Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ambrose v. First National Bank of Nevada

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided March 5, 1971No. 6276Published

1Dissent

Zenoff, C. J., and Mowbray, J.,

dissenting.

We respectfully dissent. The trust in question is a valid spendthrift trust as regards the appellant; a material purpose of the trust remains to be accomplished; and the appellant is collaterally estopped from asserting the trust does not provide for payments to her. For these reasons, the decision of the lower court should be affirmed.

1. Appellant urges that the trust is invalid since it was invalid as regarded her mother as an attempt to establish a spendthrift trust for oneself. Appellant does not argue that the trust was void ab initio, however,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Clark v. ClarkNevada Supreme Court · 1964
  2. Lucich v. MedinNevada Supreme Court · 1867
  3. Freman v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  4. Coughran v. First National BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API