South Carolina Court Affirms Trustee Removal in Disability Trust Case
South Carolina Court of Appeals affirms removal of trustee who moved disabled beneficiary from home against her wishes, awarding $130K+ in attorney fees.
What Happened
The South Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed a Richland County Probate Court decision removing William B. Walkup as trustee of a special needs trust established for Jane Baskin, a woman with cerebral palsy. The appellate court’s January 15, 2025 ruling ended a six-year legal battle that began when Walkup moved Baskin from her longtime family home against her wishes in 2015.
The trust was created in 1990 by Baskin’s father, Eldridge Baskin, specifically to provide “for the sole benefit of” his daughter throughout her life. Despite this clear mandate, Walkup relocated Baskin to a non-wheelchair accessible apartment he owned, citing high expenses. When she requested to return home, he threatened to place her in a nursing home and later refused to pay for her home’s insurance and utilities, attempting to force a sale of the property.
Judge Amy McCullough found that the relationship between trustee and beneficiary had “deteriorated to a toxic level of litigation” and ruled Walkup’s removal was in Baskin’s best interest. The court also held Walkup in contempt and ordered him to pay $3,500 in sanctions plus $129,625.80 in attorney’s fees. Following the appellate court’s unanimous affirmation, Walkup settled for an amount exceeding the judgment plus accrued interest.
What It Means
This case highlights critical protections available to trust beneficiaries in South Carolina when trustees fail in their fiduciary duties. South Carolina law requires trustees to provide regular communication to beneficiaries, yet Walkup spoke to Baskin about the trust only once in over two decades. The court’s decision reinforces that trustees must prioritize beneficiary welfare over cost considerations, particularly in special needs trusts designed to enhance quality of life.
The ruling demonstrates South Carolina probate courts’ willingness to intervene when trustees breach their duties. While South Carolina typically requires trustees to post bonds, though wills can waive this requirement, this case shows that financial protections alone are insufficient when trustees act against beneficiary interests. The substantial attorney fee award of over $130,000 sends a strong message about the consequences of trustee misconduct.
For families with special needs trusts in South Carolina, this case underscores the importance of selecting trustworthy fiduciaries and establishing clear oversight mechanisms. South Carolina has adopted the Uniform Trust Code, which provides beneficiaries with specific rights to information and court intervention when necessary. The case also illustrates how trust disputes can extend probate-like proceedings well beyond the typical 9 months to 18 months timeframe, emphasizing the value of proper initial trustee selection.
Context from SimplyTrust
Trust administration requires ongoing oversight and communication between trustees and beneficiaries. SimplyTrust’s platform helps families document trustee responsibilities and beneficiary rights clearly within their trust documents. The platform also provides resources for understanding fiduciary duties and establishing accountability measures that can prevent the type of breakdown seen in this South Carolina case. When creating trusts for family members with special needs, clear documentation of the trust’s purpose and the trustee’s obligations becomes even more critical for protecting vulnerable beneficiaries.
