MATTER OF HOME-STAKE PRODUCTION CO., ETC

13 Citing cases

  1. ROCK SPRINGS LAND AND TIMBER, INC. v. LORE

    2003 WY 100 (Wyo. 2003)   Cited 25 times

    As a general rule, the interpretation of the language of a trust instrument constitutes a question of law. Matter of Home-Stake Prod. Co. Deferred Compensation Trust, 1979 OK 81, ¶ 8, 598 P.2d 1193, 1196. The "appellate court claims for itself plenary independent and non-deferential authority to reexamine a trial court's legal rulings" de novo. Kluver v. Weatherford Hosp. Auth., 1993 OK 85, ¶ 14, 859 P.2d 1081, 1084; Corr v. Corr, 2001 OK CIV APP 31, ¶ 11, 21 P.3d 642, 644.

  2. Edwards v. InvesTrust

    487 P.3d 837 (Okla. Civ. App. 2021)

    Finally, "[t]he interpretation of the language of a trust instrument is a question of law for the court." Matter of Home-Stake Prod. Co. Deferred Comp. Tr. , 1979 OK 81, ¶ 8, 598 P.2d 1193 (citation omitted). ANALYSIS

  3. In re Living Trust of Reid

    46 P.3d 188 (Okla. Civ. App. 2002)   Cited 1 times

    ¶ 7 As a general rule, the interpretation of the language of a trust instrument constitutes a question of law. Matter of Home-Stake Prod. Co. Deferred Compensation Trust, 1979 OK 81, ¶ 8, 598 P.2d 1193, 1196. The "appellate court claims for itself plenary independent and non-deferential authority to reexamine a trial court's legal rulings" de novo. Kluver v. Weatherford Hosp. Auth., 1993 OK 85, ¶ 14, 859 P.2d 1081, 1084; Corr v. Corr, 2001 OK CIV APP 31, ¶ 11, 21 P.3d 642, 644.

  4. Dani v. Miller

    2016 OK 35 (Okla. 2016)   Cited 25 times

    In re Will of Dimick, 1975 OK 10, ¶ 10, 531 P.2d 1027 ; Dunnett v. First Nat. Bank & Trust Co., 1938 OK 608, ¶ 6, 184 Okla. 82, 85 P.2d 281. Where there is no ambiguity and the language of a trust is clear and plainly susceptible of only one construction, the plain provisions of the trust instrument must determine its construction. House of Realty, Inc. v. City of Midwest City, 2004 OK 97, ¶ 36, 109 P.3d 314 ; Matter of Home–Stake Production Co., Etc., 1979 OK 81, ¶ 8, 598 P.2d 1193. Appellant alternates between using the terms trust and public trust when referring to the relevant sections of the UUPA.

  5. Stratton v. Stephens

    503 P.3d 1221 (Okla. Civ. App. 2021)

    ¶5 Interpretation of the language of a trust instrument presents a question of law for the court. Matter of Home-Stake Production Co., Etc. , 1979 OK 81, ¶ 8, 598 P.2d 1193, 1196 (citations omitted). Where "there is no ambiguity and the language of a declaration of trust is clear and plainly susceptible of only one construction, the plain provisions of the trust instrument must determine its construction."

  6. Edwards v. Investrust

    2021 OK Civ. App. 16 (Okla. Civ. App. 2021)

    Finally, "[t]he interpretation of the language of a trust instrument is a question of law for the court." Matter of Home-Stake Prod. Co. Deferred Comp. Tr., 1979 OK 81, ¶ 8, 598 P.2d 1193 (citation omitted). ANALYSIS

  7. Corr v. Corr

    21 P.3d 642 (Okla. Civ. App. 2000)   Cited 5 times

    ¶ 10 The interpretation of a trust instrument and whether it is ambiguous is a question of law for the court. In re Home-Stake Prod. Co. Deferred Compensation Trust, 1979 OK 81, ¶ 8, 598 P.2d 1193, 1196. A question of law requires a de novo review by the appellate court and the "appellate court claims for itself plenary independent and non-deferential authority to reexamine a trial court's legal rulings."Kluver v. Weatherford Hosp. Auth., 1993 OK 85, ¶ 14, 859 P.2d 1081, 1084. ¶ 11 A trust instrument is ambiguous if it is susceptible to two or more interpretations.

  8. KERR v. UMB BANK, N.A.

    Case No. CIV-06-95-C (W.D. Okla. Dec. 20, 2007)

    The Court interprets the trust instrument as a matter of law, applying the plain language of the agreement and construing it in favor of the beneficiaries. See Matter of Home-Stake Prod. Co. Deferred Compensation Trust, 1979 OK 81, 598 P.2d 1193, 1196. The Flynn Trusts are governed by two documents: the 1965 Trust Agreement and Mrs. Flynn's will.

  9. House of Realty v. City of Midwest City

    2004 OK 97 (Okla. 2004)   Cited 34 times

    Where there is no ambiguity and the language of a trust is clear and plainly susceptible of only one construction, the plain provisions of the trust instrument must determine its construction. Matter of Home-Stake Production Co. Deferred Compensation Trust, 1979 OK 81, 598 P.2d 1193, 1196. The Trust Indenture states that the Compounded Principal shall not be spent for any reason except in the event that HMA prematurely terminates its lease or by a vote of the people.

  10. Griffin v. Griffin

    1992 OK 36 (Okla. 1992)   Cited 10 times
    Determining that court may make rulings concerning trustor's intent

    We disagree. 12 O.S. § 2801[ 12-2801] (1981), First National Bank trust Co. of Okla. City v. Foster, 346 F.2d 49 (10th Cir. 1965), 598 P.2d 1193 (Okla. 1979), Ollie v. Rainbolt, 669 P.2d 275 (Okla. 1980). The interpretation of John T. Griffin's Revocable Trust Agreement is a question which must be addressed by state law.