education,” could be carried out by directing the funds to a guardian or the children’s parents. Alternatively, the Bank asserted that the trust constituted a charitable trust because it achieves a purpose that benefits the community.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Miller, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 803,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.