Estate of Merle Allen Whiting, Jr., Deceased, Vicki Ann Whiting, Executrix - Page 18

                                       - 18 -                                         
          (citing Fies v. Feist, 224 S.W. 633 (Ark. 1920)); see also Estate           
          of Harp v. Harp, 875 S.W.2d 490, 491 (Ark. 1994).  “[I]t is                 
          * * * [the court’s] duty to consider the * * * [trust] as a whole           
          and to reach ‘the real purpose and intention of the testator.’”             
          Angel v. Angel, 655 S.W.2d 373, 374 (Ark. 1983) (quoting Union              
          Trust Co. v. Madigan, 35 S.W. 349 (Ark. 1931)).                             
                    3.   Decedent Intended To Qualify for the                         
                         Marital Deduction                                            
               In interpreting two conflicting clauses, we must determine             
          the decedent’s intent, using the four corners of the trust                  
          agreement.  See Aycock Pontiac, Inc. v. Aycock, 983 S.W.2d at               
          919-920; see also In re Estate of Lindsey, supra at 812 (“The               
          paramount principle in the interpretation of wills is that the              
          intention of the testator governs.”).  We find that, considering            
          all language in the trust agreement, decedent’s intent was to               
          qualify for the marital deduction.                                          
               Decedent manifested his intent to qualify for the marital              
          deduction in numerous ways.  First, the trust agreement named two           
          of the trusts in reference to the marital deduction:  The                   
          “Marital Deduction Trust” and the “Non-Marital Deduction Trust”.            
          The name of a trust is evidence of decedent’s intent.                       
               Second, it is evident from the trust agreement that decedent           
          intended to minimize Federal estate taxes through the use of the            
          marital deduction.  See Estate of Todd v. Commissioner, 57 T.C.             
          288, 294 (1971) (references to the marital deduction and                    

Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011