Court Opinion

ID: 9446548
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 21:58:11.56915+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:30:41.855305
License: Public Domain

On Petition for Rehearing.
PER CURIAM.
Taxpayers have petitioned for a rehearing upon three issues involved in our decision of December 12, 1958. On one of these issues, that opinion relied in part on our understanding that counsel had conceded the grantor’s ability under New York law to appoint herself as a substitute trustee; counsel now states that no such concession was intended. We have therefore reconsidered this issue on its merits.
The trust in no way limits the freedom of the grantor to appoint anyone as trustee (or, after 1946, individual co-trustee). The grantor could, under Article Nineteenth, have directed that a trustee appointed by her serve without compensation; the dissenting opinion in Loughridge’s Estate v. Commissioner, 10 Cir., 1950, 183 F.2d 294, certiorari denied 1950, 340 U.S. 830, 71 S.Ct. 67, 95 L.Ed. 609, which is the only authority casting doubt on the breadth of her discretion which we have found or to which we have been cited, is thus distinguishable. In the absence of any indication to the contrary, we must hold that New York would follow the generally accepted rule that the settlor may make herself a trustee. See Restatement, Trusts § 100 (1935).
The other points raised were fully and very ably briefed and argued by counsel and were disposed of in our opinion of December 12, 1958.
An order will be entered denying the petition for rehearing.