In Search of a Unifying Principle for Article V of the Uniform Trust Code: A Response to Professor Danforth

Abstract

Professor Robert Danforth's exploration of spendthrift trusts in Article Five of the UTC and the Future of Creditors 'Rights in Trusts is a superb piece of work. Professor Danforth analyzes with considerable acuity the ins and outs of the specific rights creditors and beneficiaries of trusts have under the Uniform Trust Code (UTC). His article clearly represents the most detailed analysis of the new Code's approach to spendthrift trusts. Professor Danforth is determined to establish that Article V is not as creditor-friendly as its critics claim.2 His article is essentially an apologia, coupled with some proposed modifications so as to leave no doubt about this. However, in his zeal to defend Article V and refute the contention that it is too creditor-friendly, Professor Danforth strikingly ignores its manifold shortcomings. Article V is a missed opportunity to legislate a coherent theory of creditor rights and spendthrift protections. As drafted, it is a disappointing amalgam of often contradictory, formalistic rules.