Testator placed the residue of his estate in trust, and, after making provision as to one-third of the principal and income for his widow, left the remaining two-thirds to his children, or their children by right of representation, the net annual income to be paid to them in convenient installments for twenty years after his death, the principal share of each to be transferred in four as nearly equal installments as possible at five-year intervals. By a codicil, executed after plaintiff, the wife of one of testator's sons, had announced her intention of securing a divorce, it was provided that no title in the trust estate or income should vest in any beneficiary, nor should the principal or income be liable for the debts of any beneficiary, nor should any beneficiary have any power to dispose of his interest in the estate prior to actual distribution. Plaintiff, having secured a judgment for alimony and support against her former husband, sought to reach his interest in the principal, allocated to him by the trustee, but not yet paid. Held, the corpus was as inalienable as the income, and a claim for alimony could not reach it. Erickson v. Erickson, (Minn. 1936) 266 N. W. 161.
TRUSTS - RESTRAINTS ON ALIENATION - ABILITY OF A DIVORCED WIFE TO REACH THE CORPUS OF A SPENDTHRIFT TRUST FOR ALIMONY CLAIM,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol34/iss8/35