Court Opinion

ID: 9609556
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 03:28:25.561092+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:55:44.669295
License: Public Domain

HOWE, Justice
(concurring and dissenting):
I concur that a trust was created as payments were received and that the court can modify the divorce decree to provide that no more payments should come into the trust.
I dissent from the balance of the holding of the majority opinion. I believe it to be error to require that the trust continue as to the funds on hand just because all the beneficiaries did not consent to its termination, or because its purpose was not fulfilled. Under § 30-3-5, U.C.A.1953, the district court has broad powers to change the funding of education for minor children from one source to another, or to discontinue funding completely. (Incidentally, both parents here offered to personally pay any expenses if their children desired further education). The formal rules of trust law should not be applied to perpetuate the trust in view of the power of the court under § 30-3-5 to terminate it.
I also dissent from the statement in the majority opinion that the balance on hand, $5,914.28, has “vested” in the children. This amount belongs to the parents upon termination of the trust under the terms of their stipulation and the divorce decree entered in 1973.
TIBBS, District Judge, concurs in the opinion of HOWE, J.