Is the Trustee’s Duty to the Beneficiary or to the Trust Itself?
Does a trustee have a duty to the beneficiary or to the purpose of the trust?
These are often in alignment, and the trustee doesn’t have to choose one over the other. But sometimes they are in conflict, and that’s where issues arise.
This is not just an abstract legal concept; it has consequences in the real world. A trustee who does not live up to his or her duty under the law can get in legal trouble, as one trustee found out in last year’s South Carolina Court of Appeals case Baskin v. Walkup (2025) (find it here). The trustee was not only removed from his role but was found in contempt and ordered to pay over $100,000 in legal fees.
Before jumping into the details of the case, which should be illuminating to trustees in South Carolina, let’s see what state statute says.
Purpose or Beneficiaries: What South Carolina Law Says
Under South Carolina Code:
“Upon acceptance of a trusteeship, the trustee shall administer the trust in good faith, in accordance with its terms and purposes and in the interests of the beneficiaries, and in accordance with this article.” – Section 62-7-801
“A trustee shall administer the trust solely in the interest of the beneficiaries.” – Section 62-7-802(a)
“The duty of a trustee to act in good faith and in accordance with the purpose of the trust” cannot be overridden by any provision in the trust. – Section 62-7-105(b)(2)
The purpose of a trust may be to preserve family wealth and/or land; to provide for beneficiaries during their lifetimes; to fund charitable institutions; and so on. It’s advisable for the grantor/settlor of a trust to explicitly state the purpose of the trust so there’s no confusion as to its purpose. South Carolina Code Section 67-7-105(b)(3) requires that a trust “have a purpose that is lawful and possible to achieve.” It cannot be illegal or violate public policy.
A trustee must prioritize the goals of the trust and the wishes of the grantor/settlor rather than act in his or her own best interest. The trustee must also serve the beneficiaries while being careful not to go against the trust’s purpose by agreeing to a beneficiary’s requests for more funds – a common occurrence, in our experience.
But what if not making more disbursements to the beneficiary actually violates the trustee’s duty to the trust? That brings us to Baskin v. Walkup.
Baskin v. Walkup (2025) – The Background
Eldridge Baskin died in 1990, leaving a house on Summerlea Drive and its contents to his only child, then-43-year-old daughter Jane E. Baskin (Baskin) who had certain needs due to cerebral palsy.
The rest of his estate was put in a trust for Baskin’s benefit for the rest of her life. Under the terms of his will, the trust was “for the sole benefit of my daughter, Jane E. Baskin, the sole purpose of the trust created hereunder being to provide for the well[-]being of Jane E. Baskin so long as she shall live.”
Family friend William B. Walkup was named trustee, and under the terms of the trust he had broad powers to manage and invest the trust’s assets and “complete and absolute discretion” to make disbursements to Baskin.
The trust started with over $130,000 in liquid assets and a rental home worth over $40,000. Over the years, the trust’s value grew to over $500,000 under Walkup’s management, according to later testimony.
Over the years, too, the relationship between Baskin and Walkup deteriorated to the point where Baskin filed an action seeking removal of Walkup as trustee and an accounting in July 2020.
The Trial – Disagreements Over Trust Funds
The trial began in January 2021.
Baskin testified that in June 2015, against her will, Walkup moved her out of the family home she’d lived in since 1959 and into an apartment complex owned by Walkup. Walkup said that Baskin had begun falling at her home and that her being closer meant he and his daughter could (and did) provide additional support. Baskin said that the apartment was not accessible, as she was in a wheelchair at that time.
Baskin stated that she wanted to move back to the Summerlea Drive house, but Walkup wanted to move her to a nursing home. Baskin refused, and she began renovations on the house. Walkup said that expenses at the house were $14,400 per month, which would deplete the trust in three years. Expenses at the nursing home, by comparison, could be as low as $6,600 per month, depending on how much care Baskin needed.
In August 2017, Walkup sent Baskin a letter stating that the trust would stop paying insurance and electrical bills starting in October. The following May, through her attorney, Alex Weatherly, Baskin “demanded” $6,500 per month from the trust. Baskin also testified that the trust paid for just 40 hours of caregiving a week, but she needed ten hours per day. Baskin’s long-time friend Michele Moseley provided caregiving and was named/ Baskin’s POA in 2017.
The trial paused when a temporary settlement agreement was reached in which the parties agreed:
- Walkup would remain the trustee responsible for investing and tax reporting
- Baskin’s attorney Alex Weatherly would be appointed special trustee for Baskin’s care, and
- Baskin would move to the Summerlea Drive house by February 1, 2021
(A handful of other legal actions followed, but they are not pertinent to this discussion; read the full opinion for details.)
The trial resumed over a year later, in August 2022. The court-appointed guardian ad litem (GAL), whose role it was to represent Baskin’s best interests, testified that Baskin needed more funds from the trust for professional care and to fix up the Summerlea Drive house. She also testified that Baskin did not seem to be under undue influence from Moseley.
A trust and estate attorney, on behalf of Walkup, said it was more important for a trustee to follow the testator’s instructions than to prioritize good relations with the beneficiary. He also stated that Walkup’s financial management of the trust, which had grown considerably under his care, was “remarkable.”
Walkup, for his part, had previously testified that he was 80 years old and had known Baskin since she was 11 months old, and he agreed to be trustee because he thought he could help. He stated that the relationship with Baskin deteriorated once Moseley became more involved, which Moseley denied.
The Court Removed Walkup as Trustee
The probate court found in favor of Baskin, ordering Walkup to be removed as trustee. This decision was based on (quoting the appeals court’s opinion):
- “best serving Baskin;
- a substantial change in circumstances in the relationship between Walkup and Baskin, which had “deteriorated to a toxic level of litigation”; and
- requested by Baskin, best serving the trust, and not inconsistent with a material purpose of the trust.”
A suitable trustee was immediately available, noted the court, namely Weatherly, who had already been serving as special trustee.
Walkup was not only removed as trustee but was found in contempt and in breach of the temporary settlement agreement. He was ordered to pay Baskin’s attorney’s fees of $3,500 and $129,625.80.
This Appeal Followed
The appeals court affirmed. It found that the probate court made the correct decision based on Baskin’s best interests and the deterioration of the relationship between Walkup and Baskin.
South Carolina courts have authority under SC Code Section 62-7-706 to remove a trustee on certain grounds, a topic covered in a previous blog. Here, the appeals court cites subsections (b)(3) and (b)(4) specifically:
(3) because of the unfitness, unwillingness, or persistent failure of the trustee to administer the trust effectively, the court determines that removal of the trustee best serves the interests of the beneficiaries; or
(4) there has been a substantial change of circumstances or removal is requested by all of the qualified beneficiaries, the court finds that removal of the trustee best serves the interests of all the beneficiaries and is not inconsistent with a material purpose of the trust, and a suitable cotrustee or successor trustee is available”
It also quotes the following comments on this section:
“A trustee may be removed for untoward action, such as for a serious breach of trust, but the section is not so limited. A trustee may also be removed under a variety of circumstances in which the court concludes that the trustee is not best serving the interests of the beneficiaries. The term ‘interests of the beneficiaries’ means the beneficial interests as provided in the terms of the trust, not as defined by the beneficiaries.”
And:
“Friction between the trustee and beneficiaries is ordinarily not a basis for removal. However, removal might be justified if communications breakdown is caused by the trustee or appears to be incurable.”
While Walkup’s financial expertise was “apparent,” the appeals court found that “the record was replete with evidence that long-term growth rather than Baskin’s well-being was Walkup’s primary concern.” Since that objective went against the stated purpose of the trust of caring for Baskin, and the trustee’s primary duty is to carry out that purpose, Walkup was removed as trustee.
Takeaway for Trustees – Beware
Whether or not Walkup genuinely believed he was prioritizing Baskin’s well-being or was more concerned with getting great returns on the trust’s investments, this is a bad outcome for him and could be bad for trustees in future cases. We’ve previously covered another case, IN RE: Deborah Dereede Living Trust v. Karp (2019), in which a trustee was found personally liable by the same court.
These decisions are a good reminder that individual trustees put themselves at risk for what is often a thankless and low-paying job. It’s imperative that trustees understand the purpose of the trust and serve the beneficiaries’ interests in alignment with that purpose.
Get Help with Trusts and Trustee Issues
If you need help drafting, revising, or revoking a trust, or have issues with a trustee and/or beneficiary, call estate planning attorney Gem McDowell at the Gem McDowell Law Group. Gem has over 30 years of experience practicing in South Carolina, and he and his team help individuals and families create personalized wills, trusts, and comprehensive estate plans tailored to their unique circumstances. Gem is a creative problem solver who can help you fix problems, protect your interests, and avoid mistakes in the first place.
Call Gem and his team, with offices in Myrtle Beach and Mt. Pleasant, SC, at (843) 284-1021 to schedule your free initial consultation today.
When and How Can a Trustee Be Removed?
In South Carolina, a trustee of a trust can be removed in one of two ways: either in accordance with the terms of the trust or by a court under state trust law.
Below, we’ll look at both in turn.
A Trustee Can Be Removed Under State Law
South Carolina Code Section 62-7-706 covers the grounds for removal of a trustee by the court and who may request the removal. (Note that Title 62, Article 7 of the SC Code is based on the Uniform Trust Code, a model law adopted in some form by the majority of the states.)
Who Can Request the Removal of a Trustee?
Under subsection 62-7-706(a), “the settlor, a cotrustee, or a beneficiary may request the court to remove a trustee, or a trustee may be removed by the court on its own initiative.”
On What Grounds Can a South Carolina Court Remove a Trustee?
Quoting subsection 62-7-706(b), a court can remove a trustee if:
- “the trustee has committed a serious breach of trust;
- lack of cooperation among cotrustees substantially impairs the administration of the trust;
- because of unfitness, unwillingness, or persistent failure of the trustee to administer the trust effectively, the court determines that removal of the trustee best serves the interests of the beneficiaries; or
- there has been a substantial change of circumstances or removal is requested by all of the qualified beneficiaries, the court finds that removal of the trustee best serves the interests of all the beneficiaries and is not inconsistent with a material purpose of the trust, and a suitable cotrustee or successor trustee is available.”
Here, “interests of the beneficiaries” means “the beneficial interests provided in the terms of the trust,” as defined in Section 62-7-103.
These grounds give the courts discretion in determining whether a trustee should be removed based on the facts of an individual case. To see how the law was applied in a real case recently, check out our discussion of the South Carolina Court of Appeals Baskin v. Walkup (2025) decision here on the blog.
What is the Process for Having a Trustee Removed by the Court?
The party requesting the removal starts the process by filing a petition for removal in the court with jurisdiction over the trust, usually the probate court.
Before turning to the courts, however, the party seeking to remove the trustee should first look to the trust document.
A Trustee Can Be Removed Under the Trust’s Terms
Many trusts contain provisions regarding how and when a trustee may be removed, often with steps on how to appoint a successor trustee. Removing a trustee under the trust’s terms is typically faster and less costly than going through the courts.
Who Has the Power to Remove a Trustee?
A trust may grant the power to initiate the removal of a trustee to:
- The settlor/grantor, if still alive
- All of the named beneficiaries or a percentage of the beneficiaries (often a majority or supermajority)
- A trust protector, if there is one
- Co-trustees, if there are multiple trustees
This varies by trust, so look at the terms of the trust in question.
What Are Common Grounds for the Nonjudicial Removal of a Trustee?
Many trusts allow for the nonjudicial removal of a trustee on the same grounds listed above, namely breach of trust, lack of cooperation, unfitness, etc. This allows for the trustee’s removal through an administrative process rather than needing to go through the courts.
But a grantor has flexibility when creating his or her trust and may choose to allow for the trustee’s removal on broad or narrow grounds. At one extreme end, the grantor may include language that allows certain parties to initiate the removal of a trustee “for any reason” or “without cause.” At the other end, the grantor may only allow for the nonjudicial removal of a trustee for no reason but incapacity, for example.
There are advantages and disadvantages to both routes. If you are thinking about what kind of trustee removal provisions to include in your trust, talk through the alternatives with your attorney.
What is the Process for Removing a Trustee Under a Trust’s Terms?
The steps required to remove a trustee vary depending on the trust. Steps may include:
- Informing the trustee and other parties in writing
- Holding a vote (if agreement among a majority or supermajority of beneficiaries is required)
- Selecting a successor trustee
- Filing or recording the trustee’s resignation letter
The trustee may also need to provide an accounting and/or to turn over trust assets as needed.
Get Help with Trusts and Estate Planning from the Gem McDowell Law Group
For help drafting or revising a trust, removing a trustee, or developing a comprehensive estate plan that’s tailored to you, call estate planning attorney Gem McDowell. Gem and his team at the Gem McDowell Law Group, with offices in Myrtle Beach and Mt. Pleasant, SC, work with individuals and families in South Carolina to solve problems, protect their interests, and provide peace of mind. Call Gem’s office today at (843) 284-1021 to schedule your free initial consultation.
Pros and Cons of Family Friend vs. Corporate Trustee and Why Choice of Fiduciary Matters
A trustee of a trust is a fiduciary with a legal duty to act in the best interest of the trust beneficiary or beneficiaries in accordance with the terms and purpose of the trust.
The choice of trustee is an important one, which is why it should not be an afterthought when drawing up the trust instrument. The right trustee can ensure the grantor’s (aka settlor’s) wishes are carried out and help create a positive legacy for future generations. The wrong trustee can deviate from the grantor’s wishes and intent, stoke conflict among beneficiaries, and mismanage trust assets – sometimes to the point of criminal wrongdoing.
Here are some things to consider when choosing a fiduciary, plus some different options for your trust.
Family Friend or Corporate Trustee?
The choice of trustee often comes down to a choice between a family friend/relative or an unrelated corporate trustee. Both have their pros and cons.
The Family Friend/Relative as Trustee: Pros and Cons
Many grantors choose a trusted family member or friend for this role.
One main advantage is cost. The trustee is entitled to compensation as detailed in the trust instrument or, potentially, “reasonable compensation” under state law. This can be a set hourly rate or a small percentage of the trust assets (often below 1%) annually. Many trustees waive the fee altogether, especially if administering the trust is not too time consuming and challenging.
One disadvantage is that if the trust is time consuming and challenging, a family friend may not have the skills and experience. A trustee needs to know all relevant legal and tax matters to stay in compliance and may have a large job in terms of investing, managing, and distributing trust assets. Additionally, non-corporate trustees are not required to be bonded and insured like corporate trustees are, leaving assets more vulnerable to mismanagement and misconduct.
Succession planning can be a challenge, too. The trustee will eventually die or may step away from the role sooner due to illness, incapacity, or any number of other personal issues. The grantor must consider how a successor would be chosen in this circumstance.
Finally, consider the personalities, relationships, and interpersonal dynamics of the parties involved. Having someone who knows the grantor and beneficiaries personally can be a pro or a con depending on the particular situation. On the one hand, he or she may have valuable insights into the grantor’s values, wishes, and intent, and the individual needs and potential issues of the beneficiaries, because of those personal relationships. This can be a big benefit that corporate trustees simply can’t replicate.
On the other hand, this could work against the trustee. Beneficiaries may try to take advantage of their personal history with the trustee, the trustee could treat beneficiaries unfairly due to personal biases, or previously good relationships could be strained.
Whether the personal relationship is a pro or con is highly dependent on the individual personalities and relationship dynamics of the beneficiaries and trustee.
The Corporate Trustee: Pros and Cons
Another common option is the corporate trustee, where a financial institution is the trustee, and individual employees carry out the day-to-day duties of administering the trust.
One main advantage of choosing a corporate trustee is that you know the individuals involved have the skills and experience needed to manage and administer the trust. They are aware of all the legal and tax implications and obligations and can handle them, even if the trust is complex and time consuming.
Corporate trustees are also regulated by state and federal authorities, providing a level of protection you don’t have with non-professional family/friend trustees. Corporate trustees are bonded and insured against fraud, theft, misconduct, and errors and omissions.
Another benefit is the ease of succession planning; even if individual trust officers or advisors leave the role, another one takes over, providing continuity over time.
The biggest downside of choosing a corporate trustee is often the cost. A corporate trustee will not waive the fee, which is often a small percentage of the trust assets annually plus fees and expenses for any additional services. This can add up to a sizeable amount every year.
Finally, consider the lack of insider knowledge and personal relationships with the grantor and the beneficiaries. Again, whether this is a pro or con is a matter of individual personalities and relationships. An impartial corporate trustee could be ideal in certain situations, while in others, a trustee with personal knowledge could better carry out the spirit and intent of the trust.
Questions to Consider When Choosing a Trustee
If you’re considering creating a trust, here are some questions to consider when it comes to choosing a trustee.
- Does the trustee understand my intent as the grantor, and can he or she help carry out that intent?
- Is the trust so large and/or complex that it should be administered by a professional with experience? Or is it straightforward enough for anyone to manage?
- Knowing the personalities and relationship dynamics of the beneficiaries, is it wiser to have a trustee who is impartial or one with a personal touch?
- For family friend/relative trustees:
- Does he or she have a good relationship with the beneficiaries? Is he or she good at resolving conflict, dealing with different personalities, and saying “no” when necessary?
- Does he or she have the time necessary to administer the trust? Does he or she have the required knowledge about compliance, taxes, and investing to carry out the job effectively?
- Is he or she reliable? Trustworthy?
- For corporate trustees:
- What experience does the individual/team administering the trust have with similar trusts?
- If the company is bought out or merges with another company, how does that affect continuity?
- What are the fees? Are additional services (such as litigation support, tax preparation, etc.) available, and how are they billed?
Speak with your estate planning attorney to come up with questions that are pertinent to your unique situation.
Additional Options for Your Trust
As the grantor, you are not stuck in an either-or position. You have options beyond having either a corporate trustee or a family friend serve as trustee, including:
Appoint a combination of both. With both types of trustees, you get the best of both worlds. The corporate trustee has the impartiality, experience, and time to properly administer the trust. The family friend/relative trustee has the personal connections and knowledge to ensure the trust is being administered according to the grantor’s wishes. The downsides: this is probably more costly (unless the family friend waives the fee) and could lead to clashes between the two trustees if the trust is not clear about the roles of each trustee.
Appoint a trust director*. A trust director is an individual with a specific role as described by the trust. For instance, a trust director may be solely in charge of managing the investment of assets but have nothing to do with making distributions or handling compliance. The trust director works alongside others to manage the trust. Read more about trust directors here on our blog.
Appoint a trust protector*. A trust protector is an individual whose role is to ensure that the trust is being administered according to the terms of the trust and the wishes of the grantor. He or she is not involved in asset management or day-to-day handling of the trust but has a more supervisory role. Read more about trust protectors and when it’s smart to have one here on our blog.
*These terms are sometimes used interchangeably.
Require Trustee to Be Bonded and Insured. A family friend or relative is not required by law to be bonded and insured, but the trust instrument can require it, providing an extra layer of protection.
Create a Private Family Trust Company (PFTC). Creating a PFTC is a viable option for ultra-high-net-worth families. PFTCs allow for more privacy, better continuity over time, and more input from family members (as members of the company) on how to administer the trust. The company itself is a fiduciary and acts as trustee. The downsides: PFTCs are expensive to maintain and are currently not recognized by all states.
Make the Trust Flexible Enough for the Future. Understand that things will change over time, and a trust should be flexible enough to adapt to uncertain future circumstances. Include provisions on replacing a trustee such as when replacement can or must happen and who has the authority to select the replacement.
Legal Help and Strategic Advice from Gem McDowell
Trusts may seem simple on the surface, but with many kinds of trusts, many potential pitfalls, and changing laws and tax regulations, they can quickly become complicated. Avoid mistakes and get strategic advice from estate planning attorney Gem McDowell of the Gem McDowell Law Firm with offices in Myrtle Beach and Mt. Pleasant, SC.
Gem and his team help individuals and families in South Carolina create estate plans that reflect their unique circumstances to protect what they love and bring peace of mind. Whether you need help creating or reviewing a trust, choosing a trustee, or developing a custom estate plan from scratch, Gem can help. Call 843-284-1021 today to schedule your free consultation.
What is a Trust Protector and When Do You Need a Trust Protector?
If you know anything about trusts, you have likely heard of the roles of settlor (aka grantor), beneficiary, and trustee. But there’s another role to know about: the trust protector.
Let’s look at what a trust protector is, who can be a trust protector, and the advantages and disadvantages of appointing one for your trust.
What is a Trust Protector and What Does a Trust Protector Do?
A trust protector, or simply “protector,” is an individual or entity whose primary role is to ensure the trust is being carried out in accordance with the settlor’s original wishes. Trust protectors were most commonly seen in asset-protecting offshore trusts in the 1980s and 1990s, but they have since become more popular for all kinds of trusts in the U.S. and many other nations.
What does a trust protector protect against? Depending on the circumstances, the trust protector may protect the trust from various threats or risks including trustee misconduct, mismanagement, or incapacity; disputes among beneficiaries and/or trustee(s); changing laws that adversely affect the trust; ill-advised financial decisions; and more.
Common powers and responsibilities may allow a trust protector to:
- Oversee trust administration to ensure it’s in compliance with applicable laws and with the settlor’s wishes
- Require trustee to get trust protector’s consent before taking certain actions such as investing or distributing funds
- Modify the trustee’s powers
- Remove or replace trustees
- Change the beneficiary or beneficiaries
- Adjust as needed in response to changing circumstances
A trust protector may have all or some of the powers listed above, and more. The exact powers and responsibilities are enumerated either in the trust instrument itself or in a separate document.
Who Can Be a Trust Protector?
In theory, anyone of legal age who is mentally competent can be appointed trust protector, other than a trustee. Even the settlor/grantor may serve as the trust protector (and often does). Entities such as banks, law firms, and corporations may also serve as trust protectors.
In practice, it can be challenging to find the right individual or entity to effectively fill the role. The ideal candidate should have the right experience and knowledge, including knowing relevant state and federal laws, tax and reporting requirements, and the trustee’s powers and responsibilities, for a start. A trust protector should also be an impartial third party with no conflict of interest, meaning the individual or entity should not have any financial stake in the trust or how it’s handled.
Above all, a trust protector should be someone the settlor can rely on to carry out their wishes, which is why settlors often select a family friend or close acquaintance whom they trust implicitly.
Does Every Trust Need a Trust Protector? Advantages of Appointing a Trust Protector
No, not every trust needs one, but we strongly recommend a trust protector in the following situations:
- A troubled beneficiary. If the beneficiary has issues with drugs, alcohol, or excessive spending, a trust protector – such as a family friend or counselor – can be helpful in finding the right trustee to handle the trust. The two can work together to ensure the trust is not misused.
- Specific investments. A grantor may wish to appoint a trust protector to help direct the investment of trust assets in a particular “family way” that the trustee might not be familiar with.
Outside of these specific circumstances, here are just some of the main advantages of having a trust protector that any trust can benefit from:
Flexibility to respond to changing circumstances. Changes in family/beneficiary situations, tax code, and estate planning laws can adversely affect a trust. Trust protectors have powers trustees don’t (and legally cannot) have that allow them to alter the trust in response to new circumstances. This can reduce tax liabilities and ensure the trust reflects the settlor’s wishes long after the settlor is gone.
Oversight over the trustee. Trust protectors can also serve as an additional layer of protection against mismanagement by the trustee(s). This is more important than ever, as the powers of trustees have grown over time. Oversight by a third party (the trust protector) can help prevent intentional or unintentional mishandling by the trustee(s) that can harm the beneficiaries’ interests and endanger the trust.
Conflict resolution. Trust protectors can also act as informal mediators when disputes arise. Beneficiaries may fight among themselves, and trustees and beneficiaries often have competing goals, which can lead to strife and litigation. (Read about how one such conflict ended up in the SC Court of Appeals here on our blog.) A skilled trust protector can step in at the first signs of conflict and resolve the matter amicably, potentially avoiding litigation and strained relationships.
Depending on your circumstances and goals, you may gain additional advantages by appointing a trust protector for your trust. This is something to speak with your estate planning attorney about.
What if you didn’t appoint a trust protector in the original trust document? That’s not a problem. A settlor can add a trust protector later.
Downsides of Having a Trust Protector
What are the risks and disadvantages of having a trust protector? Some possible downsides include:
Higher fees. Not all trust protectors are compensated for their role, but some are. Trust protectors who are fiduciaries (with a fiduciary duty to the beneficiary or beneficiaries) are typically compensated. Depending on the terms of the trust, having a trust protector can be expensive and can diminish the trust’s assets.
Potential for challenges. Trusts have been around for centuries, and by now the roles and responsibilities of the grantor/settlor, trustee, and beneficiary are clear. But the role of trust protector is relatively new, and relevant case law in South Carolina is sparse. The potential for lawsuits and legal challenges over a trust protector’s actions shouldn’t be ignored.
Needless complexity. A trust protector may end up bringing conflict, indecision, or poor judgment to the situation. This is why it’s crucial to take the time to select the right trust protector. No trust protector at all is better than an ineffective and incompetent one.
For Help with Trusts and Estate Planning, Call the Gem McDowell Law Group
Trusts are excellent instruments for estate planning, but they can be complex. For help creating or amending a trust, or for advice on appointing a trust protector for your trust, talk with Gem McDowell. Gem helps individuals and families in South Carolina create estate plans tailored to their unique circumstances and wishes. He’s also a problem solver who can help you tackle tricky family or inheritance situations and avoid mistakes.
Call Gem and his team at their Myrtle Beach or Mount Pleasant, SC office today to schedule your free, no-obligation consultation at (843) 284-1021, or reach out to us through this form.
