When New Jersey adopted the Uniform Trust Code, in large part in 2016, it seemed to make successor trustee appointments and the filling of vacancies in the role of trustee more efficient, supporting continuity in trust administration and the fulfilment of trustees' fiduciary duties. However, the Superior Court rules and definitions, when read with the relevant statutes, leave a substantial gap that courts and practitioners must fill: When does a trustee not named in the governing trust instrument qualify as a successor trustee, under the Surrogate Court's jurisdiction, versus as a substituted trustee, under the Superior Court's jurisdiction? This distinction affects both the time and processes for these appointments, often when trust beneficiaries are most vulnerable. The Civil Practice Committee should amend the rules to clarify that a trustee nominated under a procedure within the governing trust instrument should qualify, not as a substituted trustee, but as a successor trustee, which would streamline the appointment procedure, effectuate the settlor's intent, and harmonize the rules with the applicable statutes. 

UTC Section 704

Before the Uniform Trust Code (UTC) was adopted, N.J.S.A. 3B:11-5 governed the appointment of a new trustee by the court whenever a prior trustee failed or refused to act, or died before a trust's termination. Under Section 3B:11-5, for a trustee appointed under a will or an inter vivos trust, the Superior Court had jurisdiction to remove the prior trustee and appoint the new trustee, and the statute did not distinguish whether the trustee became a successor or substituted trustee. In 2015, N.J.S.A. 3B:31-49 was added, before the state's 2016 adoption, in large parts, of the UTC, but with substantial similarities to it.