## Facts

- In 1960, Phyllis Hurley (plaintiff) and James Hurley (defendant) divorced, and James was obligated to pay child support.
- In 1966, James’s mother, Maybelle Hurley, executed a will that created a spendthrift trust for James.
- Under the trust terms, James was entitled to receive all trust income for life, and the principal would pass at his death into trusts for his two daughters (Maybelle’s granddaughters).
- The trust included a spendthrift provision restricting voluntary and involuntary transfer of James’s beneficial interest.
- In 1977, Phyllis sued James in Missouri for failure to pay child support.
- In 1978, Maybelle died, and her will was later admitted to probate in the Ingham County Circuit Court in Michigan; Michigan National Bank served as trustee (garnishee-defendant).
- In 1979, Phyllis obtained a Missouri money judgment against James for past-due child support.
- Phyllis then filed suit in Ingham County Circuit Court seeking to enforce the Missouri judgment by reaching James’s interest in the spendthrift trust.
- The circuit court ruled for Phyllis and ordered the trustee to pay both accrued and future trust income into court to satisfy the past-due child-support judgment and ongoing support; the trustee appealed.

## Issues

1. May a beneficiary’s income interest in a spendthrift trust be reached to satisfy enforceable child-support obligations, despite a spendthrift clause?
2. If so, may a court order payment of both accrued trust income and future income distributions toward satisfaction of past-due and ongoing child support?

## Decision

- The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court’s order.
- The court held that spendthrift protection does not bar enforcement of child-support obligations against a beneficiary’s trust income.
- The court approved the order directing the trustee to pay accrued income and to divert future income distributions to the court for satisfaction of the support obligation.
- The order operated against James’s income interest and did not authorize taking trust principal that was reserved for remainder beneficiaries.

## Legal Principles

- Even where a trust is a spendthrift trust, a beneficiary’s interest may be reached to satisfy certain enforceable claims, including claims for support of a spouse or child (Restatement (Second) of Trusts § 157).
- A spendthrift clause generally shields a beneficiary from ordinary creditor process, but it does not provide a shelter from duties arising from family support obligations.
- Courts may use garnishment or similar judicial process to direct payment of trust income that would otherwise be distributed to the beneficiary, when necessary to satisfy child-support obligations.
- Relief may be tailored to reach the beneficiary’s income stream without disturbing the trust’s principal or the remainder interests, unless additional authority permits otherwise.

## Conclusion

Hurley v. Hurley holds that a beneficiary cannot rely on a spendthrift clause to avoid child-support obligations: the beneficiary’s right to receive trust income may be subjected to court process to satisfy past-due child support and to secure payment from future income distributions, while leaving the trust principal and remainder interests intact.


Hurley v. Hurley, 309 N.W.2d 225 (1981)