Appeals court: Eiteljorg estate trustees breached duties

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Trustees for the estate of deceased Indianapolis businessman Harrison Eiteljorg breached their duty to distribute more than $1 million from his trust, a panel of state appellate court judges ruled Monday.

The judges affirmed an earlier decision from the Marion Superior Court, which determined the trustees should have distributed $1.2 million in October 2004 to Eiteljorg’s sons, Harrison Eiteljorg II and Jack Eiteljorg. The trustees distributed the money the next year, after being ordered to by a court.

Harrison Eiteljorg founded the Eiteljorg Museum of American Indians and Western Art in downtown Indianapolis in 1989.

Trustees for his estate are Eiteljorg’s stepson, Roger Eiteljorg, and accountant John Lienhart. The trustees were appealing rulings by judges Charles Dieter and Tanya Walton Pratt in 2005, claiming they erred in finding a breach of duty and in assessing damages and attorneys'  fees.

Two of the three appellate judges on the panel affirmed Pratt’s decision, while one dissented.

Harrison Eiteljorg died in 1997 and named his second wife, Sonja, as sole beneficiary. She died in July 2003. At the time, the assets of the Eiteljorg trust totaled about $6.5 million, including $3.2 million in liquid assets, according to court documents.

The two Eiteljorg sons requested a distribution in October 2004 of $2 million, which Lienhart considered excessive because the trust may have owed as much as $2 million in additional taxes, the documents said.

Instead, Lienhart and Roger Eiteljorg countered by offering a total of $1 million.

Following failed attempts at negotiating, the brothers petitioned the court in January 2005 to remove Lienhart and Roger Eiteljorg as trustees, and later raised 13 claims of breach of trust.

Judge Charles Dieter issued an order denying their removal as trustees but required an immediate distribution of $1.5 million. In July 2005, the trustees complied by distributing $1.2 million in cash, in addition to non-liquid assets, according to court documents.

Dieter also determined that the trustees breached their duty by failing to promptly distribute the assets, but the judge found them not liable on the 11 remaining breach of trust claims.

Judge Dieter found the trustees breached their duties, but died before ruling on damages. Pratt took over the case and concluded that $1.2 million should have been distributed at an October 2004 meeting.

“The bottom line is that [trustees] John and Roger, in violation of the explicit terms of the trust agreement, and knowing that the property was available, did not distribute $1 million in trust assets or seek guidance from the courts for at least six months following the October meeting,” the judges wrote in supporting Pratt.

Pratt also awarded Harrison Eiteljorg II $156,701 in lost earnings from investments he planned to make with the money from the trust and awarded Jack Eiteljorg $112,046 in lost profits from a missed real estate deal. In addition, she awarded the two $353,612 in attorney’s fees.

But the panel of judges in the appeal said the brothers are only entitled to interest on their withheld distributions and found the damages awarded by Pratt to be “erroneous.”

The appellate judges also found the attorney’s fees to be excessive and concluded a fee of $150,000 to be more appropriate.

The appellate judges remanded the awarding of compensatory damages and attorney’s fees back to the trial court.



Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

  2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

  3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

  4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.

  5. http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/duke-energy-customers-angry-about-money-for-nothing