If an outright bequest of the pet and any caretaking funds is not desirable, it will be because the pet owner, for one reason or another, is not entirely confident that the designated caretaker will be willing and able to care for the pet for its lifetime in the manner the pet owner would like.  In this case, the use of either a statutory pet trust or a traditional legal trust for a pet may be appropriate.

As an initial matter, establishing an effective statutory pet trust or common law trust necessarily includes designating, at a minimum, the following two parties:

·                     A caretaker who is willing and able to care for the pet (i.e., the beneficiary under the traditional legal trust, and the trustee under the statutory pet trust); and

·                     A third party who can enforce the trust against the caretaker (i.e., the trustee under the traditional legal trust, and the untitled “individual” granted certain powers in the pet trust statutes).

In addition, the settlor may designate yet another party as remainder beneficiary (i.e., to receive any remaining trust funds upon the death of the pet) who, in avoiding conflicts of interest, should be someone other than one of the above parties.

This web site does include sample language.  Nonetheless, because of the inherent uncertainties and limitations surrounding the use of a statutory pet trust (discussed above), some experts recommend avoiding use of a statutory pet trust altogether.  As such, a discussion of drafting the terms of a statutory pet trust has been omitted in favor of the following more detailed exposition pertaining to provisions for traditional common law trusts.