In re McKinney
67 A.3d 824
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2013Background
- Settlor trusts lacked portability clauses but 2006 PA provisions added no-fault removal for substantial change of circumstances.
- Petitioner seeks removal of PNC Bank as trustee of two trusts (Testamentary and Descendants’ Trust) and successor SunTrust Delaware.
- Trustee lineage spans multiple mergers: Bank and Trust → Pennbank → Integra Bank North → Integra Bank → National City Bank of Pennsylvania → National City Bank → PNC after 2009.
- Petitioner moved from Pennsylvania to Virginia; beneficiaries reside in Virginia; she cites changed personal needs and centralized administration as justification.
- Trial court denied removal and reimbursed PNC’s fees; appellate court reverses, finds no-fault criteria satisfied, and remands to assess SunTrust Delaware’s suitability.
- The case examines whether removal best serves beneficiaries’ interests, not inconsistent with material trust purpose, under 20 Pa.C.S.A. § 7766(b)(4).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether no-fault removal under § 7766(b)(4) applies. | McKinney argues substantial change justifies removal. | PNC contends no proper substantial change. | Yes; no-fault removal applicable with clear and convincing showing. |
| Whether removal is in the beneficiaries’ best interests. | Removal serves beneficiaries’ best interests. | Removal would not serve best interests. | Removal in beneficiaries’ best interests supported by record. |
| Whether removal is not inconsistent with a material purpose of the trust. | Removal aligns with settlors’ intent to effective administration. | Trusteeship designation was a material purpose. | Removal not inconsistent with material purpose. |
| Whether a suitable successor trustee is available. | SunTrust Delaware is suitable. | Suitability unresolved at trial. | Remand to determine SunTrust Delaware’s suitability. |
| Whether the trial court erred in awarding fees to PNC. | Fees improper if removal granted. | Fees permissible when beneficiary challenges trustee. | Reversed; fee ruling vacated pending remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Estate of Brown, 30 A.3d 1200 (Pa. Super. 2011) (trustee removal standards; deference to trial court’s credibility)
- In re Estate of Mumma, 41 A.3d 41 (Pa. Super. 2012) (no-fault removal requirements; clear and convincing standard)
- Rapela v. Green, 289 P.3d 428 (Utah 2012) (best interests analysis allows trustee comparison; focus on successor suitability)
- Davis v. U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 243 S.W.3d 425 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007) (factors influencing best interests: location, taxes, familiarity, fees)
- Fleet Nat. Bank v. Foote, 837 A.2d 788 (Conn. 2004) (best interests factors include convenience, personalization, and lower fees)