Brief Fact Summary. The testator’s children contend that their father transferred all of his property to their grandmother to hold in trust until they were responsible enough to manage it. The testator’s mother claims that no such trust was intended and that the children’s claim is bared by the statute of limitations.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. A trust can arise from implied circumstances as a result of the presumed intention of the parties. It is repudiated when the trustee makes claims or other conduct that denies there is a trust and claims the trust property as his or her own.
Whether Clive transferred his property to Gladys as a gift or to hold in trust for the benefit of his children?
Whether a claim under the trust was bared by the statute of limitations and JNOV was proper?
Affirmed. The jury found and the testimony is consistent with their finding that Gladys was to hold the property in trust for the benefit of the children.
No. Reversed. An action based on an express trust is subject to a three year statute of limitations, however such period does not begin until the beneficiary of the trust discover or should have discovered that the trust has been terminated or repudiated by the trustee. Here the jury must determine these underlying facts and therefore the grant of JNOV was improper.
A motion for a JNOV admits the truth of the opponent's evidence and all inferences that can be reasonably drawn therefrom, and requires the evidence be interpreted most strongly against the moving party and in the light most favorable to the opponent.View Full Point of Law