Estate of: Kane, B., Estate of: Kane, B. No. 2158 EDA 2016

Background

Bernice M. Kane executed a revocable trust (2000, amended 2003) naming herself (then sole trustee) with co-trustee corporate successor arrangements; Wells Fargo served as co‑trustee/custodian and PNC was successor custodian.
Bernice executed a durable Power of Attorney (POA) on Sept. 10, 2012, appointing her daughter Lauren Hope Kane as agent; a physician’s letter dated Sept. 20, 2013 stated Bernice suffered dementia and could not handle financial affairs.
A dispute arose (late 2014/early 2015) when Lauren sought to use the POA to withdraw trust assets and revoke the trust unilaterally; Wells Fargo and PNC refused to honor those directives.
Lauren filed a petition to compel the corporate trustees to accept and act on the POA; the Orphans’ Court denied relief (July 5, 2016), and stayed transfer of custodianship pending appeal but refused emergency withdrawals.
On appeal, Lauren argued (1) the 2014 amendments to the PA POA statute required banks to accept the POA and (2) the POA conferred authority to withdraw trust corpus and revoke the trust despite trust terms requiring co‑trustee action. The Superior Court affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Kane)	Defendant's Argument (Wells Fargo / PNC)	Held
Whether 20 Pa.C.S. §5608.1 (2014 amendments) required acceptance of Kane's POA and made banks liable for refusal	§5608.1(a) obligates acceptance of a properly executed durable POA; appellees should have honored it and face liability	The 2014 amendments are not retroactive to a 2012 POA; even generally a person may refuse in good faith if they believe agent lacks authority (§5608.1(b)(6))	Court: No relief — 2014 amendments do not apply retroactively and appellees reasonably believed agent lacked authority; Orphans’ Court finding not an abuse of discretion
Whether the POA empowered Kane to withdraw trust income/corpus and revoke the revocable trust unilaterally	POA (and §5602(a)(7)/§5601.4) authorizes agent to withdraw property and amend/revoke settlor’s revocable trust	Trust instrument’s provisions and Trust Act limit agent authority; §5601.4(a) bars authority that is prohibited by another instrument; Uniform Trust Act §7752 limits agent’s power to amend/revoke unless expressly authorized by trust or court order	Court: Denied — trust terms and §7752 prevent unilateral revocation/withdrawal; POA cannot override express trust restrictions
Whether PNC could be appointed substitute custodian/co‑trustee without Kane's consent	Kane: trust provisions (as read) require her consent or allow replacement by grantor's daughter on disability	PNC/Orphans’ Ct.: appointment addressed by trust; Orphans’ Ct. stayed appointment portion pending appeal and appointment challenged lacks merit / is moot	Court: Issue inadequately developed and in part moot; waived and not reversible error
Whether PNC’s demands (ID, releases, indemnities) to accept co‑trusteeship were unlawful or unduly burdensome	Kane: demands exceeded statutory requirements and were unreasonable, preventing her service as co‑trustee	PNC: industry‑standard protections reasonably protect trust assets; parties must heed limitations in writing; agent’s scope strictly construed	Court: Waived for poor appellate development; on merits, demands reasonable as safeguards against dissipation; no relief

Key Cases Cited

In re Weidner, 938 A.2d 354 (Pa. 2007) (scope of POA determined by POA language and statutory framework; strict construction)
In re Estate of Whitley, 50 A.3d 203 (Pa. Super. 2012) (appellate review of Orphans’ Court factual findings and credibility)
In re Fiedler, 132 A.3d 1010 (Pa. Super. 2016) (POA powers governed by Code and strictly construed)
Kripp v. Kripp, 849 A.2d 1159 (Pa. 2004) (standard of review for questions of law and scope of appellate review)
Straub v. Cherne Indus., 880 A.2d 561 (Pa. 2005) (preservation of issues and waiver principles on appeal)
In re Estate of Luongo, 823 A.2d 942 (Pa. Super. 2003) (reversal standard where Orphans’ Court applies law incorrectly)