determining that declaratory judgment concerning the assignment of the principal in a trust was warranted because the interested parties’ rights to the principal had vested
How later courts described this case
- determining that declaratory judgment concerning the assignment of the principal in a trust was warranted because the interested parties’ rights to the principal had vested
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Olson, J.
(dissenting in part)—I cannot agree that we should pass upon the validity of the assignments of trust principal and accumulated income (the vested remainder) in this case. Regarding that issue, this action is premature, and any opinion expressed upon it is purely advisory.
The date an action is commenced, and not the date of final judgment, should govern its maturity. This action was started January 31, 1950. The assignments in question cannot be effective until June 10, 1953, the thirty-fifth birthday of Crosby, the assignor. If he does not survive that date, the interests of the assignees are subject to complete defeasance. In that event, all questions regarding the assignments will be moot. No one has or can have a tangible present interest in the determination of their validity while the possibility of defeasance exists.
Further, Crosby, the assignor, if he survives June 10, 1953, may honor the assignments to the satisfaction of all parties and thus prevent any controversy regarding them. His nonaction in the case at bar seems to indicate that such a result is probable.
Schwellenbach, J., concurs with Olson, J.