Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes
20 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6102 (2026)
Termination of trusts (Deleted by amendment).
✓ current as of May 2026
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
PA-LEGpalegis.us
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
§ 6102. Termination of trusts (Deleted by amendment).
2006 Amendment. Section 6102 was deleted by amendment July 7, 2006, P.L.625, No.98, effective in 120 days.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1975–2023 · leading case: In Re Paxson Trust I, 893 A.2d 99 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2006).
In Re Paxson Trust I, 893 A.2d 99 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2006). “Instead, he insists that it was his intention to transfer the title back to the Trust, but "[t]he commencement of the divorce action and the actions of the [sic] Paula Marie and Rebecca have prevented the Paxsons from conveying the Trust Property back to the Trust.”
R.J. Cindrich v. Michael Fisher, former Attorney Gen. (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2017). “The law violated at the time was the law of deviation and 20 Pa. C.S. §6102. Respondent Palmer reported to Attorney General Fisher that he did not know how the assets were transferred to a local university as a chair in Joe Katarincic’s name.”
Martin, C. v. Paul, S. & Martin, C. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2023). “2, Joint State Government Commission’s Comment to UTA (quoting 20 Pa.C.S. § 6102 (repealed)); 1 Pa.C.S. § 1939 (drafting commission’s comments may be consulted in construction of statute).”
Rupert Est., 11 Pa. D. & C.4th 538 (1990). “In petitioner’s brief, which was submitted after the trial, he also attempted to' interject 20 Pa.C.S. §6102 as a ground for bringing suit.”
In re Est. of Stover, 23 Pa. D. & C.4th 193 (1995). “Bodine Trust, supra; 20 Pa.C.S. §6102. The decedent’s charitable purposes have not been frustrated by the consolidation of the two churches, so we may not apply the doctrine of cy pres in this instance.”
Est. of Halpern v. Comm'r, 70 T.C.M. 229 (Tax Ct. 1995). “The members of the Halpern family chose not to seek court authorization under this provision.”
Haag Est., 73 Pa. D. & C.2d 605 (1975). “164), 20 Pa.C.S. §6102, as amended. The court has appointed a guardian and trustee ad litem for possible minor and unascertained remaindermen.”
— 20 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6102(a) — 1 case
In Re Paxson Trust I, 893 A.2d 99 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2006). “Instead, he insists that it was his intention to transfer the title back to the Trust, but "[t]he commencement of the divorce action and the actions of the [sic] Paula Marie and Rebecca have prevented the Paxsons from conveying the Trust Property back to the Trust.”
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.