From our private database of 37,100+ case briefs...
Stegemeier v. Magness
Delaware Supreme Court
728 A.2d 557 (1999)
Facts
A. Gray Magness’s will appointed his wife, Anne Magness (defendant) and Charles Allmond III to serve as coadministrators of his estate. The will also established a residuary trust, naming Donald Magness (defendant), Gray’s brother, as trustee. Anne was designated the trust’s income beneficiary for life. After Anne’s death, the trust assets were to be divided among Gray’s six daughters. Gray owned 171 lots in a real estate development, as well as undeveloped land adjacent to the development. At his death, title to the real estate vested in Donald as trustee, subject to a power of sale granted to Anne and Allmond as administrators of the estate. After Gray’s death, Anne and Donald formed a new construction company, Magness Builders, Inc. Magness Builders purchased the real estate held in the residuary trust, built homes on it, and sold the homes to third-party purchasers. Anne and Allmond conveyed the property to Magness Builders pursuant to their power of sale. Susane Stegemeier and Diane Mulrooney (plaintiffs), two of the trust’s residuary beneficiaries, sued Anne and Donald for breach of fiduciary duty, arguing that Stegemeier and Mulrooney had not been advised of the sale of the trust property. The trial court found for Anne and Donald, reasoning that they had not engaged in self-dealing and that, because the property had sold for a fair price, the beneficiaries had not suffered a financial loss. Stegemeier and Mulrooney appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hartnett, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 629,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 37,100 briefs, keyed to 984 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.