Source: L. 2014: Entire article added, (HB 14-1353), ch. 209, p. 776, § 1, effective July 1, 2015.
Subsection (1)(a) states the fundamental principle that an instrument can only exercise a power of appointment if the instrument, under applicable law, is valid (or partially valid, see the next paragraph). Thus, for example, a will exercising a power of appointment must be valid under the law--including choice of law (see Section 103)--applicable to wills. An inter vivos trust exercising a power of appointment must be valid under the law--including choice of law (see Section 103)--applicable to inter vivos trusts. In part, this means that the instrument must be properly executed to the extent other law imposes requirements of execution. In addition, the creator of the instrument must have the capacity to execute the instrument and be free from undue influence and other wrongdoing. On questions of capacity, see Restatement Third of Property: Wills and Other Donative Transfers §§ 8.1 (Mental Capacity) and 8.2 (Minority). On freedom from undue influence and other wrongdoing, see, e.g., Restatement Third of Property §§ 8.3 (Undue Influence, Duress, or Fraud). The ability of an agent or guardian to exercise a power of appointment on behalf of a principal or ward is determined by other law, such as the Uniform Power of Attorney Act or the Uniform Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Act.
The instrument need not be entirely valid. A partially valid instrument can exercise a power of appointment if the provisions exercising the power are valid.
Subsection (1)(b) requires the terms of the instrument exercising the power of appointment to manifest the powerholder's intent to exercise the power of appointment. Whether a powerholder has manifested an intent to exercise a power of appointment is a question of construction. See generally Restatement Third of Property: Wills and Other Donative Transfers § 19.2. For example, a powerholder's disposition of appointive property may manifest an intent to exercise the power even though the powerholder does not refer to the power. See Restatement Third of Property: Wills and Other Donative Transfers § 19.3. Subsection (1)(b) also requires that the terms of the instrument exercising the power must, subject to Section 304, satisfy the requirements of exercise, if any, imposed by the donor.
Language expressing an intent to exercise a power is clearest if it makes a specific reference to the creating instrument and exercises the power in unequivocal terms and with careful attention to the requirements of exercise, if any, imposed by the donor.
The recommended method for exercising a power of appointment is by a specific- exercise clause, using language such as the following: "I exercise the power of appointment conferred upon me by [my father's will] as follows: I appoint [fill in details of appointment]."
Not recommended is a blanket-exercise clause, which purports to exercise "any" power of appointment the powerholder may have, using language such as the following: "I exercise any power of appointment I may have as follows: I appoint [fill in details of appointment]." Although a blanket-exercise clause does manifest an intent to exercise any power of appointment the powerholder may have, such a clause raises the often- litigated question of whether it satisfies the requirement of specific reference imposed by the donor in the instrument creating the power.
A blending clause purports to blend the appointive property with the powerholder's own property in a common disposition. The exercise portion of a blending clause can take the form of a specific exercise or, more commonly, a blanket exercise. For example, a clause providing "All the residue of my estate, including the property over which I have a power of appointment under my mother's will, I devise as follows" is a blending clause with a specific exercise. A clause providing "All the residue of my estate, including any property over which I may have a power of appointment, I devise as follows" is a blending clause with a blanket exercise.
This act aims to eliminate any significance attached to the use of a blending clause. A blending clause has traditionally been regarded as significant in the application of the doctrines of "selective allocation" and "capture." This act eliminates the significance of such a clause under those doctrines. See Sections 308 (selective allocation) and 309 (capture). The use of a blending clause is more likely to be the product of the forms used by the powerholder's lawyer than a deliberate decision by the powerholder to facilitate the application of the doctrines of selective allocation or capture.
If the powerholder decides not to exercise a specific power or any power that the powerholder might have, it is important to consider whether to depend on mere silence to produce a nonexercise or to take definitive action to assure a nonexercise. Definitive action can take the form of a release during life (see Section 402) or a nonexercise clause in the powerholder's will or other relevant instrument. A nonexercise clause can take the form of a specific-nonexercise clause (for example, "I do not exercise the power of appointment conferred on me by my father's trust") or the form of a blanket-nonexercise clause (for example, "I do not exercise any power of appointment I may have").
In certain circumstances, different consequences depend on the powerholder's choice. Under Section 302, a residuary clause in the powerholder's will is treated as manifesting an intent to exercise a general power in certain limited circumstances if the powerholder silently failed to exercise the power, but not if the powerholder released the power or refrained in a record from exercising it. Under Section 310, unappointed property passes to the powerholder's estate in certain limited circumstances if the powerholder silently failed to exercise a general power, but passes to the donor or to the donor's successors in interest if the powerholder released the power.
Subsection (1)(c) provides that the exercise is valid only to the extent the exercise is permissible. On permissible and impermissible exercise, see Sections 305 to 307.
The rule of this section is consistent with, and this Comment draws on, Restatement Third of Property: Wills and Other Donative Transfers §§ 19.1, 19.8, and 19.9 and the accompanying Commentary.
Structure Colorado Code
Title 15 - Probate, Trusts, and Fiduciaries
Article 2.5 - Uniform Powers of Appointment Act
Part 3 - Exercise of Power of Appointment
§ 15-2.5-301. Requisites for Exercise of Power of Appointment
§ 15-2.5-302. Intent to Exercise - Determining Intent From Residuary Clause
§ 15-2.5-303. Intent to Exercise - After-Acquired Power
§ 15-2.5-304. Substantial Compliance With Donor-Imposed Formal Requirement
§ 15-2.5-305. Permissible Appointment
§ 15-2.5-306. Appointment to Deceased Appointee or Permissible Appointee's Descendant
§ 15-2.5-307. Impermissible Appointment
§ 15-2.5-308. Selective Allocation Doctrine
§ 15-2.5-309. Capture Doctrine - Disposition of Ineffectively Appointed Property Under General Power
§ 15-2.5-310. Disposition of Unappointed Property Under Released or Unexercised General Power
§ 15-2.5-311. Disposition of Unappointed Property Under Released or Unexercised Nongeneral Power
§ 15-2.5-312. Disposition of Unappointed Property if Partial Appointment to Taker in Default
§ 15-2.5-313. Appointment to Taker in Default
§ 15-2.5-314. Powerholder's Authority to Revoke or Amend Exercise