Storey Mountain v. Weldon

── Storey Mountain v. Weldon ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Date: June 04, 2026 Category: Private Civil Diversity Case: 24-20535 Document: 95-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/04/2026 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ____________ FILED June 4, 2026 No. 24-20535 Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk Storey Mountain, L.L.C., Plaintiff—Appellant, versus JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Garnishee, Daniel J. Weldon, Successor Trustee of the Mary Katherine Weldon Trust, Appellee. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:22-MC-524 ______________________________ Before Wiener, Engelhardt, and Oldham, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 24-20535 Document: 95-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/04/2026 No. 24-20535 James W. Weldon, Jr. (“James”) signed a last will and testament directing that much of his estate would pass into trusts, which he called “Child’s Trusts.” The will stated that the “Trustee shall distribute to the child, as primary beneficiary, and may distribute to his or her descendants (if any), as secondary beneficiaries, so much or all of the income and principal of the child’s trust . . . as the Trustee determines to be appropriate to provide for their continued health, maintenance, support, and education . . . .” After James passed away, his daughter Mary Katherine Weldon Mitchum (“Katherine”) probated James’s will and formed three trusts, one for each of James’s surviving children: herself as well as her brothers Daniel J. Weldon (“Daniel”) and James W. Weldon (“James Jr.”). Katherine would serve as the trustee for each child’s trust and Daniel would serve as the first substitute trustee for each trust. Katherine would go on to set up an account for her trust at Fidelity Brokerage Services L.L.C. (“Fidelity”). Later, Katherine was a defendant in an unrelated civil suit that resulted in an adverse judgment. Eventually, that judgment was assigned to Storey Mountain, L.L.C. (“Storey Mountain”). And Storey Mountain sought to garnish Katherine’s assets. Ultimately, the district court concluded Storey Mountain could garnish the trust’s account, reasoning that James’s will did not create any vested interests in Katherine’s trust for her descendants. Thus, the court held that the spendthrift trust’s legal and beneficial interests merged, meaning “the Fidelity Account is not a valid spendthrift trust under the doctrine of merger.” See also Tex. Prop. Code § 112.034 (regarding merger). Daniel, as substitute trustee, then filed a motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). Daniel argued that merger only occurs if the 2 Case: 24-20535 Document: 95-1 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/04/2026 No. 24-20535 trustee is the only beneficiary. And he pointed out that there were other beneficiaries of Katherine’s trust. The district court granted Daniel’s Rule 59(e) motion. The d