MANARY v. Anderson
265 P.3d 163
Wash. Ct. App.2011Background
- Homer Greene and Eileen Greene created a revocable living trust in 1995, funding it with their residential property as trustees and naming beneficiaries.
- Eileen died in 1998, after which Homer became sole trustee; he did not establish the Family Trust or Survivor's Trust as contemplated by the trust terms.
- In August 1999 Homer amended the trust, naming his sister Alice as sole beneficiary and Jeffrey Manary as second successor trustee; no dispute about Manary's status as trustee.
- Homer, living on the property, executed a last will on November 5, 2004 bequeathing his interest in the property to Edwin Anderson.
- Homer died in January 2007; Anderson was appointed personal representative and continued to occupy the property.
- Alice Manary filed suit to quiet title; Anderson counterclaimed; after filings, the trial court granted summary judgment to Manary, later appealed by Anderson.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the Testamentary Disposition of Nonprobate Assets Act apply | Manary contends Act does not apply. | Anderson argues Act controls disposition of nonprobate asset. | Act applies; Anderson entitled to asset |
| Whether Homer's interest in the property is a nonprobate asset under the Act | Manary contends property was a trust asset not nonprobate. | Anderson asserts asset is nonprobate under Act. | Property qualifies as a nonprobate asset |
| Whether notice provisions of RCW 11.11.050/070 apply | Manary argues notice to him was required. | Anderson contends notice not required since he held the asset and statute targets third parties in possession. | No notice to Manary required; statutory requirements not triggered |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Estate of Furst, 113 Wash.App. 839, 55 P.3d 664 (2002) (distinguishes revocation of trusts by will and Act applicability)
- Schaaf v. Highfield, 127 Wash.2d 17, 896 P.2d 665 (1995) (standard for summary judgment review)
- Lake v. Woodcreek Homeowners Ass'n, 169 Wash.2d 516, 243 P.3d 1283 (2010) (statutory interpretation principles and plain meaning)
- State v. Engel, 166 Wash.2d 572, 210 P.3d 1007 (2009) (principles of statutory interpretation and context)
- Rest. Dev., Inc. v. Cananwill, Inc., 150 Wash.2d 674, 80 P.3d 598 (2003) (statutory construction framework)