Last year we delved into some of the problems associated with trust termination.  And we learned that some jurisdictions, like Maine, abolished the presumption that a spendthrift provision is a material purpose of a trust.  Therefore, in states like Maine, a spendthrift clause may not necessarily prohibit the termination of a trust.

Today, we turn to Arkansas, a state that – unlike Maine – has codified the common law presumption that “[a] spendthrift provision in the terms of the trust is presumed to constitute a material purpose of the trust.”  Ark. Code Ann. § 28-73-411(c).  But, that’s not our focus today.  Today, we want to look at what type of situation might permit termination of a trust when a statute permits trust termination where “the trust’s purposes, as expressed in or implied by the circumstances surrounding the trust, as a result of circumstances not foreseen to the

It’s been a while since we last looked at spendthrift clauses in trusts.  If drafted correctly, they can be an effective tool for shielding assets.  Of course, if a beneficiary knows he or she is an actual or contingent remainder beneficiary of a trust, then it usually helps for that beneficiary to actually know whether a spendthrift clause exists.

In Estate of Hord, the Court of Appeals of Iowa had occasion to consider the enforceability and scope of the spendthrift clause in Carl Hord’s will.  Let’s take a look at what the clause said: