For the articles dealing with the code itself, the Desk Reference uses the following format: (1) the Florida statutory text is outlined in detail, (2) the outline is immediately followed by a section captioned "Reprise & Comment" which restates the content of each treated Florida code by section and subsection; this in turn is followed by (a) a complete synopsis of the commentaries of the national conference of commissioners on uniform state laws for each presented companion UTC (including Uniform Prudent Investor) law by section or subsection and (b) any editor comments, (c) citation to related Restatement of Law sections and comments thereto and (d) any references to applicable Appendix Of Trust Forms And Explanatory Notes (provided for information and discussion purposes only).

In 2003, the national commissioners on uniform state laws provided 150 pages of commentary to coincide with promulgation of the code and the call for its recommended adoption by the states. These commentaries, which are updated after periodic conferences, discuss every code section, except those transferred from the (former) Revised Uniform Prudent Investor Act--see reference thereto in Desk Reference FS §736.0901 and Code Part IX herein. In completing this work the editor has used the UTC commentary resulting from the NCCUSL July 30-August 6, 2004 conference published March 7, 2005. The reprise of the commissioners' commentary, although condensed, is as detailed as the commentaries themselves and include all citations to often-referenced secondary materials and sources quoted therein. They are also organized and discussed after each (sub)section of provisions within the code.

The importance of the UTC commentary as provided in the "Reprise and Comment" is explained in the commentary to UTC §106 (FS §736.0106--"Common law of trusts; principles of equity"):

" The statutory text of the Uniform Trust Code is also supplemented by these Comments, which, like the Comments to any Uniform Act, may be relied on as a guide for interpretation. See Acierno v. Worthy Bros. Pipeline Corp., 656 A. 2d 1085, 1090 (Del. 1995) (interpreting Uniform Commercial Code); Yale University v. Blumenthal, 621 A. 2d 1304, 1307 (Conn, 1993) (interpreting Uniform Management of Institutional Funds Act); 2 Norman Singer, Statutory Construction Section 52.05. (6th ed. 2000); Jack Davies, Legislative Law and Process in a Nutshell Section 55--4 (2d. ed. 1986)."

As a result of the foregoing, the commentaries are an indispensable part of any discussion of any jurisdiction's uniform trust code.

In both the outline, reprises and commentaries, the editor has not felt obligated to necessarily provide the statute verbatim, instead presenting as reliable a restatement of the language as possible. In so doing the editor relies on an "irrebuttable presumption" that those who seriously use the Desk Reference, have access to the text of the statute itself and will rely on it appropriately.

The editor's comments are sprinkled throughout the text to provide helpful observations which necessarily accrue during the process of studying, collating and cross referencing the code, including its companion commentary, with particular attention paid to how Florida's code and the Uniform code (including its explanatory commentary) differ. The comments follow not only the reprise of statutory sections, but also occasionally appear in bracketed italicized references within the commissioners' statutory commentary itself.

UTC §106 (FS §736.0106--"Common law of trusts; principles of equity") provides that the trust code is supplemented by the common law of trusts and the principles of equity. Specifically, the commissioners' commentary thereto states that the common law of trusts and the principles of equity apply "particularly as articulated by the Restatement of Trusts, Restatement (Third) of Property: Wills ad other Donative Transfers, and the Restatement of Restitution. Further, the commentary describes the common law of trusts as including:

"the contemporary and evolving rules of decision developed by the courts in exercise of their power to adapt the law to new situations and changing conditions. It also includes the traditional and broad equitable jurisdiction of the court, which the Code in no way restricts."

Also, the commentary describes the UTC as being drafted "in close coordination with the writing of the Restatement, Third." Throughout the UTC commentaries, numerous references to the influence of specific Restatement sections from which the UTC section is adapted or based, are cited. Accordingly, discussion of the related Restatement sections and a synopsis of their commentaries are provided as an indispensable part to any discussion of any jurisdiction's uniform trust code.

The importance of the Restatement of Trusts as a starting point for the review of the common law of trusts and for use as a supplement to the UTC requires a brief discussion of this work including its development. The Restatement of Trusts is presented in statutory form, section by section, The statutory format is then followed by commentaries, which amplify and clarify the stated rules. Thereafter, the commentary is followed by Reporter's Notes which state case law, statutory trends and other materials relating to each treated section.

Working with the Restatement is itself a challenge because of its evolving nature. The last complete treatment of the subject is presented in Restatement of Law Second, Trusts, adopted and promulgated on May 23, 1957 and published in a two volume edition in 1959. However, the updated, modernized, version embodied in Restatement of Law Third, Trusts has been, and continues to be, formulated and promulgated in stages. The evolutionary nature of this work makes it a difficult source to work with since it has not been and is not a constant (unchanged) source of reference for those who work with it, including the editor, drafters of the UTC and trust law practitioners.

The first effort of Restatement Third, Trusts came in principally modifying §§227-229 of Restatement Second, Trusts, dealing with trustee investment duties. Moreover, this effort included the modification of a dozen or so statutes also found in Restatement Second, Trusts, Chapter 7 "THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE TRUST", Topic 1 "GENERAL PRINCIPLES" and Topic 2 "DUTIES OF THE TRUSTEE". These modifications changed the Restatement rule and either entirely or partially amended the Commentary thereto as well. Collectively, this revision is called Restatement of Law Trusts, Third Prudent Investor Rule, finally adopted and promulgated on May 18, 1990 and currently published as one volume in 1992. Although this was the first installment of Restatement Third, Trusts, the version retained the section numbering provided in Restatement Second, Trusts.

The second effort of Restatement Third, Trusts came in the release of two new volumes. Volume 1 covers Part 1. "NATURE, CHARACTERISTICS AND TYPES OF TRUST" and Part 2. "CREATION OF TRUSTS, with newly numbered sections therein as §§1-26. Volume 2. covers Part 3. "ELEMENTS OF TRUST", Part 4. "NATURE OF BENEFICIARIES' RIGHTS AND INTERESTS" and Part 5. "MODIFICATION AND TERMINATION OF TRUSTS" with newly numbered sections therein as §§27-69. Both of these volumes were finally adopted and promulgated on May 16, 2001 and are collectively published in one softbound volume that same year.

The third effort of Restatement Third, Trusts came as Volume 3 covering Part 6. "TRUST ADMINISTRATION", with newly numbered sections therein as §70-92. Note that sections §227-229 Restatement Trusts, Second, which were revised as Restatement Third, Prudent Investor Rule are further revised in and appear as new Chapter 17 "INVESTMENT OF TRUST FUNDS (THE "PRUDENT INVESTOR RULE") and renumbered §§90-92, in this most recent update of Restatement Third, Trusts. This volume was finally adopted and promulgated on May 18, 2005 and published in one hard bound volume in 2007. However, the prior published version of §§70-89 was available in the form of Tentative Draft No. 4 (April 5, 2005) which version was itself modified in the final promulgated version which was also published in 2007.

The present, ongoing, effort of Restatement Third, Trusts is embodied in Part 6 "TRUST ADMINISTRATION" which will add Chapters 18-22, §§93-110. This version has at the completion date of this manuscript appeared in the form of Preliminary Draft No. 8 (May 11, 2007). This work is itself described in the Reporter's Memorandum thereto as "a highly preliminary Preliminary Draft of the last volume of our Trusts Third project." Moreover, this publication appears with the following caveat to those who review it:

"This document, as of the date it was printed, had not been considered by the Council or membership of The American Law Institute, and therefore does not represent the position of the Institute on any of the issues with which it deals."

Similarly, the publication reiterates the further status of this draft as follows:

"The bylaws of the American Law Institute provide that `Publication of any work as representing the Institute's position requires authorization by the membership and approval by the Council.' Each portion of an Institute project is submitted initially for review to the project's Consultants or Advisers as a Memorandum, Preliminary Draft, or Advisory Group Draft. As revised, it is then submitted to the Council of the Institute in the form of a Council Draft. After review by the Council, it is submitted as a Tentative Draft, Discussion Draft, or Proposed Final Draft for consideration by the membership at the Institute's Annual Meeting. At each stage of the reviewing process, a Draft may be referred back for revision and resubmission. The status of this Draft is indicated on the front cover and title page. This is the first draft of the material contained in this Draft."

Given the above cited status of this draft, the editor has not incorporated Part 6 into this manuscript, even though sections contained therein are liberally used as further explanatory references in Parts 4. and 5. of (finally approved) Restatement Third, Trusts.

Due to the evolving nature of the Restatement, Trusts as discussed above, and the fact that the UTC commentary which refers to it as the basis for UTC sections relied on its version(s) as they existed a number of years ago, it is occasionally difficult for the editor to translate the older version (dates) relied on by the code to the restatement as currently constituted. Moreover, to illustrate the foregoing, the Commissioners' commentary to the UTC will sometimes (1) only cite the Restatement Second, Trusts section(s), or (2) cite both Restatement Second and its Restatement Third, Trusts counterpart sections, or (3) only cite Restatement Third, Trusts Prudent Investor Rule sections. Where possible the editor has elected to reprise only the more modern Restatement Third, Sections in discussing the relevant UTC sections. However, given the unsettled status of Restatement Third, Trusts Part 6., §§93-110, and related factors, this is not always possible or prudent, therefore comparable Restatement Second, Trusts sections are presented as the basis for best, most current, discussion of trust law.

The remaining question is the extent to which the evolving nature of the development of the Restatement Trusts is diminished as a source of citation of the law of trusts within the UTC. It is the editor's view that subject to certain apparent exceptions which appear relatively infrequently, the positions expounded in Restatement Trusts (in whatever version) are similarly compatible with the UTC so as not to create significant problems in their reliance as good authority to submit to a court, consistent with other trends and citations which appear in any state's current common law.