July 1, 2025
This true story was reported in the Ohio appellate decisions.
Roger Glass had three testamentary documents. The first, executed in February 2022, was a will that left his residuary estate to his husband, Larry Mullins. Larry was named the executor of the estate. The second was a revocable living trust, which held shares in a private company, Marene, Inc., as well as an Ameriprise Brokerage Account. The trust beneficiaries were the three daughters of Roger’s sister, Carol Pollock. Larry became the trustee of living trust at Roger’s death. Finally, the Roger Glass Stock Trust was to hold shares in Marene for Roger’s benefit during his life. At his death, his sister became the trustee of this trust, and the remainder beneficiaries were the same three nieces.
Roger died in August 2022. Said the Court: “At some point following the death of Roger Glass, Mullins made a determination that the Marene stock had not been transferred to either trust, and that it had become a part of Glass’s estate, which thus passed exclusively to Mullins.”
In July 2023 Carol and her daughters filed a lawsuit demanding that Roger’s testamentary plan be carried out, and that Larry be removed as the trustee of the living trust. He filed a counterclaim seeking a judgment that he was sole legal owner of the Marene shares. The probate court removed Larry as trustee, and he appealed.
The appellate court noted that a trustee may only be removed for a “serious breach of trust.” “Serious” is not defined. A serious breach of trust might be a single act that causes significant harm, or it might be a series of small breaches that individually do not justify removal but do so when considered together. The duties of a trustee are spelled out in the Ohio statutes, and among them is a duty to communicate with beneficiaries.
Among Larry’s lapses in this regard, he:
- Never advised the beneficiaries of the existence of the trust or their right to a copy of the trust document
- Never notified them of his acceptance of the trusteeship or his contact information
- Failed to keep them reasonably informed about the administration of the trust.
- What’s more, the Court said that there was no evidence Larry had taken any steps at all to administer the trust! He was unable to provide any evidence at trial about the status of the brokerage account, for example, and had given the beneficiaries no information about the account. Because Larry failed to meet his statutory duties as trustee, his removal from that post was confirmed by the court. The decision did not identify a successor trustee. Choosing a spouse or family member as executor or trustee might seem like a good idea, but a neutral, professional fiduciary, such as us, is often the better choice. With a trust company or bank trust department, conflicts of interest are avoided. Implementation of testamentary wishes becomes far more likely.
« Back to Articles
