ShareThis Page
Separate trust means Scaife grandchildren weren’t to inherit 1935 fund, trustee argues |

Separate trust means Scaife grandchildren weren’t to inherit 1935 fund, trustee argues

Mike Wereschagin
| Wednesday, February 4, 2015 6:13 p.m

If Sarah Mellon Scaife wanted her grandchildren to inherit money from a trust she set up in 1935 for her son, she wouldn’t have created a separate trust just for the grandchildren, a trustee of the 1935 trust said in court filings Wednesday.

Scaife, mother of late Tribune-Review publisher Dick Scaife, created what’s known as the Grandchildren’s Trust in 1963, shortly before the birth of granddaughter Jennie Scaife, now 51, of Palm Beach, Fla. Jennie Scaife and her brother, David Scaife, 49, of Shadyside, want an Allegheny County court to force an accounting of the 1935 trust, which they said they would have inherited if their father hadn’t spent it before his death on July 4.

Jennie Scaife on Jan. 15 objected to the “scandalous and impertinent” disclosure of the Grandchildren’s Trust, which is worth an estimated $560 million and every year pays her and David Scaife about $12 million each. She argued their personal wealth — estimated at $350 million to $500 million each — has no bearing on the dispute over the 1935 trust.

But H. Yale Gutnick, one of three trustees of the 1935 trust and chairman of the Trib’s board of directors, said the existence of the Grandchildren’s Trust shows that Sarah Mellon Scaife never intended her grandchildren to inherit the 1935 trust.

“To put it simply, it was reasonable for Gutnick to assume that Sarah Scaife intended the trustees to distribute all trust (principal) to her son, leaving her grandchildren nothing, because she later provided for them, and handsomely, in a separate trust,” Gutnick’s filing said.

Jennie Scaife’s lawyer, William Pietragallo, said Gutnick’s claim is “more babble” and “more inaccuracy.”

“We will stand up in court,” he said.

Jennie and David Scaife claim that trustees of the 1935 trust – Gutnick, Scaife relative James Walton and PNC Bank – improperly allowed their father to spend more than $300 million, mostly to subsidize Dick Scaife’s newspapers.

The trustees argue that Sarah Mellon Scaife gave them broad authority to spend the trust’s money for Dick Scaife’s benefit, and that the siblings’ claim to the trust expired when the trust emptied. Dick Scaife, in a column he wrote shortly before his death, said nothing gave him a greater sense of accomplishment than his newspapers, especially the Tribune-Review.

Mike Wereschagin is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7900 or

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.