![rothschild1118 rothschild1118](https://eu-images.contentstack.com/v3/assets/bltabaa95ef14172c61/bltd2f5cd6d347761ab/67338121180b9d229ffe4e1c/te-1118-Rothschild.jpg?width=1280&auto=webp&quality=95&format=jpg&disable=upscale)
In May, we published an article in this journal entitled “Alaska Supreme Court Invalidates Exclusive Jurisdiction Provision,”1 concerning the Alaska Supreme Court’s decision in Toni 1 Trust v. Wacker (Toni 1 Trust).2 That decision held that Section 34.40.110(k) of the Alaska Trust Act, which purported to grant Alaska courts exclusive jurisdiction over fraudulent transfer actions against Alaska self-settled spendthrift trusts, was an ineffective exercise of the Alaska legislature’s authority and couldn’t control the jurisdictional question that it sought to control. The Toni 1 Trust decision confirmed an earlier decision of the Montana courts to the effect that a transfer of Montana real estate to an Alaska self-settled spendthrift trust...
Unlock All Access Premium Subscription
Get Trusts & Estates articles, digital editions, and an optional print subscription. Choose your subscription now and dive into expert insights today!
Already Subscribed?