Memorandum  Memorandum and Order: Holiday M. Collins and another vs. Holiday Collins Storck and others

Date:	10/17/2012
Referenced Sources:	G.L. c. 215, § 6 G. L. c. 211, § 4A

NO. SJ-2012-360

Memorandum and Order

Holiday M. Collins¹ and another² vs. Holiday Collins Storck and others³

The plaintiffs bring this action pursuant to G. L. c. 215, § 6, to reform a trust instrument, the Blencathra Trust, in order, they state, to conform the trust to the intent of the settlor, the plaintiff Holiday M. Collins, and in order to maximize Federal transfer tax savings. They allege that as a result of mistake, the Trust as drafted does not achieve the settlor's purpose, and therefore reformation is necessary. They also claim that it is necessary for the full court to entertain this action, because the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is bound only by a decision of a State's highest court, citing Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Estate of Bosch, 387 U.S. 456, 465 (1967).

I am mindful of the abundant case law holding that the IRS and Federal courts are not absolutely bound by decisions of lower State courts adjudicating matters of State substantive law. See, e.g., Walker v. Walker, 433 Mass. 581, 582 (2001). I also recognize, however, that under the Supreme Court's Bosch decision, the IRS and Federal courts are obligated to give "proper regard" to the decisions of the lower State courts on such matters. Commissioner v. Estate of Bosch, supra at 463-465. There is nothing in the material before me suggesting that the Federal authorities would not give proper regard to a decision of the Probate and Family Court in this case, and I am hopeful that they would in fact honor a decision from the Probate and Family Court in a case such as this just as fully as they would honor a decision from this court. The parties do not suggest that there are novel or unsettled issues of Massachusetts law involved that require resolution by this court; it appears that the case requires only an application of settled Massachusetts legal principles to this set of facts.

If the plaintiffs are entitled to the reformation they seek -- as to which I express no view -- a judge of the Probate and Family Court has full authority to grant them this relief. See G. L. c. 215, § 6. Accordingly, pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 4A, this matter is to be transferred to the Probate and Family Court for final disposition.

Order

It is ORDERED that this matter be transferred to the Probate and Family Court Department for further proceedings and final disposition.

Margot Botsford  
Associate Justice

1. Settlor of the Blencathra Trust, dated December 16, 1992.
2. David S. Collins, Trustee of the Blencathra Trust, dated December 16, 1992.
3. Jennifer Collins Moore, Nathaniel Sebastian Storck, Harold McCutchin Moore, and the Commissioner of Internal Revenue.