Tomazic v. Rapoport, 977 N.E.2d 1068

Rapoport served as Trustee of the David Tomazic Trust after David Tomazic’s 2009 death.
The 2009 trust/Will named Jennine as a 60% beneficiary, with no residual beneficiary.
A 2011 modification later redirected primary beneficiaries to Frank Tomazic Jr. (10%) and Deborah Liberatore (50%).
Jennine’s distribution was conditioned on attaining age 35 and being of sound mind and character; if not, her interest terminates.
Rapoport allegedly mismanaged the Trust, failed to provide accounting, and threatened eviction and termination of Jennine’s interest in retaliation for questions about value and administration.
Jennine sued in 2011 seeking to set aside the modification, remove Rapoport, obtain an accounting, and protect her trust interest, leading to interim restraining and removal orders.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Standing after termination of interest	Jennine retained standing via beneficiary status at filing	Jennine’s interest terminated; no standing	Standing preserved; court removal voided termination as nullity
Whether trust was wholly discretionary	Rapoport’s discretion was absolute and unreviewable	Trust grants sole discretion to trustee	Trust not wholly discretionary; court can review for bad faith and improper motive
Removal of trustee for serious breach of trust	Removable for serious breach under R.C. 5807.06(B)	Discretion to remove requires clear and convincing evidence	Remover proper; evidence showed serious breach of trust and improper motive
Court’s handling of discovery and accounting	Accounting deficiencies showed mismanagement	Accounting provided; no egregious breach	Court acted within authority to remove trustee and require protections for beneficiary

In re Estate of Ternansky, 141 N.E.2d 189 (Ohio App. 1957) (courts enforce trustees to act in good faith despite broad discretion)
Pack v. Osborn, 117 Ohio St.3d 14 (2008-Ohio-90) (even with broad discretion, trustees must act fairly and reasonably)