Also known as: res of the trust · trust reses · trust property · trust corpus
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
The identifiable property interest that constitutes the subject of a trust. A trust cannot exist without this property, which the trustee holds for the benefit of the beneficiaries.
Tristan Thompson serves as trustee of a trust holding rental properties for two siblings. When deciding whether to sell one building or renovate another, Tristan must weigh the income needs of the current beneficiary against the long-term value for the remainder beneficiary. The trust res remains intact only if Tristan balances both interests without favoring one.
Tyrone Tran transfers $200,000 into an account he designates as trust property for his niece. Because Tyrone both creates the trust and supplies the funds, he qualifies as settlor of that portion of the res. Any later addition by another person would create a separate portion attributable to that contributor.
Tiffany Torres resigns as trustee of a trust holding investment securities. Until a successor is appointed and the securities are transferred, Tiffany retains authority to sell a declining stock to prevent loss. The res stays protected during the transition period.
Timothy Tang is removed as trustee of farmland held in trust. He must immediately arrange transfer of the deeds and leases to the successor trustee rather than retaining possession. Failure to deliver the res promptly exposes Timothy to liability for any resulting damage.
Tracy Torres funds a trust with corporate bonds that generate interest. The res produces income taxed according to the trust's terms and the settlor's retained powers. Any distribution of the bonds themselves requires separate accounting from the income they produce.
The executor paid the federal estate tax that included the value of the trust principal and filed suit for a refund in the district court. All facts were stipulated for the district court proceeding. The district court ruled for the government. The executor appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The decedent had been a donor to three inter vivos trusts previously established by his wife. He served as a trustee of the trusts until the date of his death. The initial life beneficiary was the decedent's adult son. Eighty percent of the trust income was normally payable to the son, with the balance added to principal. Subsequent beneficiaries were the son's widow and his issue. The trust instruments contained powers in Article 4 and Article 7. Article 4 permitted the trustees in their absolute discretion to increase the percentage of income payable to the son when needed in case of sickness or desirable in view of changed circumstances. The trustees could also cease paying income to the son and add it all to principal during such period as they decided the stoppage was for his best interests. Article 7 gave the trustees broad administrative powers, including discretion to acquire investments not normally held by trustees and authority to determine what was to be charged or credited to income or principal. It further empowered the trustees generally to do all things in relation to the trust fund which the donor could do if living and the trust had not been executed. The government claimed that the powers in the two articles required inclusion of the trust corpus in the decedent's estate. The executor disputed this position after paying the tax and seeking recovery. The district court had ruled against the executor on the stipulated facts, leading directly to the appeal.
View caseTheo Thomas creates a trust of park land for a racially restricted purpose that later becomes impossible. The res reverts to his heirs because the trust purpose can no longer be fulfilled. The property leaves trust status and returns to individual ownership.
In 1911, United States Senator Augustus O. Bacon executed a will that devised a tract of land to the Mayor and Council of the City of Macon for use as a park and pleasure ground exclusively for white people, with control vested in a Board of Managers composed entirely of white persons, and the will expressed the Senator's view that the two races should be forever separate while providing that the property under no circumstances was to be devoted to any other purpose. The city accepted the trust and initially operated the park on a segregated basis, but after it began allowing Negroes to use the park, members of the Board of Managers sued in state court to remove the city as trustee and appoint new trustees, prompting Negro citizens to intervene in the proceedings. Following the city's resignation as trustee, the Georgia courts appointed private trustees, but in Evans v. Newton the United States Supreme Court held that the park must be operated without racial discrimination, leading the Georgia Supreme Court to determine that the purpose of the trust had become impossible to fulfill and to remand the case for further proceedings. The trial court declined to apply the cy pres doctrine, ruled that the trust had failed, and determined that the property had reverted to Senator Bacon's heirs, a decision affirmed by the Supreme Court of Georgia; petitioners, the Negro citizens of Macon who had sought integration of the park, challenged the termination of the trust, and the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the case.
View caseThe trust fails for lack of a res. Without specific property that can be held and managed, no trust relationship arises even if intent and beneficiaries are clear.
Only if it is an existing interest capable of transfer. Crops not yet grown or profits not yet earned generally cannot form the initial res, though an existing orchard or contract right might qualify.
No. The underlying marital character remains even after transfer. The res is still subject to division as marital property despite the change in legal title.
Supporting sources
…land. Kuapa Pond was part of an ahupuaa that eventually vested in Bernice Pauahi Bishop and on her death formed a part of the trust corpus of petitioner Bishop Estate, the present owner. In 1961, Bishop Estate leased a 6,000-acre area, which included Kuapa Pond, to petitioner Kaiser Aetna for subdivision development. The…