Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Americans for the Arts v. Ruth Lilly Charitable Remainder Annuity Trust 1 U/A January 18, 2002 Case Brief

Indiana Court of Appeals2006Docket #2533462
855 N.E.2d 592 2006 Ind. App. LEXIS 2137 2006 WL 2975575 Trusts and Estates Fiduciary Law

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: A trustee was sued for failing to diversify trust assets. The court found the trust document’s specific language, which authorized retaining assets “despite any resulting…lack of diversification,” validly waived the trustee’s default duty to diversify under the Prudent Investor Act, absolving the trustee of liability.

Legal Significance: Establishes that a trust instrument can override the statutory duty to diversify if it contains clear language permitting retention and explicitly waiving liability for a lack of diversification, especially when beneficiaries, represented by counsel, had an opportunity to object to the terms during formation.

Americans for the Arts v. Ruth Lilly Charitable Remainder Annuity Trust 1 U/A January 18, 2002 Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

National City Bank (the Bank), as conservator for Ruth Lilly’s estate, drafted a new estate plan that created two Charitable Remainder Annuity Trusts (CRATs). The appellants, including Americans for the Arts, were remainder beneficiaries. The appellants and their sophisticated legal counsel reviewed the proposed plan, made other objections, but did not object to paragraph 10(b) of the trust documents before the plan was approved by the probate court. Paragraph 10(b) empowered the Bank, as trustee, “to retain indefinitely any property received” and stated that any investment retained in good faith “shall be proper despite any resulting risk or lack of diversification or marketability.” The CRATs were funded entirely with Eli Lilly & Co. stock. The Bank held the concentrated position for several months, during which the stock’s value declined significantly, before fully diversifying the portfolios. When the Bank later sought court approval for its actions, the beneficiaries objected and counterclaimed, alleging the delay in diversification was a breach of the fiduciary duty to diversify under the Indiana Uniform Prudent Investor Act (PIA) and seeking to surcharge the Bank for the losses.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Can a trust instrument’s provision authorizing a trustee to retain assets “despite any resulting risk or lack of diversification” effectively waive the trustee’s default statutory duty to diversify under the Prudent Investor Act?

Yes. The court affirmed summary judgment for the trustee, holding that the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Can a trust instrument’s provision authorizing a trustee to retain assets “despite any resulting risk or lack of diversification” effectively waive the trustee’s default statutory duty to diversify under the Prudent Investor Act?

Conclusion

This case provides a clear roadmap for drafters seeking to override a Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in r

Legal Rule

Under the Indiana Uniform Prudent Investor Act, the default prudent investor rule, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla

Legal Analysis

The court's analysis centered on the interplay between the default duties imposed Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • A trust instrument can override the statutory duty to diversify if
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint oc

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?