Connection lost
Server error
In Re the Estate of Janes Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A corporate trustee retained a massive concentration of Kodak stock as its value plummeted. The court found this imprudent, holding that failure to diversify can be a breach of fiduciary duty, even with a “blue chip” stock, when it ignores the trust’s purposes and beneficiaries’ needs.
Legal Significance: This case established that under New York’s prudent person rule, a fiduciary’s failure to diversify a concentrated portfolio can be imprudent. It requires a holistic analysis of the trust’s circumstances, not just the quality of the individual stock, presaging modern portfolio theory.
In Re the Estate of Janes Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Rodney B. Janes’s will established several trusts, primarily to provide income for his 72-year-old widow for life. The estate’s $2.5 million stock portfolio was heavily concentrated, with 71% of its value in Eastman Kodak stock. The petitioner, a corporate trust company, served as executor and trustee. Shortly after the testator’s death in 1973, the petitioner decided to retain the high concentration of Kodak stock. This decision was made without a formal investment plan, without meaningful consultation with the inexperienced widow, and despite the stock’s low dividend yield (approx. 1.06%), which was insufficient to meet the income beneficiary’s needs. Over the next seven years, the price of Kodak stock fell dramatically, from approximately $135 per share to $47 per share, causing a substantial loss to the estate. The beneficiaries filed objections to the trustee’s accounting, seeking to surcharge it for the imprudent retention of the stock concentration.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a fiduciary’s retention of a high concentration of a single stock violate the prudent person standard of care if it fails to consider the overall portfolio risk and the specific needs of the trust beneficiaries, even when the stock is considered a high-quality, “blue chip” security?
Yes. The court held that the petitioner acted imprudently by retaining the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does a fiduciary’s retention of a high concentration of a single stock violate the prudent person standard of care if it fails to consider the overall portfolio risk and the specific needs of the trust beneficiaries, even when the stock is considered a high-quality, “blue chip” security?
Conclusion
This decision modernized the prudent person rule in New York by establishing Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo
Legal Rule
Under the prudent person rule (EPTL 11-2.2 [a] [1]), a fiduciary is Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sun
Legal Analysis
The Court of Appeals rejected the petitioner's argument that a failure to Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna ali
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A fiduciary’s failure to diversify a highly concentrated stock portfolio can