Colorado Code
Part 3 - Exercise of Power of Appointment
§ 15-2.5-312. Disposition of Unappointed Property if Partial Appointment to Taker in Default

Unless the terms of the instrument creating or exercising a power of appointment manifest a contrary intent, if the powerholder makes a valid partial appointment to a taker in default of appointment, the taker in default of appointment may share fully in unappointed property.
Source: L. 2014: Entire article added, (HB 14-1353), ch. 209, p. 779, § 1, effective July 1, 2015.
If a powerholder makes a valid partial appointment to a taker in default, leaving some property unappointed, there is a question about whether that taker in default may also fully share in the unappointed property. In the first instance, the intent of the donor controls. In the absence of any indication of the donor's intent, it is assumed that the donor intends that the taker can take in both capacities. This rule presupposes that the donor contemplated that the taker in default who is an appointee could receive more of the appointive assets than a taker in default who is not an appointee. The donor can defeat this rule by manifesting a contrary intent in the instrument creating the power of appointment, thereby restricting the powerholder's freedom to benefit an appointee who is also a taker in default in both capacities. If the donor has not so manifested a contrary intent, the powerholder is free to exercise the power in favor of a taker in default who is a permissible appointee. Unless the powerholder manifests a contrary intent in the terms of the instrument exercising the power, it is assumed that the powerholder does not intend to affect in any way the disposition of any unappointed property.
The rule of this section is consistent with, and this Comment draws on, Restatement Third of Property: Wills and Other Donative Transfers § 19.24 and the accompanying Commentary.

Structure Colorado Code