Skip to Content

We are a Veteran Owned Business, providing 20% discounts for Veterans, First Responders, Elementary and High School teachers. Please contact us to set up a phone or Zoom meeting. Taking care of you and your family, It's What We Do!

Exclusive Power of Appointment and Bad Faith in Montgomery County Orphans’ Court Litigation

Posted on Thu Mar 26, 2015, on Estate Litigation

From our “Ask a Question” Mailbag: Montgomery County Exclusive Power of Appointment and Bad Faith

Most Recently Updated July 14, 2018.

“My father’s executor just excluded me from a share in his King of Prussia Trust. Is there anything I can do?”

Montgomery County Exclusive Power of Appointment and Bad Faith

Some form of legal action is the first thought of most children who are disinherited by their parents, especially when their perceived share of the parents’ estate goes to their siblings instead. If it is your intention to create an estate plan that disinherits a child or to challenge a plan that disinherits you, many options exist.

Case Example

The Orphans’ Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, Pennsylvania recently ruled on one parent’s strategy to disinherit in the Zucker Estate.

This case provides insight into how accurate trust drafting can achieve financial support goals and provide a spouse with flexibility in their estate plan. The focus in this case was a challenge to a marital trust and the critical difference between exclusive and non-exclusive powers of appointment. A factual background will serve as point of reference for the key takeaways in the Zucker case.

Factual Background:

  • 1996 – Mr. Z, a Montgomery County resident, drafts Will, including a marital trust for the benefit of his wife Mrs. Z. The marital trust includes powers of appointment held by Mrs. Z
  • 2002 – Mr. Z dies, survived by Mrs. Z and three children (SZ, KG, WG)
  • 2003 – Mrs. Z drafts Will
  • 2005 – Mrs. Z drafts codicil exercising her exclusive powers of appointment and specifically disinheriting WG
  • 2013 – Mrs. Z dies
  • 2013 – WG files suit in Montgomery County Orphans’ claiming powers were nonexclusive and exercised in bad faith

The Court’s Reasoning

The marital trust in Mr. Z’s Will existed to provide Mrs. Z with financial security for the rest of her life. Then, by terms of the trust, she had the power to appoint, “all or any part of the principal […] to or for any one or more of my children.” Providing for Mrs. Z was not the issue in this case. The issue in Zucker is what powers Mrs. Z had over disposition of the trust principal after her death. How the marital trust in Mr. Z’s Will was drafted governs the extent of Mrs. Z’s power.

The Court’s Conclusion

After careful parsing of the language in Mr. Z’s Will, the Montgomery County Orphans’ Court reached two conclusions – the powers of appointment were exclusive and no “good faith requirement” in exercising that power exists. Essentially, Mrs. Z was able to use her powers in bad faith, to disinherit a child.

Powers of Appointment – Limitations

The importance of determining whether powers of appointment will be exclusive or non-exclusive before drafting cannot be overstated. Fortunately, it’s a matter left solely to the discretion of the testator. In its most basic terms, an exclusive power allows the holder (here, Mrs. Z) to disinherit persons when disposing of the marital trust assets. This is in contrast to one with non-exclusive powers that do not allow the holder to disinherit a member of the class stated in the original trust.

The key language in the trust was, “to or for any one or more of my children.” This gave Mrs. Z exclusive powers of appointment. If she had not exercised those powers, the trust would have been distributed equally among her three children. But, Mrs. Z did exercise her powers to specifically exclude WG, who initiated the suit before the Montgomery County Orphans’ Court. Due to carefully drafted language entitling Mrs. Z to exclusive powers of appointment, she succeeded in excluding WG from the trust assets.

Another Failed Argument

WG’s second argument against her exclusion from the trust assets also failed. WG claimed that Mrs. Z used her powers in bad faith, out of hate for WG. The court dismissed this stating no precedent existed in Montgomery County requiring good faith in exercising a power of appointment over trust assets.

Your Goal

Whether your goal is to provide for your spouse, children or both – careful drafting can help effectuate those goals. Spelling out your intentions with the help of an experienced lawyer is an easy way to ensure the advice from Zucker keeps your family out of the courtroom.

Further Estate Litigation Questions?

Challenging an executor for suspected bad faith is only one of many Estate Litigation issues our firm addresses. Consequently, if you want to learn more, please read my more detailed article, Trust and Estate Litigation All You Need to Know.

In Conclusion: Montgomery County Exclusive Power of Appointment and Bad Faith

I hope that this article was helpful in explaining what to do if you feel you’re the victim of bad faith. Further, I included links to even more detailed information on my website. Therefore, please contact me and let me know how I did. Certainly, your comments and questions are welcome!

Let our Lawyers help walk you through what can be a confusing process. To begin with, call to speak to one of our experienced Litigation Attorneys.  By all means, our lawyers are ready to answer your questions. In fact, feel free to contact our office for a free consultation. Ultimately our goal is to put our 25 years of estate litigation experience to work for you.

Wills, Trusts, Probate, and Estate Litigation It’s All We Do!


Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Estate Litigation, Estate Litigation Attorney, Estate Litigation Lawyer, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, Standard of Care for Fiduciaries

Peter KlenkPeter Klenk

What Our clients are saying

Klenk Law Logo

Ronald W.

Peter and his staff are very responsive and always willing to help my clients and in a cost efficient manner.

Klenk Law Logo

Brian M.

Peter explained a complex subject very clearly, helped us to decide the best approach to managing our estate and then made it very easy for us to execute the required documents. He will be a valuable resource for years to come and clearly has a great understanding of estate law that will lead to innovative solutions for us. I would unhesitatingly recommend him for estate planning.

Klenk Law Logo

Michael Patete

Surprisingly easy

Klenk Law Logo

Qiana Wright

Great friendly staff

Klenk Law Logo

Michael Wolfgang

Peter and the whole team at Klenk Law are top notch. They are thorough, efficient and understanding of client needs. He was able to tailor our estate planning needs just how we envisioned.

Let us put our expertise to work for you.

Free consultation within 24 hours.