24(a). Appellants argue that because a specific fund is at issue, they have a sufficient interest in the litigation pending in the district court. While we will address each of Rule 24(a)’s requirements, we first turn to whether the appellants have a sufficient interest in the litigation, A. Rule 24(a)(2) requires the intervenor to demonstrate “an interest relating to the property or transaction which is the subject of the action ...” Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(a)(2). While the precise nature of the interest required to intervene as of right has eluded precise and authoritative definition, Harris, 820 F.2d at 596; 3B Moore’s Federal Practice, ¶24.07[2], at 24-57 (2d ed. 1982); 7C Wright, Miller & Kane, Federal Practice & Procedure § 1908, at 263 (1986), some general guidelines have emer n.1966) (<HOLDING>); see generally, Wright & Miller, supra, §
holding that the beneficiary of a trust was not the real party in interest regarding rights owned by the trust holding that the trust remaindermen had a sufficient interest to intervene in an action by the trust executors for a tax refund holding that a constructive trust had arisen on a third partys house due to her use of trust assets which had been diverted by the paca trustee to pay the mortgage and finding that the trust beneficiary plaintiffs are entitled to a lien on the property in the amount of the diverted funds recognizing the existence of a constructive trust under new jersey law and applying that trust retroactively to exclude from a bankruptcy estate property in which a creditors security interest had been lost through the prepetition misconduct of the debtor holding that a third party who receives trust property on inquiry notice that a trustee has misappropriated trust funds is also liable for breach of trust