Mo. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 456
Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 456.021 (2026)

Addition to trusts

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  456.021.  Addition to trusts. — A devise or other transfer, the validity of which is determinable by the law of this state, may be made by a will or other instrument of transfer, including a designation of beneficiary under a life insurance policy, to the trustee or trustees of a trust established or to be established by the testator or transferor or by the testator or transferor and some other person or persons or by some other person or persons, including a funded or unfunded life insurance trust, although the settlor thereof has reserved any or all rights of ownership of the insurance contracts, if the trust is identified in the testator's will or the instrument of transfer and its terms are set forth in a written instrument.  The devise or transfer shall not be invalid because the trust is amendable or revocable, or both, or because the trust was amended after the execution of the will, the delivery of the instrument of transfer, or the death of the testator.  Notwithstanding whether a devise or transfer is made before or after August 28, 1996, a devise or transfer is valid if the devise or transfer is made only to the name of the trust or if the devise or transfer is made to the name or names of the trustee or trustees as the trustee or trustees of the trust.  Unless the testator's will or the instrument of transfer provides otherwise, the property so devised:

  (1)  Shall not be deemed to be held under a testamentary trust of the testator or transferor but shall become a part of the trust to which it is given; and

  (2)  Shall be administered and disposed of in accordance with the provisions of the instrument or will setting forth the terms of the trust, including any amendments thereto made before the death of the testator or transferor, regardless of whether made before or after the execution of the testator's will or the delivery of the instrument of transfer, and, if the testator's will or the instrument of transfer so provides, including any amendments to the trust made after the death of the testator or transferor.  A revocation or termination of the trust before the death of the testator shall cause a devise to the trustees of that trust to lapse.

­­--------

(L. 1983 H.B. 117, A.L. 1996 H.B. 941, A.L. 2004 H.B. 1511)

Transferred 2004; formerly 456.232

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2014–2025 · leading case: Richard E. Ivie, Jimmie R. Ivie, LaDonna Small, & Bernard Ivie v. Arnold L. Smith & Sidney B. Smith, 439 S.W.3d 189 (Mo. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Richard E. Ivie, Jimmie R. Ivie, LaDonna Small, & Bernard Ivie v. Arnold L. Smith & Sidney B. Smith, 439 S.W.3d 189 (Mo. 2014). · cites it 2× “See § 456.021, RSMo Supp.2013 (permitting pour-over wills).”
Rouner v. Wise, 446 S.W.3d 242 (Mo. 2014). “See § 456.021. 1 The 1996 Trust Agreement named Dr.”
Cary Shippert vs. Terry Shippert, et al. (Mo. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 9× “In two points on appeal, Cary contends that the trial court erred in ruling that the provision of the will incorporating the terms of the trust controlled distribution of the estate even if the trust itself was void due to undue influence because the provision in the pour-over…”
Michael C. Laws, Jr., & Malinda a. Salinger v. J. Christopher Allen, Pers. Rep., & Substituted Parties Moreau, Defendants-respondents, 697 S.W.3d 834 (Mo. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 6× “a (2003); § 456.021 RSMo Cum. Supp. (2013); Ivie v.”
C. David Rouner & Alisha Hudson v. Cari Renee Wise, Individually & as Co-Tr. of the K.R. Conklin Living Trust, & Carli Nicole Conklin, Individually & as Co-Tr. of the K.R. Conklin Living Trust (Mo. 2014). “See § 456.021. 1 The 1996 Trust Agreement named Dr.”
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 456.021(2): 1 case
Cary Shippert vs. Terry Shippert, et al. (Mo. Ct. App. 2025). “In two points on appeal, Cary contends that the trial court erred in ruling that the provision of the will incorporating the terms of the trust controlled distribution of the estate even if the trust itself was void due to undue influence because the provision in the pour-over…”
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.