Betty White loved animals, and she planned her giving to reflect her values. So why, nearly five years after her passing, is her trustee asking a court for permission to update the language in her trust? The answer is a great reminder for all of us. According to the trustee’s filing, the organization her trust named to carry gifts to the L.A. Zoo is no longer affiliated with it, so her trustee is working to create a new path for those gifts to reach the cause she cared about. Nobody did anything wrong when the trust was drafted. Things change over time, and the language in a trust has to be ready for that!
What happened
According to a complaint filed by her trustee, as reported by Parade, Ms. White’s trust (last updated in 2020) set aside ongoing donations for the L.A. Zoo, an institution she had supported personally for decades. The gifts were routed through the Greater Los Angeles Zoo Association (GLAZA), the zoo’s longtime fundraising partner. Ms. White even served as a GLAZA trustee, so this was an organization she knew well.
Since then, the relationship between GLAZA and the City of Los Angeles, which runs the zoo, has changed. The two organizations ended their long partnership in 2025, according to the Los Angeles Times, which you can read about in this article.
Now her trustee is asking the court to direct the gifts to organizations that currently work with the zoo. The trustee says that’s what Ms. White intended, but it isn’t what the document says.
The limits of careful vetting
This is a story about how much can change over time. When I evaluate a nonprofit for a bequest, I look at financial stability, governance, and track record. By those measures, GLAZA was a well-established partner of the zoo when the trust was drafted, and Ms. White herself had served as a GLAZA trustee.
So, the takeaway here is that sometimes vetting gives you a good read on how an organization will hold up over the long term, and sometimes it can’t. Even a strong, stable nonprofit can see its relationships and role change over five, ten, or thirty years. That’s not a flaw in anyone’s process. It’s just how some timelines work.
How flexible giving language helps
The good news is the fix is simple and happens at the drafting stage. Strong charitable language does three things:
States the purpose, not just a name. For example, a gift might say, “to support the care and welfare of animals,” along with naming the organization that delivers it. (This is an illustration, not the wording of Ms. White’s trust.)
Includes a backup plan. Name the preferred organization, then say what should happen if it merges, changes its mission, or no longer works with the cause the donor cares about.
Gives the trustee limited flexibility. A little built-in discretion lets them choose a similar organization without needing to ask a court first.
A quick check for any giving plan
Whether it’s your own plan or one you’re reviewing for a client, here are a few questions worth asking:
Does the plan say what the gift is meant to accomplish, or only who should carry it out?
Is there a backup if a named organization changes?
Who decides when a change is needed, and within what limits?
When did someone last read the giving language with fresh eyes?
A five-minute review now can save a trip to court later. Whether it’s your own giving plan or a client’s, I’d be glad to help you think through the charitable side and work alongside your attorney on the language.
A quick note on my role: I don’t manage assets, prepare taxes, or give legal advice. I work alongside attorneys, accountants, and wealth managers to handle the charitable side of the giving plan.
This article is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal, tax, or financial advice. It is a case study based on published news reports as of October 2026. The related court matter has not been decided, and details may change. The drafting concepts discussed are illustrative and are not language for any specific document. The author is not affiliated with Betty White’s estate, her trustee, the Greater Los Angeles Zoo Association, the City of Los Angeles, or the Los Angeles Zoo. Readers should consult a qualified attorney to draft or revise the language in their own documents.
Sources
Perry Carpenter, “Betty White’s Estate Seeks Court Approval to Redirect $75 Million for Animal Charities,” Parade, via Yahoo Entertainment, September 17, 2026
Noah Goldberg, “Inside the L.A. Zoo’s messy $50-million breakup,” Los Angeles Times, via AOL, July 1, 2025
About the Author
Eva Fordham, MPA, CAP®, is the founder and principal of Expert Philanthropy, a Los Angeles-based philanthropic advisory firm serving individuals, families, and family foundations nationwide. Before launching her firm, she spent 15+ years in nonprofit fundraising. She works alongside wealth managers, estate planning attorneys, and CPAs to help clients give with confidence.
Photo by Geoffrey Lippert.
Questions about your own giving plan, or a client’s?