pjc-family-2024-lib

PJC 235.10

E XPRESS T RUSTS

the beneficiary, or if the transaction is expressly prohibited by Tex. Prop. Code §§113.052–.055, the question should not be submitted for that transaction. See com ment below entitled “Presumption of unfairness shifts burden of proof.” Even if the question is not submitted, the question in PJC 235.15 (exculpatory clause) should be submitted if the trust contains an exculpatory provision. Rewording. If more than one self-dealing transaction is alleged, the phrase trans action in question was in item 1 should be replaced with the phrase the transactions in question were , and the word transaction in the initial instruction and in items 3 and 5 should be replaced with the word transactions . If not all elements in dispute. Only the elements in items 1 through 5 that are in dispute in the particular case should be submitted. Source of question and instruction. Unless limited or modified by the terms of the trust agreement or the Texas Trust Code, trustees are subject to the same “common law” fiduciary duties as other fiduciaries. Tex. Prop. Code § 113.051. The foregoing question and instruction are derived from Stephens County Museum, Inc. v. Swenson , 517 S.W.2d 257, 261 (Tex. 1975) (material issues are whether fiduciary made reason able use of trust and confidence placed in him and whether transactions were ulti mately fair and equitable to beneficiary); Tex. Prop. Code § 113.051 (trustee required to administer trust in good faith according to its terms); Crim Truck & Tractor Co. v. Navistar International Transportation Corp. , 823 S.W.2d 591, 594 (Tex. 1992), super seded by statute as stated in Lesley v. Veterans Land Board of Texas , 352 S.W.3d 479, 490 n.72 (Tex. 2011) (fiduciary duty requires party to place interest of other party before his own); Slay v. Burnett Trust , 187 S.W.2d 377, 387–88 (Tex. 1945) (duty of loyalty prohibits trustee from using advantage of his position to gain any benefit for himself at expense of his cestui que trust and from placing himself in any position where his self-interest will or may conflict with his obligations as trustee); Kinzbach Tool Co. v. Corbett-Wallace Corp. , 160 S.W.2d 509, 512–14 (Tex. 1942) (it is duty of fiduciary to deal openly and to make full disclosure to party with whom he stands in such relationship); Johnson v. Peckham , 120 S.W.2d 786, 787 (Tex. 1938) (partners required to make full disclosure of all material facts within their knowledge relating to partnership affairs; it is necessary to make disclosure of all important information); Montgomery v. Kennedy , 669 S.W.2d 309, 313 (Tex. 1984) (trustee owes beneficiary fiduciary duty of full disclosure of all material facts known to him that might affect beneficiary’s rights); Huie v. DeShazo , 922 S.W.2d 920, 923 (Tex. 1996) (trustee’s duty of full disclosure extends to all material facts that might affect beneficiary’s rights). The question and the initial instruction in the foregoing submission differ from that in PJC 104.2 (see the current edition of Texas Pattern Jury Charges—Business, Con sumer, Insurance & Employment ). The Committee believes it is appropriate to clearly describe the transaction in question and to limit the jury’s consideration to the circum stances existing at the time of the transaction. See Archer v. Griffith , 390 S.W.2d 735,

278