Estrada v. Arizona Bank
Arizona Court of Appeals
732 P.2d 1124 (1987)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
Stephen Estrada’s (plaintiff) mother was killed in a car accident when Estrada was two years old. A subsequent wrongful-death action resulted in a settlement of $99,161.54, which was placed into a court-created trust for Estrada until he reached maturity. The trust named Arizona Bank (defendant) as trustee. Eight years later, the court ordered Arizona Bank to begin making annual accountings regarding the trust. The bank filed such accountings each year for the trust’s duration. The accountings disclosed information concerning the trust’s investments, income, and expenses. Each year, Estrada and his guardians received notice of the accountings and did not file any objections. And each year, the court approved the accountings. When Estrada turned 18, Arizona Bank filed a final accounting and a proposal for final distribution of the trust’s assets to Estrada. Notice was provided to Estrada and his guardians, and again there was no objection. The court approved the final accounting and proposal on October 18, 1982. The trust’s assets were then promptly disbursed to Estrada. In July 1984, Estrada sued Arizona Bank, alleging that mismanagement of the trust depleted the trust’s value. Arizona Bank moved for summary judgment, arguing, among other things, that Estrada’s claim was barred by res judicata because Estrada never contested any of the accountings. The trial court held in Arizona Bank’s favor, and Estrada appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Howard, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.



