Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Authority conferred on a person to designate recipients of property or interests in property, whether by will or deed.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Withdrawal Power Classification
Parker Phillips serves as trustee of a family trust holding investment assets. The trust grants him authority to withdraw principal for his own benefit without any standard restricting the withdrawals. A creditor seeks to reach those assets in Parker's bankruptcy proceeding. The withdrawal authority qualifies as a presently exercisable general power of appointment, bringing the assets into the estate.
Beneficiary Appointment Authority
Pablo Perez holds a beneficial interest in a trust created by his parent. The trust terms authorize Pablo, acting outside his role as trustee, to direct distribution of trust principal to designated family members. When the trustee questions whether Pablo counts as a beneficiary, the appointment authority confirms his status under the governing definition.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Uniform Acts
Model Codes
Restatements
Casebooks
Hornbooks
Course Outlines
Study Supplements
Dictionaries
Trust Asset Inclusion Dispute
Paige Porter created an inter vivos trust retaining authority to direct trust assets to herself or her estate. Upon her death, her surviving spouse claims the trust assets fall outside the probate estate. The retained authority operates as a general power of appointment, requiring inclusion of the assets for spousal election purposes.
Sullivan v. Burkin390 Mass. 864, 867, 460 N.E.2d 572 (1984)
Jurisdictional Contact Analysis
Preston Pratt, a nonresident trust beneficiary, exercises a power of appointment over assets held by a Delaware trustee. The trust was funded by a Florida settlor who later moved to Florida. Florida courts assess whether the exercise creates sufficient contacts for personal jurisdiction over the trustee.
Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz471 U.S. 462, 474 (1985)
State Law Characterization
Perry Pratt's estate includes a trust over which his spouse held a general power of appointment that she released before his death. The estate claims a marital deduction on the federal return. Federal authorities determine the character of the interest under controlling state law rather than accepting a state trial court ruling.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Estate of Bosch387 U.S. 456, 465 (1967)
Trustee Jurisdiction Challenge
Pilar Pena, a Delaware trustee, faces a Florida proceeding challenging the validity of a power of appointment exercised under a trust created by a Florida settlor. The trustee received notice only by publication. The court evaluates whether the trustee's contacts with Florida support personal jurisdiction.
Hanson v. Denckla357 U.S. 235, 254 (1958)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
5
How does a general power of appointment differ from a special power?+
A general power permits the donee to appoint property to anyone, including the donee or the donee's estate. A special power restricts appointments to a defined class of permissible appointees.
When is a power of appointment considered presently exercisable?+
A power is presently exercisable when the donee may exercise it during life without waiting for death or obtaining consent from an adverse party or trustee under an ascertainable standard.
Does a residuary clause in a will exercise a power of appointment?+
Courts split on whether a general residuary clause exercises a power of appointment. Some require an express reference to the power. Others presume exercise unless the will shows contrary intent.
What happens if a donee fails to exercise a power of appointment?+
The appointive property passes according to the donor's instructions for default takers. Absent such instructions, it reverts to the donor's estate or passes under the instrument creating the power.
Can a power of appointment be released during the donee's lifetime?+
A donee may release a power of appointment in whole or in part, either inter vivos or by will, subject to any restrictions in the creating instrument.
357 U.S. 235 (1958)Conflict of Laws
…647-649; Doherty & Co. v. Goodman, 294 U. S. 623, 627; Hess v. Pawloski, 274 U. S. 352. The execution in Florida of the powers of appointment under which the beneficiaries and appointees claim does not give Florida a substantial connection with the contract on which this suit is based. It is the validity of the trust agreement,…