Erwin v. Frost
2014 Ark. App. 51
Ark. Ct. App.2014Background
- Donald Ross Frost and his wife Shelby executed the "Donald Ross and Shelby Lee Frost Revocable Living Trust" on July 25, 2007; Donald died in May 2008.
- Lori Erwin (Donald’s adult daughter from a prior marriage) sued in March 2010 asking the court to declare the trust irrevocable, alleging diminished capacity, scrivener’s error, misunderstanding, undue influence, and overreaching.
- Shelby, as surviving spouse and successor trustee, amended the trust after Donald’s death to change beneficiaries, effectively disinheriting Erwin and two sisters.
- Trial evidence was mixed: witnesses (including the drafting attorney and a pastor) testified Donald understood the trust and intended it to be revocable; family members testified Donald loved his daughters and may not have understood or intended revocability.
- The circuit court found Erwin failed to prove diminished capacity, undue influence, scrivener’s error, or lack of understanding and denied reformation; Erwin appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trust should be declared irrevocable / reformed | Erwin: Trust was product of diminished capacity, mistake, or undue influence; settlor did not intend revocable trust | Shelby: Settlor intended a revocable trust; settlor understood revocability and authorized Shelby to amend | Court: Affirmed — Erwin failed to prove mistake, diminished capacity, or undue influence |
| Whether Donald lacked capacity when signing the trust | Erwin: Donald was ill, confused, and did not understand "revocable" despite being able with numbers; thus lacked capacity | Shelby & witnesses: Donald was competent, discussed and requested a revocable trust, attorney explained revocability | Court: Credibility resolved for defendant; no clear error in finding capacity present |
| Whether scrivener’s errors/mistake of expression invalidate revocability | Erwin: Language discrepancies and drafting errors show settlor’s intent was different (irrevocable) | Shelby: Drafting errors irrelevant to settlor’s intent to allow Shelby post-death amendment; testimony supports revocability | Court: Errors insufficient; Erwin did not meet burden for reformation |
| Standard of review / burden of proof | Erwin: Trial required clear and convincing evidence for reformation | Shelby: (Responded on merits) | Court: Affirmed trial judge’s findings; on appeal, review for clear error (defer to fact-finder credibility determinations) |
Key Cases Cited
- Akin v. First Nat’l Bank, 25 Ark. App. 341, 758 S.W.2d 14 (Ark. Ct. App. 1988) (standard for reformation and proof requirements)
- Farm Credit Midsouth, PCA v. Reece Contracting, Inc., 359 Ark. 267, 196 S.W.3d 488 (Ark. 2004) (standard for clearly erroneous review and deference to fact-finder credibility determinations)