This petition for a decree determining whether the phrase in Article V, paragraph G of the decedent's will, dated June 21, 1983, "to the income beneficiaries as set forth herein in the proportions herein prescribed" refers to his surviving daughters, Gillian Leonard and Sandra Leonard Starr, such that each of them will be identified as the remaindermen of one-half of the remaining trust estate established in Article V, is resolved as follows.

The only interested party to appear and file objections to the relief requested is Randolph College, successor in interest to Randolph-Macon Women's College. The college is a two-third residuary beneficiary under item III(D)(1) of the last will of Paula V. Leonard, the decedent's spouse. The beneficiary of the remaining one-third interest is Benedictine Foundation, located in Washington, D.C. The foundation has not participated in this proceeding. The will is dated July 3, 2002.

The decedent died a resident of Dutchess County on February 3, 1993. His will, dated June 21, 1983, was admitted to probate by decree on March 22, 1993. The decedent's spouse, Paula V. Leonard, died on October 17, 2006. Paula V. Leonard was the third wife of the decedent. He was also survived by two adult daughters. One daughter is the child by his first wife, and the other daughter is the child of his second wife. Paula V. Leonard had no children. Her will was admitted to probate on March 1, 2007.

Article V of the decedent's will establishes a testamentary trust through the residuary estate. Paragraph G of Article V is the subject of analysis in this proceeding. It provides:

"Notwithstanding anything set forth herein, the Trust shall terminate upon the later of (1) the date of my wife's death or (2) July 1, 1985, at which time the principal and any remaining interest shall be distributed to the income beneficiaries as set forth herein in the proportions herein prescribed."

The issue is, who did the decedent intend to benefit when he designated "income beneficiaries as set forth herein in the proportions herein prescribed" as the remainder beneficiaries of the trust?

Initially, the court notes that the testamentary trust is comprised of eight (8) lettered paragraphs. Paragraphs C and H contain contingencies which did not occur. However, the decedent does designate his daughters as the ultimate beneficiaries in the event either contingency took place.

The court's task is to ascertain the testator's intention from the words used in the trust instrument, and to give effect to that intention unless contrary to public policy or an established rule of law. (In re: Marine Midland Bank-Western, 55 AD2d 215 [4th Dept. 1976]; In re: Day's Trust, 10 AD2d 220 [1st Dept. 1960].) Language that is unambiguous and supports a reasonable meaning of a trust must be accepted as manifesting the grantor's intention. Therefore, the court is bound to such language and may not engage in rules of construction. (In re: Gouraud, 85 AD2d 342 [1st Dept. 1982] aff'd 59 NY2d 925 [1983].)

It is settled that the everyday and ordinary meaning of words reigns supreme when ascertaining the testator's intent. (Matter of Gustafson, 74 NY2d 448, 453 [1989].) The testator's intention is to be gleaned from the language of the instrument as a whole, not from [*2]detached portions alone, and contradictory clauses are, whenever possible, to be reconciled accordingly. (106 New York Jurisprudence 2d, Trusts, §100.)

There is also the presumption against intestacy, particularly with respect to residuary bequests. (Matter of Nurse, 35 NY2d 381, 388 [1974].)

Applying the above cited principles to the application under consideration, the court finds there is no ambiguity to the testator's intention. The order of the decedent's priorities are clearly manifest. Article IV of the will consists of a monetary and personal property bequest to the spouse, slightly smaller money bequests to the daughters, and in default thereof, to their issue. A smaller money bequest to the children of a friend completes the article.

Article V is the residuary clause. It establishes the testamentary trust under consideration. The primary beneficiary is the decedent's spouse, followed by the two daughters, followed by their issue, and in default thereof, to the issue of the decedent's brother, George D. Leonard. There is no language within the body of the trust granting the wife appointive powers. (see EPTL §10-3.3.) The only reference to her estate is paragraph A, which provides that upon her death any undistributed income shall be paid to her estate. Throughout the trust, only the spouse and the daughters are described as income beneficiaries. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the decedent intended his daughters to be the intended beneficiaries following the death of their stepmother under the provisions of paragraph G.

The court answers the question posed in the introductory paragraph of this decision in the affirmative. The decedent's surviving daughters, Gillian Leonard and Sandra Leonard Starr, are the remaindermen of the remaining trust estate established in Article V, paragraph G, each possessing a one-half interest in the same.

On this application, the Court considered the verified petition supported by five (5) exhibits, memorandum of law with one (1) exhibit, verified objections, and reply memorandum of law.

Counsel for petitioner is directed to submit a decree with notice of settlement consistent with the foregoing within ten (10) days from the date of this decision.

The foregoing constitutes the decision of the Court.

Dated:Poughkeepsie, New York

August 16, 2007

ENTER

Hon. James D. Pagones, S.C.J.

081507 decision