Legal Opinion

Probasco v. Clark

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided May 4, 1984No. 4, September Term, 1984PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GILBERT, Chief Judge.

It is highly doubtful that when Herbert L. Armstrong created a simple testamentary trust leaving an income to his son for life and the remainder to a church that he foresaw that such a straightforward bequest would lead to this litigation. 1

This case is a variation of the old saw, “Where there is a will, there are relatives.” Here there is a relative who seeks to uphold the provisions of a testamentary trust and a remainderman that desires to accelerate its acquisition of the corpus of the trust. The concept of the old adage, nevertheless, remains the same.

From the record…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Bowers' Trust EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
  2. Carter v. KemptonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  3. Johns v. MontgomeryIllinois Supreme Court · 1914
  4. Altemeier v. HarrisIllinois Supreme Court · 1949
  5. Stellings v. AutrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Penn Mutual Life Insurance v. AbramsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. Vito v. GrueffCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2017
  3. In Re Joint E. & S. Dist. Asbestos LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1995
  4. Findley v. FaliseDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1995
  5. Mary Kirgan v. Manufacturers & Traders TrustCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2020

2 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