New Hampshire Revised Statutes 564-F:12-1207 – Removal
Current as of: 2023 | Check for updates
|
Other versions
(a) A protector may be removed in accordance with the governing documents.
(b) The court may remove a protector if:
(1) The protector has committed a serious breach of duty;
(2) Lack of cooperation among the protectors substantially impairs the performance of the protector’s duties or the management of the foundation’s affairs;
(3) Because of unfitness, unwillingness, persistent failure of the protector to manage the foundation effectively, the court determines that removal of the protector best serves the foundation’s purposes and the beneficiaries’ interests; or
(4) The court finds that:
(A) There has been a substantial change of circumstances or all of the beneficiaries request the removal;
(B) The protector’s removal best serves the foundation’s purposes and the beneficiaries’ interests;
(C) The protector’s removal is not inconsistent with any of the foundation’s material purpose; and
(D) One or more suitable persons are continuing to serve as protectors or a suitable successor protector is available.
(c) For purposes of subsection (b)(4)(C), the removal of a person whom the founder personally appointed as a protector is presumptively inconsistent with one of the foundation’s material purposes, but that presumption may be rebutted by a preponderance of the evidence.
(b) The court may remove a protector if:
Terms Used In New Hampshire Revised Statutes 564-F:12-1207
- Evidence: Information presented in testimony or in documents that is used to persuade the fact finder (judge or jury) to decide the case for one side or the other.
- person: may extend and be applied to bodies corporate and politic as well as to individuals. See New Hampshire Revised Statutes 21:9
(1) The protector has committed a serious breach of duty;
(2) Lack of cooperation among the protectors substantially impairs the performance of the protector’s duties or the management of the foundation’s affairs;
(3) Because of unfitness, unwillingness, persistent failure of the protector to manage the foundation effectively, the court determines that removal of the protector best serves the foundation’s purposes and the beneficiaries’ interests; or
(4) The court finds that:
(A) There has been a substantial change of circumstances or all of the beneficiaries request the removal;
(B) The protector’s removal best serves the foundation’s purposes and the beneficiaries’ interests;
(C) The protector’s removal is not inconsistent with any of the foundation’s material purpose; and
(D) One or more suitable persons are continuing to serve as protectors or a suitable successor protector is available.
(c) For purposes of subsection (b)(4)(C), the removal of a person whom the founder personally appointed as a protector is presumptively inconsistent with one of the foundation’s material purposes, but that presumption may be rebutted by a preponderance of the evidence.