Collins v. Serverson
Court of Chancery of Delaware
Bill against a trustee for enforcement of the trust and security :—Deborah Layton by her will devised the residue of her estate to her executors, in trust for the benefit of her daughter, Maria Collins, a married woman. The trustees were invested with the discretion to pay the money to Mrs. Collins, from time .to time, to secure or advance her comfort, the declared object of the trust being to secure the fund against the control of her husband.
Read the full summary
Bill against a trustee for enforcement of the trust and security :—Deborah Layton by her will devised the residue of her estate to her executors, in trust for the benefit of her daughter, Maria Collins, a married woman. The trustees were invested with the discretion to pay the money to Mrs. Collins, from time .to time, to secure or advance her comfort, the declared object of the trust being to secure the fund against the control of her husband. The trustees were empowered to bring the money into the Orphans Court, to be invested under the direction of the Court. There was a clear residue of…
1Opinion of the Court
Harrington, Chancellor.
I am in some doubt whether the complainant has made out a sufficient case of insecurity of the fund to warrant the interposition of the Chancellor on that ground alone. But there has been a failure to execute the trust; and against that the Court will relieve. The trustee is bound to apply the money to the purpose of the trust, i. e., the benefit of Mrs. Collins. It is true that the time and amount of the payments are in the discretion of the trustee, subject to the order of this Coiirt • but to refuse or neglect altogether to pay her is practically to annul the trust.…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Memphis Sav. Bank v. HouchensCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
- Shepard v. BurrCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1913
- Wilmington Trust Co. v. JacobsCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1910