Opinion ID: 6536712
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The District Court's Decision Granting EFM's Motion for Judgment

Text: [¶20] The district court granted EFM's Petition for Instructions. It found the Trust is underfunded, due in part to Bruce's unexpected death. It decided decanting of trust property is specifically provided for under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 4-10-816 (a) (xxviii) and (xxx) (LexisNexis 2019). In particular, § 4-10-816(a)(xxx) (LexisNexis 2019) allows a trustee to [s]eparate a trust for the benefit of more than one (1) beneficiary into separate trusts or shares for each beneficiary, unless the trust instrument requires the trust property be held in one (1) trust for the beneficiaries. The court determined: There is no indication that the Settlor required the trust property be held in one (1) trust. It noted: [T]he Trust directs that the Settlor's specific intent is to keep the Ranch 'for the benefit of the Settlor's Wife and descendants as long as possible'. Petitioner's Exhibit C , 2.1. Decanting does not necessarily disrupt this motive. This Court will instead inquire into the general intent of the Settlor in determining whether he intended for the trust to be held specifically in one (1) single Trust. Ex[x]on Mobil[ ] Corp. v. State, Dept. of Revenue , 2009 WY 139 , ¶ 11, 219 P.3d 128 , 134 (Wyo. 2009). Here the Trust contemplates the Trustee's ability to determine how the Ranch shall be held for the benefit of the beneficiaries and does not require one joint trust for all beneficiaries. ' See Petitioner's Exhibit C , ¶ 2.1.1 (giving the Trustee power to maintain the Ranch ... as the Trustee may determine.' ). (Emphasis in original.) [¶21] The court also decided decanting is not contrary to the overarching purpose of the trust. It concluded: [T]he intent of the trust is clear. The circumstances surrounding the trust property changed and the Trustee is in the best position to determine-and subsequently has determined-a valid means of preserving Settlor's intentions, as the Settlor foresaw it would. See Petitioner's Exhibit C , ¶ 2.1.1. Notable, decanting is not contrary to the overall purpose of the trust.  It also found: Decanting preserves the use of the Ranch by the Settlor's wife and descendants. [¶22] Finally, the court stated: There is no indication that the Trustee seeks instructions in bad faith or breached its fiduciary duty. To the contrary, the Trustee acts in conformance with its power. In sum, the court concluded: The purposes of Trust administration both under our statutes and the Settlor[']s language and intent are met by granting the Petition for Instructions.