## Facts

- Alfred I. duPont died in 1935, leaving a will that created a testamentary charitable trust administered in Florida (the duPont Trust).
- After the death of duPont’s widow, the will directed that the trust’s net income be paid to The Nemours Foundation to operate “Nemours” as a charitable institution.
- The will also provided that, in any year the trust’s net income exceeded what was necessary for the Nemours purposes, the excess income was to be applied to charitable uses benefiting the people of Delaware.
- The Attorney General of Delaware, acting on behalf of the State of Delaware and its citizens, sued the trustees and related parties involved in administering the trust, including Florida First National Bank of Jacksonville and others.
- Delaware’s amended complaint alleged numerous breaches of fiduciary duty and misadministration, including conflicts of interest, imprudent management, and failures to administer the trust in accordance with the will’s charitable directions, including the Delaware-benefit provision.
- The trustees moved to dismiss, arguing that charitable-trust beneficiaries generally lack standing to enforce a charitable trust and that Delaware’s amended complaint failed to state a cause of action.
- The trial court dismissed Delaware’s amended complaint with prejudice for lack of standing.
- In a separate Florida action concerning the duPont Trust, Delaware moved to intervene; the trial court denied intervention.
- Delaware appealed both orders, and the appeals were consolidated.

## Issues

1. Whether the Delaware Attorney General has standing in Florida to sue to enforce a Florida-administered charitable trust whose terms direct certain benefits to charities benefiting the people of Delaware.
2. Whether Delaware was entitled to intervene in related Florida litigation involving administration of the same trust.
3. Whether dismissal of Delaware’s amended complaint with prejudice was proper on the pleadings.

## Decision

- The court reversed the order dismissing Delaware’s amended complaint with prejudice and remanded.
- The court held Delaware’s Attorney General had standing to bring an enforcement action in Florida concerning the duPont Trust provisions that direct charitable benefits to Delaware’s citizens.
- The court reversed the order denying Delaware’s motion to intervene and remanded for further proceedings.
- The court concluded that Delaware’s amended complaint was sufficient to proceed past the pleading stage.

## Legal Principles

- Enforcement of a charitable trust is ordinarily carried out by an attorney general rather than by individual members of the public claiming only a generalized interest.
- A plaintiff with a distinct interest tied to the trust’s specified charitable beneficiaries may have standing to seek enforcement.
- When a trust instrument expressly directs charitable benefits to a defined beneficiary group associated with another state, that state’s attorney general may have standing to sue in the forum where the trust is administered to protect that beneficiary interest.
- A legally protectable interest in proper trust administration can also support intervention in pending litigation concerning the same trust.

## Conclusion

The First District Court of Appeal held that Delaware, through its Attorney General, could sue in Florida and intervene in related Florida litigation to enforce the Alfred I. duPont charitable trust provisions benefiting Delaware’s citizens, reversed the trial court’s dismissal with prejudice and denial of intervention, and remanded for further proceedings.


Delaware v. Florida First National Bank of Jacksonville, 381 So. 2d 1075 (1979)