3 Things to Know About an “Ambiguous” Trust Document— trust lawsuits can get expensive.

Ambiguity is something Palm Beach Probate Attorneys are used to but  also something we try desperately to avoid. What is an ambiguity? Its something that is unclear either on its face or its unclear how it should be applied. When we draft an estate plan the goal is avoid ambiguity. A case coming out the fourth DCA a few years ago illustrates how ambiguities vary. Ambiguities can occur in an infinite amount of ways, such that an exhaustive list is impossible. I hope this case highlights one of the many things to consider in checking for ambiguities in your estate plan.   

• In April of 2004 Elaine B. Hillman, the testator, included the following charitable bequest, “TWENTY FIVE PERCENT (25%) to MIAMI CHILDRENS HOSPITAL FOUNDATION, CRANIAL/FACIAL FOUNDATION, located at 3000 SW 62nd Ave. Miami Fl 33144 ATT: Dr. Anthony Wolf (sic).
• Two years later a new not for profit calling itself Miami Care Foundation (MCF)  was incorporated .
• Ms. Hillman died in July of 2007.
• Dr.Wolfe had since began working at the newer not for profit.
• MCF claimed that it was the testator’s intent that Dr. Wolfe be incharge of the funds and being that he now works at MCF the funds should be taken to MCF not Miami Children’s Hospital.
• For reasons unexplained in the appellate opinion, the Miami Care Foundation chose to litigate its claim under an ambiguous-trust theory. OK, so maybe the clause as drafted wasn’t a picture of clarity, but that alone doesn’t get you to a legal finding of ambiguity (i.e., the document is open to more than one reasonable interpretation). The text was clear, it just didn’t say what the settlor intended it to say.

Under the Florida Trust Code a judge can amend the trust document to reflect the settlor’s intent . This authority is a lot more than just fixing typos as this case highlights, these can behuge changes to the trust. 

• The Court found that MCF was correct on the facts and that it was the intent of settlor to send the funds with Dr. Wolfe.
• The Court said though that there was no legal basis for a finding of ambiguity and the case failed since the Court lacked the authority to rewrite the trust document.
• In other words the money which amounted to millions was squarely the property of Miami Children’s Hospital Foundation.

There is a lot that any Palm Beach Probate Attorney can take away from this case:

1. Predatory Parties will Pray on Ambiguity: MCF was willing to fight to the death that it was the intended beneficiary. This is not uncommon and its even more common when relatives are involved as often there is bad blood.
2. Avoid Imprecise Language. It is hard to know which language is ambiguous, after all hindsight is truly 20/20. It seems unlikely that the parties here could predict two years later a similar sounding charity would be started. Also it almost seems like a divine coincidence that Dr. Wolf would go to the similar sounding charity.
3. Ambiguous Language is Costly.  Litigation is not free. The money to litigate this case comes out of the trust funds, so ambiguities can be very costly.

Side Note: Ambiguities that are obvious on their face are called patent ambiguities, and ambiguities that evolve through application of the text are called latent ambiguities. In the past Courts interpreted the two differently but the modern trend if to treat them the same.(The delineation was based on whether or not you were allowed to use out or extrinsic evidence. The trend has been to introduce extrinsic evidence.)