Can a Trust Have Two Trustees, and Can a Co-Trustee Act Alone?

The short answer: yes, a trust can have two trustees, or three, or more. Whether a co-trustee can act alone is a different question, and the answer depends first on what the trust document says and then on state law. In New Jersey and Connecticut, co-trustees who cannot agree may act by majority, which means that with two trustees every decision requires both, and with three, two can outvote one. In New York, two trustees must act jointly unless the document says otherwise, and three or more may act by majority. Every state lets the trust document change these defaults, which is why the decision to name co-trustees should be made together with a decision about how they will make decisions.

This article explains what the law in each of those states provides, why people name co-trustees, where the arrangement goes wrong, and how to draft around the problems. For the threshold question of who should serve at all, see our guide on who a trustee is and how to choose one.

FREE WEBINAR

5 Things to Know About

Estate Planning

When You Turn Sixty-Five

Save the Date

Friday, Oct 9^th at 2:30pm

Can a Trust Have More Than One Trustee?

Yes. No state limits a trust to a single trustee. A revocable living trust commonly names the two spouses who created it as initial co-trustees, then a child or two as successors. An irrevocable trust for children often names a family member and a professional together. A trust can even have a trustee who is also a beneficiary, though that combination needs care in drafting to avoid tax and creditor problems.

The trustee provisions of the trust document control. State law fills in only what the document leaves out, and much of what follows describes those default rules.

Can a Co-Trustee Act Alone?

This is the question families actually ask, usually when a bank refuses to accept one trustee’s signature or when two siblings cannot agree. The default rules differ by state.

New Jersey. Under N.J.S.A. 3B:31-48, part of the New Jersey Uniform Trust Code, “co-trustees who are unable to reach a unanimous decision may act by majority decision.” With three trustees, two can act. With two, there is no majority, so both must agree. Each co-trustee “shall participate in the performance of a trustee’s function” unless unavailable because of absence, illness, disqualification, or temporary incapacity, or unless the function has been properly delegated to another trustee. If a co-trustee is unavailable and “prompt action is necessary to achieve the purposes of the trust or to avoid injury to the trust property,” the remaining trustee or a majority of the remaining trustees may act. A trustee may delegate functions to a co-trustee, but “may not delegate to a co-trustee the performance of a function the settlor reasonably expected the trustees to perform jointly.” When a vacancy occurs, the remaining co-trustees act for the trust unless the document says otherwise.

Connecticut. Connecticut General Statutes section 45a-499tt, part of the Connecticut Uniform Trust Code in effect since January 1, 2020, is nearly identical: co-trustees unable to reach a unanimous decision may act by majority, the remaining co-trustees act when a vacancy occurs, each co-trustee must participate unless unavailable or the function is delegated, and a trustee may delegate any function to a co-trustee “other than a function that the terms of the trust expressly require to be performed by the trustees jointly.”

New York. New York has not adopted the Uniform Trust Code. Under Estates, Powers and Trusts Law section 10-10.7, a joint power held by three or more fiduciaries “may be exercised by a majority,” and a power held by two “may be exercised jointly by both such fiduciaries or by the survivor fiduciary, unless contrary to the express terms of the instrument creating the power.” The practical result is the same as in the other two states for two trustees: both must act. New York’s statute is framed as a rule about the instrument, so a New York trust that wants either trustee to act alone must say so expressly.

In all three states, a single co-trustee acting alone on a matter the document does not authorize acts without power, and a bank or title company that knows there are two trustees will ask for both signatures.

Is a Co-Trustee Liable for What the Other Trustee Does?

Partly. All three states protect a trustee who properly dissents or is properly absent, and all three impose a duty to police the other trustee.

In New Jersey, a dissenting trustee who joins in carrying out a majority decision but “expresses his dissent in writing promptly to his co-trustees shall not be liable for the act of the majority,” and a trustee who does not join in an action because of absence, illness, or incapacity is not liable for it. But N.J.S.A. 3B:31-48(g) adds that “every trustee shall exercise reasonable care to prevent a co-trustee from committing a breach of trust and compel a co-trustee to redress a breach of trust.” Connecticut’s statute is the same, with the duty framed around a “serious” breach. New York’s section 10-10.7 protects a dissenter who “joins in carrying out the decision of a majority” after prompt written dissent, but provides that “liability for failure to join in administering the estate or trust or to prevent a breach of the trust may not thus be avoided.”

The lesson for anyone asked to serve as a co-trustee is that the role cannot be honorary. A co-trustee who signs whatever the other trustee puts in front of them, or who stays out of the administration entirely, remains responsible for what the trust does and for stopping misconduct they should have noticed.

Why Do People Name Co-Trustees?

The reasons are usually sound in themselves:

• A check on a single trustee. A second person with access to the records and a duty to watch is a real safeguard against sloppiness and theft.
• Complementary skills. One trustee knows the family and the beneficiaries; the other knows investments or bookkeeping. A professional trustee paired with a family member is the classic version.
• Shared workload. Administering a trust for a disabled child or a long-term trust for grandchildren is years of work, and two people can divide it.
• Continuity. When one co-trustee dies or resigns, the other is already in place and, under all three states’ rules, continues to act without a court proceeding.

Two reasons are common and usually wrong. The first is fairness among children: a parent who knows one child is better suited names both to avoid hurt feelings. The trust then inherits the sibling relationship, with a legal requirement that the two agree. The second is naming a grandchild’s two parents as co-trustees because they are married. Marriages end, and a trust for the children of a divorced couple with the former spouses as required co-signers is a trust that will need a court.

What Goes Wrong With Co-Trustees?

Deadlock. With two trustees there is no majority. Every decision is unanimous or stalled. In New Jersey and Connecticut, the only way out of a true deadlock without a tiebreaker in the document is a court application, and under N.J.S.A. 3B:31-49(e) a court “may appoint an additional trustee or special fiduciary whenever the court considers the appointment desirable for the administration of the trust.” That takes months and costs the trust money.

Diffusion of responsibility. Each trustee assumes the other filed the tax return, paid the insurance, or answered the beneficiary’s letter. Statutory duties to participate exist because the failure mode is common.

Two signatures on everything. Banks, brokerages, and title companies dealing with a two-trustee trust will require both signatures on account openings, transfers, and deeds unless the document plainly authorizes one trustee to act. For a trust holding a checking account that pays a disabled beneficiary’s monthly bills, that is unworkable.

Removal is hard. A co-trustee who becomes an obstacle cannot simply be dropped. In New Jersey, under N.J.S.A. 3B:31-51, the settlor, a co-trustee, or a beneficiary may ask the court to remove a trustee, and the court may do so for the grounds listed in N.J.S.A. 3B:14-21, which requires a showing, not merely a disagreement. Unless the document gives someone a power to remove and replace trustees, a stalemate ends in litigation.

How Do You Draft a Trust With Co-Trustees That Works?

Most of the problems above are drafting problems, and each has a drafting solution:

• Authorize either trustee to sign. A clause permitting any one trustee to sign checks, open accounts, and execute routine documents, while reserving major decisions such as sales of real estate or discretionary distributions for both, removes the two-signature problem without removing the check. New York in particular needs this language, since section 10-10.7 defaults to joint action.
• Divide the job. The document can assign investment decisions to one trustee and distribution decisions to the other, each acting alone within their lane. A separate article on dividing the trustee’s role covers the directed-trust version of this idea.
• Name a tiebreaker. With two family co-trustees, name a third person, a trust protector, or a professional whose vote resolves a disagreement, or provide that a named professional’s decision controls on investment matters.
• Use an odd number. Three trustees with majority rule avoid deadlock by arithmetic, at the cost of a third set of signatures and fees.
• Give someone a removal power. A trust protector or the beneficiaries acting together can be given power to remove a trustee and appoint a successor without court involvement, subject to limits that keep the power from being abused.
• Address compensation. New Jersey sets trustee commissions by statute, at 6 percent of income under N.J.S.A. 3B:18-24 and an annual corpus commission of five dollars per thousand on the first 400,000 dollars and three dollars per thousand above that under N.J.S.A. 3B:18-25. The document should say whether two trustees share one commission or each takes one, and whether a family trustee serves without pay.
• Plan the succession. Under N.J.S.A. 3B:31-49, a vacancy with a co-trustee remaining “need not be filled unless the trust instrument provides otherwise.” Decide whether a departing co-trustee should be replaced, and by whom, so the structure the settlor designed survives the first death or resignation.

Can a Trustee Appoint a Co-Trustee?

Only if the trust document gives that power. Absent such a provision, a sole trustee cannot add a colleague, and a vacancy is filled by the document’s succession terms, by unanimous agreement of the qualified beneficiaries, or by the court, in that order under N.J.S.A. 3B:31-49(c). Many modern trusts give the acting trustee, or a trust protector, an express power to appoint an additional or successor trustee, and that power is worth including precisely because the settlor cannot foresee who will be available decades later.

Plan Well. Live Better.

Co-trustees can make a trust stronger or bring it to a standstill, and the difference is almost always in the drafting. At Milvidskiy Law Group, we help clients choose trustees, structure how they work together, and build in the tiebreakers and removal powers that keep a trust out of court. Learn more about our estate planning services.

This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Trust law varies by state and is subject to the terms of each trust instrument. The statutes described were verified in September 2026 against the New Jersey Statutes, the New York Estates, Powers and Trusts Law, and the Connecticut General Statutes and should be confirmed before relying on them.