- 15 -
to BBCA of 60 percent of petitioners’ shares in Hillside Farm was
a valid conveyance of petitioners’ economic interests. To the
contrary, at trial petitioner vigorously asserted that he never
knowingly authorized or intended any such transfer of shares to
BBCA. Similarly, on brief petitioners argue that “there were no
valid transfers to BBCA”.
Petitioners argue that Hillside Farm was created for estate-
planning purposes to keep the farm together in the family. It is
unclear, however, how the establishment of Hillside Farm would
accomplish any such objective. Under Article III, Section 8 of
the Declaration of Trust, if any trust certificate holder dies
before termination of the trust, his shares become “null and void
and shall immediately revert to the Board of Trustees, who shall
thereupon name a replacement beneficiary or beneficiaries”.
Accordingly, the creation of Hillside Farm would have provided
petitioners no assurance that the farm would remain in their
family. To the contrary, under the terms of the Declaration of
Trust, absolute power over the disposition of the farm property,
either during their lives or upon the death of either petitioner,
would have resided with Parnell and Armageddon. In any event,
the expectancy of an estate-planning advantage does not establish
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011