DOCSLIB.ORG

Uniform Trust Act Uniform Trust

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Uniform Trust Act Uniform Trust D R A F T FOR DISCUSSION ONLY UNIFORM TRUST ACT NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS FEBRUARY 9, 1999 UNIFORM TRUST ACT WITH PREFATORY NOTE AND REPORTER'S NOTES Copyright© 1999 By NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS The ideas and conclusions set forth in this draft, including the proposed statutory language and any comments or reporter’s notes, have not been passed upon by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws or the Drafting Committee. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the Conference and its Commissioners and the Drafting Committee and its Members and Reporters. Proposed statutory language may not be used to ascertain the intent or meaning of any promulgated final statutory proposal. DRAFTING COMMITTEE ON UNIFORM TRUST ACT MAURICE A. HARTNETT, III, Supreme Court, 57 The Green, Dover, DE 19901, Chair FRANK W. DAYKIN, 4745 Giles Way, Carson City, NV 89704 E. EDWIN ECK, II, University of Montana, School of Law, Missoula, MT 59812 WILLIAM L. EVANS, Ohio Northern University, Pettit College of Law, 525 S. Main Street, Ada, OH 45810 RUSSELL L. GEORGE, P.O. Box 907, 120 W. Third Street, Rifle, CO 81650 JOHN H. LANGBEIN, Yale Law School, P.O. Box 208215, New Haven, CT 06520 GLEE S. SMITH, P.O. Box 360, 111 E. 8th, Larned, KS 67550 NATHANIEL STERLING, Law Revision Commission, Suite D-1, 4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303 RICHARD V. WELLMAN, University of Georgia, School of Law, Athens, GA 30602 DAVID M. ENGLISH, Santa Clara University, School of Law, Santa Clara, CA 95053, Reporter EX OFFICIO GENE N. LEBRUN, P.O. Box 8250, 9th Floor, 909 St. Joseph Street, Rapid City, SD 57709, President MARTHA T. STARKEY, 10333 N. Meridian Street, Suite 100, Indianapolis, IN 46290, Division Chair AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION ADVISORS JOSEPH KARTIGANER, 425 Lexington Avenue, New York, NY 10017, Advisor DAVID ALAN RICHARDS, 875 3rd Avenue, New York, NY 10022, Real Property, Probate & Trust Law Section Advisor RAYMOND H. YOUNG, 26th Floor, 150 Federal Street, Boston, MA 02110, Real Property, Probate & Trust Law Section Advisor EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FRED H. MILLER, University of Oklahoma, College of Law, 300 Timberdell Road, Norman, OK 73019, Executive Director WILLIAM J. PIERCE, 1505 Roxbury Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48104, Executive Director Emeritus Copies of this Act may be obtained from: NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS 211 E. Ontario Street, Suite 1300 Chicago, Illinois 60611 312/915-0195 UNIFORM TRUST ACT TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS SECTION 101. SHORT TITLE.......................................................... 8 SECTION 102. DEFINITIONS. ......................................................... 8 SECTION 103. SETTLOR’S INTENT. .................................................. 1 5 SECTION 104. EFFECT OF THE TERMS OF THE TRUST; NONWAIVABLE PROVISIONS. 1 5 SECTION 105. COMMON LAW OF TRUSTS............................................. 1 7 SECTION 106. CHOICE OF LAW. ..................................................... 1 7 ARTICLE 2. JURISDICTION OF COURT SECTION 201. ROLE OF COURT IN ADMINISTRATION OF TRUST. 1 9 SECTION 202. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF ADMINISTRATION. 2 1 SECTION 203. JURISDICTION OVER TRUSTEE AND BENEFICIARY. 2 3 SECTION 204. DISMISSAL OF MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN TRUSTS. 2 4 [SECTION 205. SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION]. 2 5 [SECTION 206. VENUE].............................................................. 2 6 ARTICLE 3. AGREEMENTS AND REPRESENTATION SECTION 301. REPRESENTATION; BASIC PRINCIPLES. 2 9 SECTION 302. AGREEMENTS. ....................................................... 2 9 SECTION 303. EFFECT OF CONSENT BY REPRESENTATIVE. 3 0 SECTION 304. REPRESENTATION BY HOLDERS OF GENERAL TESTAMENTARY POWER OF APPOINTMENT. ....................................................... 3 1 SECTION 305. REPRESENTATION BY FIDUCIARIES AND PARENTS.. 3 1 SECTION 306. REPRESENTATION BY PERSON HAVING SUBSTANTIALLY IDENTICAL INTEREST. ........................................................... 3 2 SECTION 307. NOTICE OF JUDICIALLY-APPROVED AGREEMENT. 3 2 SECTION 308. APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM OR SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE.. 3 2 ARTICLE 4. CREATION, VALIDITY, MODIFICATION, AND TERMINATION OF TRUST SECTION 401. METHODS OF CREATING TRUST........................................ 3 4 SECTION 402. REQUIREMENTS FOR CREATION........................................ 3 7 ARTICLE 403. TRUST CREATED BY UNDUE INFLUENCE, DURESS, FRAUD OR MISTAKE. 3 9 SECTION 404. EVIDENCE OF ORAL TRUST............................................ 3 9 SECTION 405. TRUST PURPOSES..................................................... 3 9 SECTION 406. TRUST FOR CARE OF ANIMAL.......................................... 4 0 SECTION 407. TRUST FOR VALID NONCHARITABLE PURPOSE. 4 2 SECTION 408. CHARITABLE TRUSTS. ................................................ 4 3 SECTION 409. TERMINATION OF TRUST; PETITIONS FOR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL. 4 6 SECTION 410. MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION OF IRREVOCABLE TRUST BY CONSENT. ........................................................ 4 7 SECTION 411. MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION BECAUSE OF UNANTICIPATED CIRCUMSTANCES. .................................................... 5 0 SECTION 412. TERMINATION OF UNECONOMIC TRUST. 5 1 SECTION 413. REFORMATION TO CORRECT MISTAKES.. 5 2 SECTION 414. MODIFICATION TO ACHIEVE SETTLOR’S TAX OBJECTIVES. 5 3 SECTION 415. COMBINATION AND DIVISION OF TRUSTS.. 5 4 ARTICLE 5. SPENDTHRIFT PROVISIONS; CREDITOR CLAIMS SECTION 501. SPENDTHRIFT PROVISION: GENERAL. 5 7 SECTION 502. CLAIM OF BENEFICIARY’S CREDITOR AGAINST TRUST WITHOUT SPENDTHRIFT PROVISION............................................. 5 8 SECTION 503. EXCEPTIONS TO SPENDTHRIFT PROVISION.. 5 9 SECTION 504. DISCRETIONARY TRUSTS, INCLUDING TRUSTS SUBJECT TO STANDARD. 6 1 SECTION 505. CREDITOR’S CLAIM AGAINST SETTLOR.. 6 2 SECTION 506. OVERDUE DISTRIBUTION.............................................. 6 5 ARTICLE 6. REVOCABLE TRUSTS SECTION 601. CAPACITY OF SETTLOR TO CREATE REVOCABLE TRUST. 6 6 SECTION 602. REVOCATION OR MODIFICATION OF REVOCABLE TRUST.. 6 7 SECTION 603. OTHER RIGHTS OF SETTLOR; PRESENTLY EXERCISABLE POWERS OF WITHDRAWAL. .................................................... 7 1 SECTION 604. LIMITATION ON ACTION CONTESTING VALIDITY OF REVOCABLE TRUST. 7 2 SECTION 605. RULES OF CONSTRUCTION............................................. 7 3 ARTICLE 7. OFFICE OF TRUSTEE SECTION 701. ACCEPTANCE OR REJECTION OF TRUSTEESHIP. 7 4 SECTION 702. TRUSTEE’S BOND..................................................... 7 6 SECTION 703. COTRUSTEES......................................................... 7 7 SECTION 704. VACANCY IN TRUSTEESHIP............................................ 7 8 SECTION 705. RESIGNATION OF TRUSTEE. ........................................... 8 0 SECTION 706. REMOVAL OF TRUSTEE................................................ 8 2 SECTION 707. DELIVERY OF PROPERTY BY FORMER TRUSTEE. 8 4 SECTION 708. COMPENSATION OF TRUSTEE.......................................... 8 5 SECTION 709. REPAYMENT OF EXPENDITURES........................................ 8 6 ARTICLE 8. FIDUCIARY ADMINISTRATION SECTION 801 DUTY TO ADMINISTER TRUST. ........................................ 8 8 SECTION 802. DUTY OF LOYALTY.................................................... 8 9 SECTION 803. IMPARTIALITY........................................................ 9 2 SECTION 804. PRUDENT ADMINISTRATION........................................... 9 3 SECTION 805. COSTS OF ADMINISTRATION........................................... 9 3 SECTION 806. TRUSTEE’S SKILLS.................................................... 9 4 SECTION 807. DELEGATION BY TRUSTEE............................................. 9 4 SECTION 808. POWERS TO DIRECT................................................... 9 6 SECTION 809. CONTROL AND SAFEGUARDING OF TRUST PROPERTY. 9 7 SECTION 810. SEPARATION AND IDENTIFICATION OF TRUST PROPERTY. 9 7 SECTION 811. ENFORCEMENT AND DEFENSE OF CLAIMS. 9 8 SECTION 812. FORMER FIDUCIARIES................................................. 9 9 SECTION 813. DUTY TO INFORM AND REPORT........................................ 9 9 SECTION 814. DUTY WITH REGARD TO DISCRETIONARY POWER. 103 SECTION 815. GENERAL POWERS OF TRUSTEE....................................... 103 SECTION 816. SPECIFIC POWERS OF TRUSTEE. ...................................... 104 ARTICLE 9. UNIFORM PRUDENT INVESTOR ACT SECTION 901. PRUDENT INVESTOR RULE............................................ 115 SECTION 902. STANDARD OF CARE; PORTFOLIO STRATEGY; RISK AND RETURN OBJECTIVES......................................................... 117 SECTION 903. DIVERSIFICATION.................................................... 121 SECTION 904. DUTIES AT INCEPTION OF TRUSTEESHIP. 123 [SECTION 905. LOYALTY]. ......................................................... 124 [SECTION 906. IMPARTIALITY]...................................................... 125 [SECTION 907. INVESTMENT COSTS]................................................ 126 SECTION 908. REVIEWING COMPLIANCE............................................ 126 [SECTION 909. DELEGATION OF INVESTMENT AND MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS]. 127 SECTION 910. LANGUAGE INVOKING PRUDENT INVESTOR RULE.. 131 ARTICLE 10. PRINCIPAL AND INCOME ARTICLE 11. LIABILITY OF TRUSTEES AND RIGHTS OF THIRD PERSONS SECTION 1101. BREACH OF TRUST FOR VIOLATION OF DUTY. 133 SECTION 1102. REMEDIES FOR BREACH OF TRUST. 134 SECTION 1103. DAMAGES AGAINST TRUSTEE FOR BREACH OF TRUST.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Law Review Law Review
    HARVARDHARVARD LAW REVIEWREVIEW VOL.VOL. XXXIVXXXIV MAY,MAY, 19211921 NO.NO.7 7 THETHE UNIFORMUNIFORM ACTACT ONON DECLARATORYDECLARATORY R-D]1JDGMENTS GMENTS T HE National Conference ofof Commissioners on Uniform State T Laws at itsits session inin St. Louis in August, 192o,1920, approved thethe first draft of a Uniform Act on DeclaratoryDeclaratory Judgments. At thethe next session of the Conference in 1921 the Act will probably receive final approval and be recommended to legislatures for enactment. The importance of the recommendationsrecommendations of this august body in promoting the enactment of legislation in our states war­war- rants some comment upon the draft they have approved. Although a few instances of statutory authorization for the rendering of declaratory judgments may be found in our state legis­legis- lation prior to 1918, such as the California Act of 1850,1185o,l the Rhode Island Act of 1876,2 the New Jersey Act of 1915,3i915,' the Connecticut 11 CALIFORNIACAL moNIA PRACTICEPRAcrIcE Acr,AcT, § 527: "An"An actionaction may be broughtbrought byby one person against another, forfor thethe purpose of determiningdetermining an adverseadverse claimclaim whiellwhich the latterlatter makes against the former, forfor money or property, upon anan allegedalleged obligation." See KingKing v. Hall,SHall, 5 Cal.Cal. 8383 (1855).(1855). Cf. thethe actionaction of jactitation, stillstill usedused inin many coun­coun- triestries adopting thethe civilcivil law,law, 2828 YALEYALE L. J. I,I, 20. r9o9, ch. 289, 22 RHODER oDE ISLAND,ISLAND, AcrsAcrs && REsOLVES,RESOLVES, 1?76,I876, ell.ch. 563, § 17,17, GEN. LAWSLAWS 1909, ell. 289, §§ 19:ig: "No"No suitsuit inin equityequity shallshall bebe defeateddefeated on thethe groundground thatthat aa mere declaratory decree isis sought;sought; andand thethe courtcourt may makemake bindingbinding declarationsdeclarations ofof rightright inin equity,equity, withoutwithout grantinggranting consequentialconsequential relief."relief." InIn Hanley v.v.
    [Show full text]
  • Blind Trust” of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R
    The original documents are located in Box 37, folder “Personnel - Blind Trust” of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. (' Digitized from Box 37 of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library m::!.de the b~ :::.· : of .- - banking c o rpor a tion. r o= __ ·· - - a s Trustee, ~IT~~SSETH: 1. Trust. The Se·ttlor hereby crec.-ces ·this trust in . ..... ,_ . .1... t ' ,... .... - c - connec t ~on \-;~ L...cl t!l.S c.ppoJ..nL.Iu.en as. 2. me:rn.::>er O!: .... ne s-ea:::. .t. o.r: the President of the United Stc.t.es, Se·tt l a::- h ~ ~ :~b ... t£ars.31: :c5 ::.o __ ~ .,..r:.ls-t.ee all his i:J.terests in the assets d2scrib~d. in the ann~z~d Scheduler subject .to the provisio.ns.. of. this a:;ree~.ent. Settle:::- _ __ agrees to ··ae·lbrer·-'su'c_h: o 'ther - ~J.st:l::~lli-TI~nts as na~- be 1!-ecessa..._--y or : prop_er· ·eff_(?~_c_tTvely to.
    [Show full text]
  • Uniform Restrictive Employment Agreement Act]
    D R A F T FOR DISCUSSION ONLYAPPROVAL Uniform Covenants Not to Compete Act [Tentative new name: Uniform Restrictive Employment Agreement Act] Uniform Law Commission June 8MEETING IN ITS ONE-HUNDRED-AND-THIRTIETH YEAR MADISON, WISCONSIN JULY 9 – 15, 2021 Informal Session Copyright © 2021 National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws This draft, including the proposed statutory language and any comments or reporter’s notes, has not been reviewed or approved by the Uniform Law Commission or the drafting committee. It does not necessarily reflect the views of the Uniform Law Commission, its commissioners, the drafting committee, or the committee’s members or reporter. June 2 July 8, 2021 Uniform Covenants Not to CompeteRestrictive Employment Agreement Act The committee appointed by and representing the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in preparing this act consists of the following individuals: Richard T. Cassidy Vermont, Co-Chair H. Clayton Walker South Carolina, Vice-Chair Vincent P. Cardi West Virginia Paul W. Chaiken Maine Anne E. Hartnett Delaware Joanne B. Huelsman Wisconsin Peter F. Langrock Vermont Gene N. Lebrun South Dakota David C. McBride Delaware Mark H. Ramsey Oklahoma Kenneth M. Rosen Alabama Keith A. Rowley Nevada Justin L. Vigdor New York Steven L. Willborn Nebraska Joan Zeldon District of Columbia William W. Barrett Indiana, Division Chair Carl H. Lisman Vermont, President Other Participants Stewart J. Schwab New York, Reporter Stephen Y. Chow Massachusetts, American Bar Association Advisor Joanne M. Pepperl Nebraska, Style Liaison Tim Schnabel Illinois, Executive Director Copies of this act may be obtained from: Uniform Law Commission 111 N.
    [Show full text]
  • Uniform Trust Code Final Act with Comments
    UNIFORM TRUST CODE (Last Revised or Amended in 2010) Drafted by the NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS and by it APPROVED AND RECOMMENDED FOR ENACTMENT IN ALL THE STATES at its ANNUAL CONFERENCE MEETING IN ITS ONE-HUNDRED-AND-NINTH YEAR ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA JULY 28 – AUGUST 4, 2000 WITH PREFATORY NOTE AND COMMENTS Copyright © 2000, 2010 By NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS April 10, 2020 1 ABOUT NCCUSL The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL), now in its 114th year, provides states with non-partisan, well-conceived and well-drafted legislation that brings clarity and stability to critical areas of state statutory law. Conference members must be lawyers, qualified to practice law. They are practicing lawyers, judges, legislators and legislative staff and law professors, who have been appointed by state governments as well as the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands to research, draft and promote enactment of uniform state laws in areas of state law where uniformity is desirable and practical. $ NCCUSL strengthens the federal system by providing rules and procedures that are consistent from state to state but that also reflect the diverse experience of the states. $ NCCUSL statutes are representative of state experience, because the organization is made up of representatives from each state, appointed by state government. $ NCCUSL keeps state law up-to-date by addressing important and timely legal issues. $ NCCUSL’s efforts reduce the need for individuals and businesses to deal with different laws as they move and do business in different states.
    [Show full text]
  • Jurisprudence and Judicial Treatment of the Comments to the Uniform Commercial Code Sean Michael Hannaway
    Cornell Law Review Volume 75 Article 6 Issue 4 May 1990 Jurisprudence and Judicial Treatment of the Comments to the Uniform Commercial Code Sean Michael Hannaway Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Sean Michael Hannaway, Jurisprudence and Judicial Treatment of the Comments to the Uniform Commercial Code , 75 Cornell L. Rev. 961 (1990) Available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol75/iss4/6 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOTE THE JURISPRUDENCE AND JUDICIAL TREATMENT OF THE COMMENTS TO THE UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE Although the Uniform Commercial Code' (the "UCC" or the "Code") has been one of the most influential statutes of recent time, 2 and has generated extensive discussion, its "Official Comments" have received almost no scholarly consideration.3 Nearly forty years of experience has shown that courts defer, and, this discussion will argue, ought to defer to the guidance the Comments offer as to the proper application of Code provisions. The Comments occupy an unusual position as aids to statutory interpretation. They cannot ac- curately be described as legislative history in the traditional sense, as there is little evidence that the state legislatures gave any exten- sive consideration to them when adopting the Code.4 The Com- ments are not a treatise either, for the drafters clearly intended them to fulfill a more important role.5 Part I of this Note proposes that we can only fully understand the proper role of the Comments, and therefore their authoritative value, in light of the jurisprudence of the Code.
    [Show full text]
  • Trust Overview
    challenging expectations Trust Overview What is a Trust? The answer may seem obvious, but in practice many people get confused as to exactly what a trust is, and what such a structure is meant for. We will examine the various types of trust recognised under the South African common law, as well as where the Income Tax Act fits in. The Trust Property Control Act 57 of 1998 contains a rather cumbersome definition for a trust, but the short version is that a trust is a structure to which property is transferred, and is then administered by trustees on behalf of one or more beneficiaries, in accordance with the trust instrument (which could be a trust deed or a will). Section 1 of the Income Tax Act defines a trust as "‘any trust fund consisting of cash or other assets which are administered and controlled by a person acting in a fiduciary capacity, where such person is appointed under a deed of trust or by agreement or under the will of a deceased person." Alternatively in the context of estate planning, a trust can be described as a legal relationship which has been created by a person (known as the founder, donor or settlor) through placing assets under the control of another person (known as the trustee) during the founder’s lifetime (an inter vivos trust) or on the founder’s death (will trust, testamentary trust or trust mortis causa ) for the benefit of third persons (the beneficiaries). They can also confer different rights on the beneficiaries concerning the distribution of income and capital.
    [Show full text]
  • Legisbrief a QUICK LOOK INTO IMPORTANT ISSUES of the DAY
    LegisBrief A QUICK LOOK INTO IMPORTANT ISSUES OF THE DAY JAN 2019 | VOL. 27, NO. 2 State Laws and Regulations Regarding Blind Trusts ME AK VT NH WA MT ND MN WI MI NY MA RI ID WY SD IA IL IN OH PA NJ CT OR NV CO NE MO KY WV VA DC DE HI CA UT NM KS AR TN NC SC MD AZ OK LA MS AL GA TX FL Blind trust defined Blind trust recognized, but not defined Blind trust not recognized (offers no Did You Know? protection against conflict of interest) AS GU MP PR VI • No state requires Blind trust not mentioned at all public officials to use Source: NCSL, 2018 a blind trust while serving, but 12 states define blind trusts, which officials can use to avoid conflicts Preventing Conflicts of interest. • Expertise and of Interest with Blind Trusts occupations are typically considered BY NICHOLAS BIRDSONG when making legislative committee qualify lawmakers to craft good policy may come assignments, but from the private sector, but with experience often this may increase the Conflict of interest laws prohibit public officials comes financial ties. Should ethics rules prohibit risk of conflicts of and employees from exercising authority that some of the most qualified experts from working interest. substantially and directly affects a personal in government? financial interest. Despite variation in how states • Trusts aren’t just define conflicts of interest, all agree on the Blind trusts potentially cure conflicts of interest for ethics. Lottery basic idea that legislators with a conflict should by transferring assets into a financial instrument winners may use one type of “blind trust” disclose the nature of the interest and recuse controlled by an independent trustee, who may to stay anonymous.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil Law Trusts in Latin America: Is the Lack of Trusts an Impediment for Expanding Business Opportunities in Latin America?
    CIVIL LAW TRUSTS IN LATIN AMERICA: IS THE LACK OF TRUSTS AN IMPEDIMENT FOR EXPANDING BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES IN LATIN AMERICA? Dante Figueroa* I. INTRODUCTION Many differences between the Anglo-American and Latin American legal systems are rooted in dissimilar cultural and societal approaches. Equity is a major area of contrasting jurisprudence. Whereas equity plays a relegated, subordinate role in Latin American courts, equity permeates Anglo-American legal institutions—both in the criminal and civil arenas—in almost all areas, including evidence, remedies, precautionary measures, trials, juries, sentencing, and trusts. The field of trust law epitomizes this contrast; this area exemplifies how the subdued role of equity in Latin American civil laws and its vitality in Anglo-American common law create divergent legal approaches. Due to its flexibility, the trust is considered one of the most useful legal tools for promoting business in the United States. In contrast, use of the Latin American trust (fideicomiso) is limited to commercial and financial purposes and has been described as a rigid1 and archaic instrument. Due to the common law underpinnings of Anglo-American trusts, attempts at merely transplanting the use of these trusts into Latin America would likely fail. However, this does not preclude the possibility of transforming the Latin American fideicomiso into a modern and effective legal tool. The need to improve the Latin American fideicomiso has been suggested in the past. In 1921, a study supported by the U.S. Congress concluded that one of the reasons for the inefficiency of Latin American banking systems was “the lack of the trust.”2 A redesign of the Latin American fideicomiso into a more Anglo-American type of business trust should help enhance investment and promote growth and development in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • TEXAS HOMESTEAD and PROBATE LAW Jonathan D. Baughman
    TEXAS HOMESTEAD AND PROBATE LAW Jonathan D. Baughman McGinnis Lochridge 711 Louisiana, Suite 1600 Houston, Texas 77002 [email protected] (713) 615-8540 INSTITUTE FOR ENERGY LAW 2nd Texas Mineral Title Course May 14-15, 2015 Houston, Texas JONATHAN D. BAUGHMAN Jonathan D. Baughman is a partner in the Houston office of McGinnis Lochridge. He is licensed to practice law in Texas and Louisiana and received his B.S. degree from Louisiana Tech University, magna cum laude, and his J.D., magna cum laude, from Loyola Law School where he was the managing editor of the Loyola Law Review. Prior to practicing law, Mr. Baughman worked as a certified public accountant in the energy section for a major international public accounting firm and later as an internal auditor for a major natural gas pipeline company. Mr. Baughman chairs his firm’s oil and gas practice group and represents clients in a wide variety of oil and gas litigation in federal and state courts. Mr. Baughman is AV (highest) rated by Martindale Hubbell and has been recognized as a Super Lawyer by Texas Monthly. Mr. Baughman has litigated disputes involving joint operating agreements, gas processing agreements, leases and other agreements. He has litigated many oil and gas issues related to title, lease covenants, implied and express covenants to pool, royalty payments, COPAS, natural gas trading, reservoir damage, well blowouts, and misappropriation of seismic data. Mr. Baughman has written articles and spoken on numerous oil and gas issues before the American Association of Professional Landmen, the Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Foundation, the Institute for Energy Law, and the Louisiana Mineral Law Institute as well as other organizations.
    [Show full text]
  • What's Wrong with the Uniform Act?
    TRB Special Report 192 33 of the payment should not be related to the life of vide eligibility for benefits under the act to per- the mortgage on the replacement dwelling. This sons outside project limits who might sustain sub- would penalize a person who paid cash. Payment of stantive economic injury because of project-related increased taxes for a specific term, such as five or activities. These proposals effectively expand the ten years, would be preferable. definition of displaced person given in Section 101(6) and suffer from the same deficiencies noted Section 204(1) in comments on that section. Some proposed amendments are objectionable because Section 213(a) (b) they eliminate the statutory limitations on both the number of years for which the displaced tenant is Most proposals amending Sections 213(a) and (b) eligible to receive rent supplements and the maximum provide for a single set of regulations for use in dollar amounts of supplemental housing payments. implementing the Uniform Act in connection with all Given the geographic and economic mobility of our federal and federally-assisted programs and population, DOT questions the necessity for projects. An agency would be designated by the extending Uniform Act entitlements to displaced president to assure uniform application and tenants for an undefined period of time. DOT also interpretation of the single set of procedures. feels that the guarantees of last-resort housing (H.R. 6736 would create a Federal Relocation provided by the government are preferable to making Assistance Compliance Office.) Development of a unlimited payments available to displacees. single set of regulations by such an agency would be DOT favors increasing the maximum time frame of a positive step toward greater uniformity among tenant responsibility to six years and the dollar federal agencies in this area.
    [Show full text]
  • Uniform Act Basic Principles Training Objectives
    Uniform Act Basic Principles Training Objectives Identify the constitutional basis for paying just compensation to property owners. Define the major elements of the Uniform Relocation Act. List three rights of property owners under the URA. List at least 3 types of assistance available to displaced persons under the URA. Uniform Relocation Act 1970: Public Law 91-646—”Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act” 1987: Public Law 100-17—”Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Act Amendments” Purpose of the URA The historic purpose underlying the Uniform Relocation Act (URA) is: For acquisition: Treat owners fairly and consistently, encourage acquisition by agreement, minimize litigation, and promote confidence. For displaced persons: Treat individuals fairly, equitably, consistently, and do not cause disproportionate injury. For agencies: Act efficiently and in a cost- effective manner. Uniform Relocation Act—Title I Purpose: “To provide for uniform and equitable treatment of persons displaced … and to establish uniform and equitable land acquisition policies….” Person/displaced person Comparable replacement dwelling Displacing agency Appraisal Uniform Relocation Act— Title II Purpose: “To provide for uniform and equitable treatment of persons displaced from their homes, businesses, or farms by Federal and federally assisted programs….” Relocation assistance Moving expenses Replacement housing payments Uniform Relocation Act—Title III Purpose: “In order to encourage and expedite the acquisition of real property by agreements with owners, to avoid litigation and relieve congestion in the courts, to assure consistent treatment for owners…(the) agency shall make every reasonable effort to acquire expeditiously real property by negotiation.” Appraisal Acquisition Condemnation Just Compensation “In no event shall such amount be less than the agency’s approved appraisal of the fair market value of such property.” [Title III, Sec.
    [Show full text]
  • Uniform Statute and Rule Construction Act (1995)
    UNIFORM STATUTE AND RULE CONSTRUCTION ACT (1995) Drafted by the NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS and by it APPROVED AND RECOMMENDED FOR ENACTMENT IN ALL THE STATES at its ANNUAL CONFERENCE MEETING IN ITS ONE-HUNDRED-AND-FOURTH YEAR IN KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI JULY 28 - AUGUST 4, 1995 WITH PREFATORY NOTE AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT 1995 By NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS Approved by the American Bar Association Baltimore, Maryland, February 5, 1996 UNIFORM STATUTE AND RULE CONSTRUCTION ACT (1995) The Committee that acted for the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in preparing the Uniform Statute and Rule Construction Act (1995) was as follows: MAURICE A. HARTNETT, III, Chambers, Supreme Court, 57 The Green, Dover, DE 19901, Chair ROBERT H. ARONSON, University of Washington, School of Law, Condon Hall, JB-20, Seattle, WA 98105 PETER J. DYKMAN, Legislative Reference Bureau, P.O. Box 2037, 100 North Hamilton Street, Madison, WI 53701 WILLIAM H. NAST, JR., P.O. Box 301, Harrisburg, PA 17108, National Conference Co-Reporter MILLARD H. RUUD, University of Texas, School of Law, 727 East 26th Street, Austin, TX 78705, National Conference Co-Reporter PAULA TACKETT, Legislative Council Service, Room 311, State Capitol, Santa Fe, NM 87503 ROBERT J. TENNESSEN, 700 Baker Building, 706 South Second Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55402 EX OFFICIO RICHARD C. HITE, 200 West Douglas Avenue, Suite 600, Wichita, KS 67202, President W. JACKSON WILLOUGHBY, Placer County Municipal Court, 300 Taylor Street, Roseville, CA 95678, Chair, Division B EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FRED H. MILLER, University of Oklahoma, College of Law, 300 Timberdell Road, Norman, OK 73019, Executive Director WILLIAM J.
    [Show full text]