In re Soltis Estate

In In re Soltis Estate, 203 Mich App 435, 444; 513 NW2d 148 (1994), the settlor had amended her trust in 1985 to provide primarily for her son and then for her husband, the petitioner. Then in 1987, the settlor again amended the trust, this time eliminating the petitioner as a beneficiary. After the settlor died, the petitioner sought to set aside the 1987 trust and to make the trust assets a part of the decedent's estate. In re Soltis Estate, supra at 436-438. The petitioner argued, in part, that the respondents were equitably estopped from denying him his rights under the 1985 trust. The Court disagreed: In this case, the elements of equitable estoppel have not been shown. Petitioner did not justifiably rely on any alleged representations made by decedent because the language of the 1985 trust expressly reserved decedent's right to alter, amend, revoke, or terminate the agreement in whole or in part. Petitioner testified that he was aware of this provision and understood that the provision allowed decedent to amend her trust without his consent. Id. at 444. In re Soltis Estate does not hold that the doctrine of equitable estoppel cannot be raised when the document involved is revocable. Rather, In re Soltis Estate stands for the proposition that when a beneficiary of a trust knows that the trust can be revoked, the beneficiary cannot establish that he justifiably relied and acted on the belief that his status as beneficiary would not be changed. Id.