AI-assisted research summary: The court has jurisdiction over trust-related proceedings brought by trustees or interested persons, but it does not create continuing supervisory proceedings.
PART 2. JURISDICTION OF COURT CONCERNING TRUSTS (a) The court has jurisdiction of proceedings initiated by trustees and interested persons concerning the internal affairs of trusts. Proceedings which may be maintained under this section are those concerning the administration and distribution of trusts, the declaration of rights and the determination of other matters involving trustees and beneficiaries of trusts. These include, but are not limited to, proceedings to: (1) Appoint or remove a trustee; (2) Review trustees' fees and to review and settle interim or final accounts; (3) Ascertain beneficiaries, to determine any question arising in the administration or distribution of any trust including questions of construction of trust instruments, to instruct trustees, and to determine the existence or nonexistence of any immunity, power, privilege, duty or right; and (4) Release registration of a trust. (b) Neither registration of a trust nor a proceeding under this section result in continuing supervisory proceedings. The management and distribution of a trust estate, submission of accounts and reports to beneficiaries, payment of trustees' fees and other obligations of a trust, acceptance and change of trusteeship, and other aspects of the administration of a trust shall proceed expeditiously consistent with the terms of the trust, free of judicial intervention and without order, approval or other action of any court, subject to the jurisdiction of the court as invoked by interested persons or as otherwise exercised pursuant to law. [L 1976, c 200, pt of §1] Case Notes Probate court erred in determining that petitioner lacked standing to challenge the validity of petitioner's mother's trust and will; petitioner had alleged a sufficient interest in petitioner's mother's estate, as an heir-at-law, to establish petitioner's standing to challenge the subject instruments, notwithstanding the existence of a prior will that, although facially valid, had not and may not ever be submitted to probate. 130 H. 533 (App.), 312 P.3d 1240 (2013).