Roy v. Comerica Bank
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, C.J.
The issue in this case is whether a spendthrift trust which purports to give the same beneficiary an interest in both the income and the principal is valid in Michigan.
*366More particularly, the issue appears to be whether the language in Rose v Southern Michigan Nat'l Bank, 255 Mich 275, 281; 238 NW 284 (1931), "The gift to the donee must be only of the income” (followed in In re Ford Estate, 331 Mich 220, 229; 49 NW2d 154 [1951]), prevails or whether Michigan should follow the rule of the Restatement Trusts, 2d, § 153(1), p 318, comment b:
Where a beneficiary of a trust is entitled to receive…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Parker v. Port Huron HospitalMichigan Supreme Court · 1960
- Abendschein v. FarrellMichigan Supreme Court · 1969
- Wilson v. Doehler-Jarvis Division of National Lead Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1960
- Womack v. BuchhornMichigan Supreme Court · 1971
- Eaton v. Boston Safe Deposit & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- In Re DunnUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · 1997
- In Re Edgar EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1986