- 46 -
enforceable under Oklahoma law.44 Union Life Ins. Co. v. Priest,
694 F.2d 1252, 1255-1256 (10th Cir. 1982).
Respondent acknowledges the enforceability of an assignment
under Oklahoma law. Respondent argues, however, that the
relevant issue is not the assignment’s enforceability but whether
the assignment effected a withdrawal of Marital Fund assets from
the Sidney Gore Trust.
The estate planning on behalf of both Sidney Gore and
decedent reflects a remarkable and persistent pattern of
informality and inaction that makes any decision regarding what
actually took place a difficult one. Both Sidney Gore and
decedent executed wills and trust agreements before they died,
but they never actually transferred any assets into their trusts
before their deaths. Respondent has apparently accepted for
purposes of this proceeding that, by reason of Sidney Gore’s
death and the distribution order, Sidney Gore’s trust was funded,
that his trust included a Marital Fund, and that decedent had a
power to withdraw Marital Fund assets during her lifetime.
Respondent argues, however, that decedent’s execution of the
assignment without more was insufficient to withdraw the Marital
Fund assets from the Sidney Gore Trust.
44In order for an equitable assignment to be enforceable
under Oklahoma law, the equitable assignee must have furnished
consideration to the assignor. See Johnson v. Schick, 882 P.2d
1059, 1061 (Okla. 1994).
Page: Previous 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007