Wilson v. Dallas

The singer James Brown executed a will and created an irrevocable trust (the trust). The will devised Brown’s personal and household effects to his six adult children and the remainder of his estate to the trust. Under the trust’s terms, upon Brown’s death, the trust was to be divided into two subtrusts: one for Brown’s grandchildren, capped at $2 million, and one to provide educational assistance for poor children (the charitable trust). Most of Brown’s substantial estate would pass to the charitable trust. Brown’s will and trust each contained a no-contest clause, under which any challenging beneficiaries forfeited their interests. Additionally, each document stated that relatives not identified were intentionally omitted. The trust also specified that Brown did not intend any trust assets to go to a former or future spouse. Brown later had an on-and-off relationship with Tommie Rae Hynie (plaintiff) that included a brief marriage. Hynie gave birth to a son purported to be Brown’s. After Brown died, Hynie and five of Brown’s adult children (plaintiffs) sued the personal representatives of Brown’s estate (defendants), who were also the trust’s trustees, seeking to set aside the will and trust for undue influence. The family members sought a distribution of Brown’s estate to his statutory heirs via intestate succession. State Attorney General Alan Wilson intervened on the charitable trust’s behalf. Ultimately, the court approved a settlement reached between Brown’s family and Wilson. The agreement gave substantially greater assets to family members than the will’s terms called for. The estate’s personal representatives were ordered by the court to sign the agreement over their objections. The personal representatives appealed, contesting the settlement’s validity.