Blain v. Russell
Appellant, Michael D. Russell, in his capacity as trustee of the Joseph Alexander Blain Trust (Trust), was granted broad management discretion through an amendment to the Trust. Shortly after his appointment as trustee, appellant lost substantially all of the Trusts cash by investing it in an oil lease in the late 1980s.
Approximately 15 years later, respondent Jerold Blain, one of the Trust beneficiaries, petitioned to remove appellant as trustee, to obtain an accounting, and to surcharge appellant. Following a court trial, judgment was entered in respondents favor. In making its ruling, the court determined that the Trust amendment was invalid. Appellant contends the trial court made numerous evidentiary and procedural errors. According to appellant, respondent presented improper material to the court, including posttrial exhibits. Appellant further argues that the issue of the validity of the Trust amendment was not properly before the court and that the evidence does not support the finding that this amendment was invalid. Additionally, appellant contends that damages were incorrectly calculated. As discussed below, the trial courts liability findings are supported by the record and the alleged procedural errors are harmless. However, the courts improper consideration of posttrial exhibits requires reversal of the damage award.
Comments on Blain v. Russell