Law of Trusts

[shikamaru]

Michael Joesph ....

... I hope you consider writing a treatise on Trusts.

You present the information in a very high level manner which can be very difficult to grasp with much of the substance lost.
I have to go back and do my research until I can see EXACTLY what you are talking about.
I fear that I may lose access to your writings. Write a treatise .... pleeease?
Or at the very least, create a thread with your writings on trusts.
You may have to atomize good portions of it in order to bring the reader up to speed on the concepts.

[motla68]

Michael Joesph ....

... I hope you consider writing a treatise on Trusts.

You present the information in a very high level manner which can be very difficult to grasp with much of the substance lost.
I have to go back and do my research until I can see EXACTLY what you are talking about.
I fear that I may lose access to your writings. Write a treatise .... pleeease?
Or at the very least, create a thread with your writings on trusts.
You may have to atomize good portions of it in order to bring the reader up to speed on the concepts.

If you go back through all his posts, that is all he been talking about lately. Put it all in a word document and verify it all, this will help you connect the dots to where you can basically write up your own treatise on it for yourself, that is where the real learning comes in.

[shikamaru]

If you go back through all his posts, that is all he been talking about lately. Put it all in a word document and verify it all, this will help you connect the dots to where you can basically write up your own treatise on it for yourself, that is where the real learning comes in.

I have enough treatises to write .
If Mr. Joseph were to aggregate his writings, I would be greatly appreciative.
Or .... he could give me a word map and books he would consider pertinent to understand trusts that way he sees them. I can take it from there.

[David Merrill]

Soon we will have a Downloads section. Recently MJ shared some antiquainted treatises. A lot of reading but something about MJ's writing I have noticed. I do not understand it well until I try writing about it; then it almost always snaps into place.

He speaks of his trust being in Yehoshuah and that persistently translates to original estate. We don't own anything but it appeals to the highest Grantor/Creator.


Possibly I can prompt him to open up about - Library of Congress. Plug in - Incun. 1454.B5

Microfilm of the Library of Congress copy of the Gutenberg Bible purchased from Dr. Otto Vollbehr in 1930, one of three surviving perfect copies on vellum. Call number of original: Incun. 1454.B5. Microfilm. : Washington, D.C. : Library of Congress Photoduplication Service, 1952. 3 microfilm reels ; 35 mm.

[shikamaru]

Soon we will have a Downloads section. Recently MJ shared some antiquainted treatises. A lot of reading but something about MJ's writing I have noticed. I do not understand it well until I try writing about it; then it almost always snaps into place.

He speaks of his trust being in Yehoshuah and that persistently translates to original estate. We don't own anything but it appeals to the highest Grantor/Creator.

I, primarily and generally, associate trusts with property whether tangible or intangible.
I would classify trusts as a branch of the law of property personally.
Trusts originate out of English Common Law. It has spread and been adopted into Roman Civil Law.

[stoneFree]

Coin Shop. Hapsburg Dynasty - that's what it means to me. The pentagram-cut sherry topaz is unique cut by a fellow down the road who owns the mine up on the Tarryall. Shining a laser through it:

That's neat. And whenever you wear it you'll always have some real money. With Gresham's Law in effect we rarely see good money anymore.

[shikamaru]

Law of Trusts reboot

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law

For instance, whereas neither the common law nor civil law systems allow people to split the ownership from the control of one piece of property, equity allows this through an arrangement known as a 'trust'. 'Trustees' control property, whereas the 'beneficial' (or 'equitable') ownership of trust property is held by people known as 'beneficiaries'. Trustees owe duties to their beneficiaries to take good care of the entrusted property.

Do note from the above: NEITHER Common Law nor Civil Law sysem allow people to split the ownership from the control of a given piece of property.
Equity, from the aforementioned, deeply concerns itself with trusts.

Of course, Lord King LC was worried that trustees might exploit opportunities to use trust property for themselves instead of looking after it. Business speculators using trusts had just recently caused a stock market crash. Strict duties for trustees made their way into company law and were applied to directors and chief executive officers. Another example of a trustee's duty might be to invest property wisely or sell it.[52] This is especially the case for pension funds, the most important form of trust, where investors are trustees for people's savings until retirement. But trusts can also be set up for charitable purposes, famous examples being the British Museum or the Rockefeller Foundation.

Company law sprang from the law of trusts, on the principle of separating ownership of property and control.[54] The law of the modern company began with the Joint Stock Companies Act 1856, passed in the United Kingdom, which provided investors with a simple registration procedure to gain limited liability under the separate legal personality of the corporation.

Reboot review:

Legal title is vested in one party. Equitable title in another.
Legal title has ownership and control. Equitable title has right to PROFITS and BENEFITS deriving from the property.
This is the quintessential property of a USE.
On top of this, trustee is a fiduciary and agent of the beneficiary, the principal. This is the legal relationship.

[motla68]

Yes, what side of the fence do you want to be on? One can either accept the beneficial liabilities of an Estate held in trust being held by another or they can go create one, name beneficiaries and be the one in control. Separate from the Estate side of things most other instruments are constructive trusts, some can be negotiated unless upon the face of the instrument it says " non-negotiable ", example a Drivers License, negotiations can be done right then an there on the side of the road, there is nothing on that instrument that says " non-negotiable ".

UCC

§ 3-201. NEGOTIATION.

(a) "Negotiation" means a transfer of possession, whether voluntary or involuntary, of an instrument by a person other than the issuer to a person who thereby becomes its holder.

§ 3-202. NEGOTIATION SUBJECT TO RESCISSION.

(a) Negotiation is effective even if obtained (i) from an infant, a corporation exceeding its powers, or a person without capacity, (ii) by fraud, duress, or mistake, or (iii) in breach of duty or as part of an illegal transaction.

[shikamaru]

Yes, what side of the fence do you want to be on? One can either accept the beneficial liabilities of an Estate held in trust being held by another or they can go create one, name beneficiaries and be the one in control. Separate from the Estate side of things most other instruments are constructive trusts, some can be negotiated unless upon the face of the instrument it says " non-negotiable ", example a Drivers License, negotiations can be done right then an there on the side of the road, there is nothing on that instrument that says " non-negotiable ".

UCC

§ 3-201. NEGOTIATION.

(a) "Negotiation" means a transfer of possession, whether voluntary or involuntary, of an instrument by a person other than the issuer to a person who thereby becomes its holder.

§ 3-202. NEGOTIATION SUBJECT TO RESCISSION.

(a) Negotiation is effective even if obtained (i) from an infant, a corporation exceeding its powers, or a person without capacity, (ii) by fraud, duress, or mistake, or (iii) in breach of duty or as part of an illegal transaction.

I, personally, desire to move towards perfects rights i.e. the rights and duties are vested in one person rather than imperfect rights and trusts.

All things have their purpose and place though.

[motla68]

Rights are benefits, if equity follows the law then liability will follow from what rights you are claiming. Just be careful where you claim your rights come from.

Maxims of Equity

Contents

1 Equity regards done what ought to be done
2 Equity will not suffer a wrong to be without a remedy
3 Equity delights in equality
4 One who seeks equity must do equity
5 Equity aids the vigilant, not those who slumber on their rights
6 Equity imputes an intent to fulfill an obligation
7 Equity acts in personam.
8 Equity abhors a forfeiture
9 Equity does not require an idle gesture
10 One who comes into equity must come with clean hands
11 Equity delights to do justice and not by halves
12 Equity will take jurisdiction to avoid a multiplicity of suits
* 13 Equity follows the law *
14 Equity will not aid a volunteer
15 Where equities are equal, the law will prevail
16 Between equal equities the first in order of time shall prevail
17 Equity will not complete an imperfect gift
18 Equity will not allow a statute to be used as a cloak for fraud
19 Equity will not allow a trust to fail for want of a trustee