About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


Case Citations [1] (Spring 2025)

handle is hein.ali/resect1489 and id is 1 raw text is: THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE Spring 2025 Citations TRUSTS 2D Introductory Note Ind.App.2024. Intro. Note quot. in case quot. in sup. After creditor obtained a judgment against debtor for slander of title, the trial court granted creditor's motion for a lien on real property held in an inter vivos revocable trust that debtor had co-settled and for which debtor acted as co-trustee; this court affirmed, holding that creditor could enforce the judgment against debtor via the lien without violating notions of due process, even though creditor's action was not also against the other co-settlor or co- trustee or against the trust itself, because, under the terms of the trust, debtor could freely withdraw property from the trust. The court cited the Restatement Second of Trusts and the Restatement Third of Trusts in noting that, while a trust technically was not a legal entity, in numerous contexts, a trust was treated as an entity to such an extent that it was no longer inappropriate to refer to claims as against a trust, or to refer to and treat a trust, in law and in practice, as if it was an entity. Sumrall v. LeSEA, Inc., 234 N.E.3d 230, 236. CHAPTER 1. DEFINITIONS AND DISTINCTIONS TOPIC 1. DEFINITIONS § 2. Definition of Trust Ct.Fed.Cl.2024. Com. (h) cit. in case cit. in sup. Native American tribe and affiliated forest-products company sued the United States, alleging that defendant breached its trust duties to prevent and suppress fires in a forest that was held in trust by the government for plaintiff, after the forest was affected by a wildfire. This court denied in part the government's motion to dismiss, holding, inter alia, that the government owed obligations to prevent and suppress wildfires under federal statutes. The court cited Supreme Court precedent that approvingly to Restatement Second of Trusts § 2, Comment h, in reasoning that the government's elaborate control over forests and property belonging to plaintiffs established all the necessary elements ofa common-law trust, thus clearly establishing fiduciary obligations of the government in the management of plaintiff s lands and resources. Confederated Tribes and Bands of Yakama Nation v. United States, 171 Fed.Cl. 692, 711. COPYRIGHT 02025 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.