Claude H. Baldwin III v. Miles Branch and Suzanne B. Ligon

Summary

The Supreme Court of Alabama held that a beneficiary's interest in a revocable trust vested when the trust was created, even though possession was deferred until the settlor's death. Because the beneficiary predeceased the settlor, her vested interest passed to her estate and ultimately to her children. The court also held that Alabama's statutory antilapse provision for wills does not apply to trusts.

Holdings

1. Ala. Code § 43-8-224, which by its plain language applies to wills, does not apply to revocable trusts. Alabama therefore has no statutory antilapse rule for gifts made in revocable trusts.
2. Bernice held a vested remainder interest in the trust. Her interest passed to her estate at Claude's death, and Branch and Ligon were entitled to receive her share.
3. The trust's revocation-and-amendment provision and spendthrift provision did not prevent Bernice's remainder from vesting.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Alabama's antilapse statute, Ala. Code § 43-8-224, applies to a disposition in a revocable trust.
2. Whether Bernice B. Branch's interest under the revocable trust vested when the trust was created even though distribution was scheduled for Claude's death and Bernice predeceased Claude.
3. Whether Claude's reserved power to revoke or amend the trust and the trust's spendthrift provision prevented Bernice's interest from vesting.

Disposition

affirmed