I hope that is clear. Basically, A gets the money if her marriage ends and if A doesn’t end her marriage the money will go to A’s children. Would this setup of a trust be legal?
I don’t entirely follow the sequence of events with A and B, but yeah, the trust should be legal enough. You’d need to have the trust documents prepared by someone who really knows his/her stuff, as it seems like A and B would have a pretty good incentive to hire a lawyer to try to break the trust. Ditto A or B’s ex-spouse. IANAL however, you need to consult with an estate-planning lawyer who specializes in oddball stuff.
Person A should consult a good estate planning lawyer.
In very general terms, a trust with a condition to encourage divorce or separation is void as contrary to public policy, and as a result the beneficiary takes the interest free of the restriction. Ways around that are to frame condition on some other reasonable ground, as for instance, a trust that pays “its income to my widow for life unless she remarries”, which is generally held to be reasonable because the new husband is now expected to care for her. Source: Florida Bar Bri Law Review (1992), Trusts page 7.
There is nothing simple in the area of wills and trusts once you get beyond the basic “All to mother” (and you’d be amazed at how that can get screwed up). Many people through the centuries (or their heirs)have come to grief in this area over do-it-yourselfing. If this isn’t an abstract question, see a lawyer.
What if the trust was written in the reverse and the money went to children unless the grand-daughter’s marriage where to end in which case it then go to the grand-daughter. It could then be argued that the provision is not to cause the divorce, but to provide for the grand-daughter if her marriage were to end.
This is hypothetical question so there isn’t anybody to consult a lawyer.