When Jimmy Buffett died in 2023, he left behind more than a musical legacy and the Margaritaville empire. His estate plan directed assets worth an estimated $275 million into a marital trust for his wife, Jane. Their three children were named as remainder beneficiaries, and Buffett appointed his longtime business manager, Richard Mozenter, to serve alongside Jane as co-trustee. On paper, the arrangement paired family knowledge with professional experience.
Three years later, that arrangement is the subject of bitter litigation. As The Wall Street Journal Magazine reported, Jane and Mozenter each seek the other’s removal as trustee. Mozenter has also proposed moving the trust’s assets into a new trust through a process called decanting. Under the proposed arrangement, Jane would no longer be a co-trustee, and Buffett’s sister would have a role in decisions affecting the children’s inheritances. Jane opposes the move. The dispute is headed for trial.
The case illustrates a question worth asking whenever an estate plan names co-trustees: What happens if they cannot work together?
What Happens When Co-Trustees Disagree?
Pairing a family member with an experienced co-trustee can make sense. One may know the beneficiaries and their needs; the other may bring experience managing investments, businesses, or other complex assets. But the arrangement can become difficult when the trustees disagree about information, spending, or their respective authority.
Jane alleges that Mozenter withheld financial information from her. Mozenter disputes her account and contends that he is carrying out Buffett’s wishes. Both have asked a Florida court to remove the other. Those are contested claims, and the court has not resolved them.
The dispute offers a useful planning lesson for New Hampshire families. Under New Hampshire law, a court may remove a trustee when “lack of cooperation among cotrustees substantially impairs the administration of the trust.” Court intervention remains available, but it can be costly and disruptive. A trust can address potential conflict in advance by defining each trustee’s responsibilities and providing a practical way to resolve a deadlock
Decanting: A Powerful Tool With Limits
The proposed decanting is one of the most striking parts of the Buffett dispute. Decanting generally means appointing assets from one trust to another trust with different terms. In this case, Mozenter’s proposal would change who participates in administering the marital trust while leaving Jane as a beneficiary. Whether he can make those changes is part of the Florida dispute.
New Hampshire also permits trust decanting under RSA 564-B:4-418. The statute gives trustees flexibility, but places limits on that power, including restrictions concerning a trust’s material purpose and beneficiaries’ vested interests.
New Hampshire’s Supreme Court examined the relationship between decanting and a trustee’s duty of impartiality in Hodges v. Johnson. The court explained that a trustee must give due regard to beneficiaries’ respective interests. Its later decision clarified that changing or eliminating a beneficiary’s nonvested interest does not, by itself, establish a breach; the question is whether the trustee treated beneficiaries equitably in light of the trust’s terms and purposes.
That does not decide the Buffett case, which is being litigated under a different state’s law. It does show why decanting authority deserves careful thought when a trust is drafted: a power intended to help a trust adapt can itself become the subject of a serious dispute.
What This Means for Your Own Estate Plan
You do not need a $275 million trust for these questions to matter. If you plan to name co-trustees, or to provide for a spouse during life and children afterward, consider addressing three issues:
- Define how co-trustees make decisions. Identify any duties they will handle separately, which decisions require joint action, and how a deadlock can be resolved.
- Consider the scope of any decanting power. Think through what changes a trustee should be permitted to make and whether particular changes should require consent or court approval.
- Discuss the plan while you can. Explaining who will serve, what authority they will have, and what beneficiaries should expect may reduce surprises later.
Build a Plan That Holds Up When You’re Not There to Explain It
An estate plan’s real test isn’t whether it looks sound on the day it’s signed — it’s whether it holds together years later, when the person who created it is no longer there to clarify what they meant. At Cohen & Winters, we help New Hampshire families build trusts and estate plans with the kind of clarity and structure that prevents the exact disputes playing out in the Buffett family right now. If you’re creating or revisiting your estate plan, contact our office today for a free consultation.