McClure v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, 147 S.W.3d 648 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2004, pet. denied).
Settlor created an inter vivos trust. Settlor retained the power to
revoke the trust provided the revocation was in writing and the writing
was delivered to Trustee. Later, Settlor executed a will leaving the
majority of her estate to this trust. After Settlor’ death, a dispute
arose as to whether a subsequent holographic will operated to revoke the
trust so that trust property would pass under the terms of this will
rather than the trust. The trial court granted a summary judgment
holding that the holographic will did not revoke the trust.
The appellate court agreed. The court began its analysis by recognizing
that if a settlor specifies the method of revocation, that method must
be followed for an attempted revocation to be effective. The court
explained that the key to deciding the case was whether this holographic
will was delivered to Trustee prior to Settlor’s death. After examining
the evidence, the court found nothing to raise a fact issue about
Trustee’s lack of receipt of a notice of revocation. Accordingly, the
court affirmed the summary judgment that Settlor had not effectively
revoked the trust.
Moral: If a settlor specifies a method of trust revocation, the settlor
must comply exactly with that method for a revocation to be effective.