tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20257999.post6694749726071053441..comments2024-03-29T11:40:46.477+03:00Comments on Life in Israel: When there's a will there's a fight..Rafi G.http://www.blogger.com/profile/00699851287106903971noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20257999.post-40689073422563499712008-08-26T20:24:00.000+03:002008-08-26T20:24:00.000+03:00Thanks to anon. for the link. The concurring opin...Thanks to anon. for the link. The concurring opinion acknowledges that the majority of previous opinions on the issue have reached the opposite decision, but notes that the majority of them were from over 50 years ago, and did not take into account the Restatement (Third) of Trusts, which states that "a trust provision is ordinarily invalid if it tends seriously to interfere with or inhibit... the exercise of freedom to marry by limiting the beneficiary's selection of a spouse. <BR/><BR/>He notes further that "while many jurists, notably the Justices of the United States Supreme Court who adhere to the principle of following the 'original intent' of the framers of the constitution, believe in a static jurisprudence, the authors of the Restatements do not".Josh M.https://www.blogger.com/profile/14414532577328945154noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20257999.post-29683118272584059292008-08-26T17:28:00.000+03:002008-08-26T17:28:00.000+03:00http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/f...http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/feinberg.pdf<BR/><BR/>here is a link to the court decision to hold the clause void as against public policy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com