Legal Opinion

Howard v. Howard

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 28, 2007No. CV 03-0066; A123335PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtOrtega, J.

This appeal arises from a dispute between the income beneficiary and a remainder beneficiary of trusts established by the late Leo Howard. Marcene Howard, the income beneficiary for life, is Leo’s widow; Coy Howard, the remainder beneficiary, is Leo’s son. Coy contends that the trial court erred by instructing the trustee not to consider Marcene’s other assets in administering and making investment decisions for the trust. We review the evidence de novo, Goodwill Industries v. U.S. Bank, 196 Or App 556, 559, 103 P3d 1165 (2004), and affirm.

Leo and his first wife had three children, including…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Chipman v. SpitznagelCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
  2. Goodwill Industries v. U.S. BankCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
  3. Windishar v. WindisharCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987
  4. Windishar v. WindisharCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Frakes v. NayCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
  2. Schmidt v. HartCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
  3. In The Matter Of: The Catherine P. Davis Living TrustCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API