(a) A beneficiary may not commence a proceeding against a trustee for breach of trust more than two years after the date the beneficiary or a representative of the beneficiary was sent a report that adequately disclosed the existence of a potential claim for breach of trust. For purposes of this section, a report is an account statement or other form of written disclosure made by the trustee to the beneficiary.
(b) A report adequately discloses the existence of a potential claim for breach of trust if it provides sufficient information so that the beneficiary or representative knows of the potential claim or should have inquired into its existence.
(c) If subsection (a) does not apply, then a judicial proceeding by a beneficiary against a trustee for breach of trust must be commenced within two years after the first to occur of the following:
(1) The removal, resignation, or death of the trustee;
(2) The termination of the beneficiary’s interest in the trust; or
(3) The termination of the trust.
(Act 2006-216, p. 314, §1; Act 2021-384, §1.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
3
cases, 2014–2017 · leading case:
Ladd v. Stockham, 209 So. 3d 457 (Ala. 2016).
Ladd v. Stockham, 209 So. 3d 457 (Ala. 2016).
· cites it 15× “9 Therefore, the only arguments of Ladd’s properly before us pertaining to whether the statute of limitations should be tolled are those arguments concerning whether Ladd knew or should have known that SVI failed to redeem its preferred stocks in 2000, the date Ladd alleges the…”
Honea v. Raymond James Fin. Servs., Inc., 240 So. 3d 550 (Ala. 2017).
· cites it 2× “Before the enactment of § 19-3B-1005, Ala. Code 1975 (Act No. 2006-216), the two-year statute of limitations for claims alleging breach of fiduciary duty as to a trustee began " 'to run once the fiduciary relationship [wa]s terminated and possession of trust property by the…”
— Ala. Code § 19-3B-1005(a) — 2 cases
Ladd v. Stockham, 209 So. 3d 457 (Ala. 2016).
“9 Therefore, the only arguments of Ladd’s properly before us pertaining to whether the statute of limitations should be tolled are those arguments concerning whether Ladd knew or should have known that SVI failed to redeem its preferred stocks in 2000, the date Ladd alleges the…”
Honea v. Raymond James Fin. Servs., Inc., 240 So. 3d 550 (Ala. 2017).
“Before the enactment of § 19-3B-1005, Ala. Code 1975 (Act No. 2006-216), the two-year statute of limitations for claims alleging breach of fiduciary duty as to a trustee began " 'to run once the fiduciary relationship [wa]s terminated and possession of trust property by the…”
— Ala. Code § 19-3B-1005(c) — 1 case
Ladd v. Stockham, 209 So. 3d 457 (Ala. 2016).
“9 Therefore, the only arguments of Ladd’s properly before us pertaining to whether the statute of limitations should be tolled are those arguments concerning whether Ladd knew or should have known that SVI failed to redeem its preferred stocks in 2000, the date Ladd alleges the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.