Legal Opinion

In the Matter of Thomas

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided May 16, 1973PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WALSH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a Court of Chancery determination of self-dealing on the part of a trustee-remainderman with consequent limitation on the benefits to be realized by reason of such conflict.

The facts which underlie the controversy are not in serious dispute, although the parties contest the conclusions which may be drawn from them. On March 23, 1966, Emid A. Thomas (“trustor”) executed a will which included a testamentary trust with his wife as the income beneficiary and his four children as remaindermen. One of the remaindermen, James B. Thomas, (“James”) was also named as…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Equitable Trust Co. v. GallagherSupreme Court of Delaware · 1954
  2. Wilmington Trust Co. v. CarrowCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1924
  3. Bloodworth v. BloodworthSupreme Court of Georgia · 1968
  4. In re ThomasCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1972

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Oberly v. KirbySupreme Court of Delaware · 1991
  2. Stegemeier v. MagnessSupreme Court of Delaware · 1999
  3. Vredenburgh v. JonesCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1975
  4. Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 95,447 S. William Green v. Santa Fe Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976
  5. Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 95,447 S. William Green v. Santa Fe Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API