Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 5804
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 5804.13 (2026)

Judicial action where charitable purpose frustrated

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
September 12, 2008
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 499 - 127th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

(A) Except as otherwise provided in division (B) of this section, if a particular charitable purpose becomes unlawful, impracticable, or impossible to achieve, all of the following apply:

(1) The trust does not fail in whole or in part.

(2) The trust property does not revert to the settlor or the settlor's successors in interest.

(3) The court may apply cy pres to modify or terminate the trust by directing that the trust property be applied or distributed, in whole or in part, in a manner consistent with the settlor's charitable purposes. In accordance with section 109.25 of the Revised Code, the attorney general is a necessary party to a judicial proceeding brought under this section.

(B) A provision in the terms of a charitable trust for an alternative charitable purpose or for the distribution of the trust property to a noncharitable beneficiary prevails over the power of the court under division (A) of this section to apply cy pres to modify or terminate the trust.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2008–2018 · leading case: First Merit Bank, N.A. v. Akron Gen. Med. Ctr., 2018-Ohio-2689, 116 N.E.3d 843.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
First Merit Bank, N.A. v. Akron Gen. Med. Ctr., 2018-Ohio-2689, 116 N.E.3d 843. · cites it 6× “{¶ 17} The common-law doctrine of cy pres has recently been codified at R.C. § 5804.13, which provides: (A) Except as otherwise provided in division (B) of this section, if a particular charitable purpose becomes unlawful, impracticable, or impossible to achieve, all of the…”
In Re Trust of Lowry, 885 N.E.2d 296 (Ohio Ct. App. 3d Dist. 2008). · cites it 8× “Assignment of Error III The probate court misapplied the term “general charitable intent” as used at common law and in R.C. 5804.13. {¶ 10} Initially, we note that the appellate rules state: “[I]f an appellee fails to file [his] brief within the time provided by [these] rule[s],…”
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.