Dutcher v. Dutcher-Phipps Crane & Rigging, Inc., 510 S.W.3d 592 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2016, pet. denied).
Husband died owning shares of stock issued to him
individually. Wife claimed the stock passed to her under the residuary
clause of Husband’s will. However, Children asserted that the shares
passed to them as beneficiaries of trusts claiming that due to a
mistake, the shares were issued to him personally rather than in his
capacity as the trustee of the trusts. The trial court agreed with
Children.
The appellate court affirmed. The court explained
that merely because the shares did not indicate that Husband held them
in his capacity as a trustee did not mean that the facts and
circumstances could not show that he actually held them in a
representative capacity. The court carefully examined written documents
which bolstered Children’s claim that the shares were supposed to have
been issued to Husband in his capacity as a trustee. For example,
Husband amended and restated the trusts after the alleged transfer.
There would have been no reason to amend the trusts if the trusts were
not receiving the shares as new trust property.
Moral: Property held in a seemingly
personal capacity can later be shown to be held in the capacity as a
trustee if there are sufficient facts and circumstances showing that the
property was actually intended to be held in a representative capacity.