September 2012 Archives

September 14, 2012

Childless and Aging? Time to Designate a Caregiver

Phyllis Korkki with the NY Times wrote an article dealing with some of the problems our aging society has when they have no children or natural caregivers and ways to help deal with it. In the article, she quotes me in dealing with some ways you can use legal documents that can be prepared by an attorney to deal with giving someone legal rights to help you make decisions if and when you need it.

These documents can also help avoid a guardianship and limit the ability for some to hijack your assets and use them up with unnecessary fees.

Follow this link to the NY Time article or contact us to discuss how we can provide documents to help manage these situations for your, your friends, or your family.

September 10, 2012

Florida Court Finds that Settlor Lacked Requisit Capacity to Execute Trust Amendment

florida-case-law.jpgIn the Florida case of Jervis v. Tucker, 37 Fla. L. Weekly D349 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)

Bernice J. Meikle executed a revocable trust agreement in 1991, which she subsequently amended by executing a first amendment. Her trust, as amended by the first amendment,
provided that Meikle's power to revoke or amend the trust would be suspended upon her being "adjudicated incapacitated by a court of appropriate jurisdiction." The trust further provided that Meikle's powers could be restored by an order of an appropriate court having jurisdiction over Meikle, or upon the issuance and receipt by the Trustee of a written opinion from two licensed physicians after their examination of Meikle.

Meikle was adjudicated incapacitated in 2000. On December 27, 2001, Meikle executed a second amendment to her trust without obtaining a court order authorizing the amendment or restoring her capacity to amend the trust,and without written opinions from two licensed physicians.

The second amendment attempted to reallocate the distribution of her assets. Meikle died in 2007 and the second amendment to her trust was subsequently challenged by beneficiaries under her first trust amendment. In granting a motion for summary judgment, the trial court ruled that the second amendment was "void and of no legal effect." On appeal, Appellant argued that the record evidence showed that Meikle did not lack testament capacity when she executed the second amendment in 2001. The Fourth District found that the plain meaning of the trust agreement, as amended by the first amendment, required Meikle to either have her capacity restored by the court or through the written opinion of two licensed physicians.

Although the trial court had judicially restored certain of Meikle's rights before her death, it had not restored her rights concerning her property. Moreover, at the trial level, Appellant only offered the opinions of one licensed physician in support of his argument that Meikle had testamentary capacity. Although Appellant also offered the opinion of a licensed nursing home health care administrator, the Fourth District noted this witness, even though possessed of expert experience, was without a physician's license.

Therefore, because the unambiguous provisions of the trust had not been met, the Fourth District affirmed the trial court's ruling that Meikle lacked the requisite testamentary capacity to execute the second amendment to her trust.

It is important to understand and comply with the terms of the trust when making changes. You not only have to comply with the trust but with state laws that may override the terms of the trust. In this case, the Ward did not have their ability to deal with property restored by the court nor did they have two doctors state that she was not incapacitated. Even with two doctors the court order determining incapacity would have seemed to have not restored the power to deal with property including her trust.

September 7, 2012

Refusal to follow preference for appointment of Personal Representative was an abuse of discretion

florida-case-law.jpgIn the case of Bowdoin v. Rinnier, 81 So. 3d 582 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) The Decedent died intestate, leaving her husband, and a minor child as her sole heirs. Decedent's mother, filed a petition for administration seeking her appointment as personal representative. The surviving spouse filed a counter-petition for administration seeking his appointment as personal representative. After hearing, the trial court granted Appellee's petition notwithstanding husband's preference in appointment under § 733.301, Fla. Stat., because the trial court determined it was in the best interest of all parties to appoint the Decedent's mother as personal representative. On appeal, the Second District found the trial court's decision was an abuse of discretion. The Second District reinforced the proposition that statutorily preferred individuals should be appointed unless the record shows the preferred person is unfit to serve. In this case, the Mother produced no witnesses or evidence at the hearing to show the husband was unqualified to serve. The Second District Court therefore reversed the trial court's appointment of the mother and remanded the matter back to the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the decedent's husband was fit to serve as personal representative.
September 7, 2012

Last Will and Embezzlement

New movie about financial exploitation of the elderly.

September 5, 2012

Life Estate Deeds May Put Child's Interest In Home At Risk to Creditors

asset-protection-cash.jpgIn Florida many parents create Life Estate Deeds with their children in an attempt to avoid Probate on their homes. A Florida Life Estate Deed is a document which changes the ownership of a home or other piece of real estate. Essentially it creates a present interest and a future interest. A traditional life estate would say something like this, " I give my self and my spouse the right to live in the home as long as either of us shall live and the remainder to my child or children."

This example would create a future interest that vests now in the child or children and a present interest or right to use the home for the parents or grantor. While there are many potential problems like loss of tax basis, penalties and interest for failure to do gift tax returns, loss of eligibility for nursing home coverage because of the gift, the issue we are concerned about here is the risk that the home could be lost to the creditor of the child or one of the children.

Here is how it works. If the child or children do no live in the parents home, it is not their homestead, even if they do live in the home, it cannot be their homestead because they do not have a present interest in the home. Remember the child or children only have a future interest in the home. A creditor can levy against that asset just like any other. There are tables that determine the value of a future interest based on the age of the parents, their life expectancy, and the current interest rates.

So besides all the other risks associated with transferring a portion of your home to a child, you may in fact transfer nothing to your child if they end up having a creditor take the child's portion of the home.

There are ways of avoiding probate, reducing risks of loss to creditors, and receiving favorable tax status that may work in your situation but you should discuss these with a Florida Estate Planning Lawyer to see which options offer the best combination of benefits for your situation.

September 4, 2012

Who Ownes your Itunes Account? and Bruce Willis

digital_assets.jpgLast week there were several articles which brought light to many that our online identities are just licenses which will expire upon out death. While this concept is new to some, most lawyers understand this. Unfortunately there appear to be some who do not understand that we are dealing with licenses which expire upon death, because they are recommending that their clients deal with these assets using a traditional will. While they understand that a will only deals with assets that exist after death, they probably do not understand that your iTunes , Amazon , Gmail, Facebook, and Twitter accounts are licenses, which if owned individually, will not survive the death of the creator.

A Trust or Business entity can survive death! They are fictitious entities which are created by state statutes which do not have to dissolve upon death. A trust generally has provisions for beneficiaries unlike a business entity.

Last weekend the Wall Street Journal and several other publications ran articles on Who inherits your iTunes account?
Over the weekend there were several stories in the UK and Australia about Bruce Willis and his massive iTunes account with 80,000 or so songs. Today it is being reported that Bruce has no plans on suing Apple Computer over his iTunes account.

While your Amazon and iTunes accounts may be the most popular and have the most perceived value to people, it is often their other accounts that make more sense to try to protect in a DAPTrust.

If your mortgage goes to your email account and you die or become incapacitated, who will know who or how much to pay? Will they know soon enough to save your home from foreclosure, or will you incur thousands of dollars in legal fees because you signed up for electronic billing?

Will your family have the right to access your digital photos? Can you family realize value in your Facebook, or Twitter accounts to contact your "Friends" on your behalf to let them know of your illness, condition, or passing? Could your family benefit financially by allowing others to contact your "Friends" who may be aligned similarly in business?

While the iTunes angle is appealing, the other reasons are the real reasons one should plan to deal with his or her Digital Assets. Ensuring that you children can listen to your older outdated music is a nice thought, but can you remember the last time you pulled out one of your parents records or tapes to listen to it.

If you are interested in planning for your Digital Assets you might consider talking with an estate planning professional about a Digital Asset Trust - DAPTrust.com