Rogers v. Ardella Veigel Inter Vivos Trust No. 2, 162 S.W.3d 281 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2005, pet. denied).
A dispute arose as to whether certain gifts in Testator’s will were
(1) outright gifts of life estates or (2) gifts in trust of life
interests. The court examined the face of the will and found that the
words Testator used were unambiguous and not susceptible to more than
one construction. Thus, extrinsic evidence was not admissible under San
Antonio Area Foundation v. Lang, 35 S.W.3d 636, 641 (Tex. 2000), to vary
the plain meaning of Testator’s language. Testator clearly explained
that the gifts were for the beneficiaries’ “lifetime” and then later in
the will referred to the gifts as granting “a life estate.” In addition,
Testator created trusts in the same will by using trust language and
naming trustees.
Note: Because the court determined that no trusts were created by this
language, the plaintiff’s request for attorney fees from an alleged
trustee for breach of fiduciary duty under Property Code § 114.061
failed.
Moral: Even if a testator clearly nominates a gift as granting a life
estate, the argument may still be made that the gift is actually one in
trust.