Parents believe that leaving their children the family home is a great boon but experience shows that beneficiaries are not happy with the bequest.
For many people in the United States chances are that their house is their most valuable asset. It makes sense then for most parents to leave their most valuable asset to their children. But this common inheritance is only a blessing for a small few of beneficiaries and a burden on most others.
Not A Quick Sell
It is common knowledge that in order for a New York will to be valid that there must be other people to witness you signing your will as well as putting down their own signatures on your will. Despite this knowledge though improper execution of the will is the most common reason that a will is found to be invalid.
Why Do I Need Witnesses At All?
Witnesses provide an important evidentiary function to the probate process. Witnesses to your signing can provide first-hand accounts of the execution of the will. If a will is ever contested, the witnesses can testify about the procedures that were followed when executing the will, the testamentary capacity of the testator as well as the mental capacity of the testator.
Many people believe that estate planning is primarily a tool to minimize taxes by the state and ensure that your assets are passed on to the people you want them to go to. However, an important part of estate planning is ensuring that when you are incapacitated that your wishes will be respected and that you are taken care of when you cannot adequately express your wishes or provide for yourself. But how exactly is that decision made in New York? Who decides when you are incapacitated and when you will need someone else to make your decisions for you?
Your Living Will or Healthcare Directive Can Dictate The Terms of Your Incapacity
The best option for setting forth standards to decide when you are incapacitated is making sure that you are the one dictating the terms of your own incapacity. This can be accomplished through your living will, also known as a healthcare directive. Your living will traditionally acts to provide those making your healthcare decisions with your wishes as to how you would like to be treated in medical situations where you cannot give consent.
Minnesota Judge Shows No Urgency To The Detriment Of The Estate
Carver County District Judge Kevin Eide has announced that there will be no quick decisions in who will be inheriting from the late superstar according to USA Today. The probate judge in charge of the legal proceedings surrounding Prince’s estate has further indicated that due to the complexity of the case, the multiple claims and questions of parentage, the judge may forward his eventual decision to an appellate court of immediate review, a process that will only drag out the proceedings even longer.
The judge’s decision to take it slow comes despite urgings by the claimants to come to a speedy resolution. The claimants have good reason for hoping to close out the probate estate and settling matters: every day that the estate is in probate, the estate is losing money. While the probate proceedings are going on, Prince’s assets are effectively frozen. For an estate as big as Prince’s that includes quite a lot.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. left behind a legacy of peace and understanding, but he may have been surprised by the legacy that his estate is forging. Last Friday, a Fulton County Superior Court Judge declined to make a ruling in a dispute over two items left behind by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, his Bible and his Nobel Peace Prize. Fox News reports that the case over these two items is likely to go to trial, with King’s estate, controlled by his two sons, against their sister, Bernice. This is only one of many lawsuits that have crept up in years past over the legacy of Dr. King.
Managing Estate Assets and Legacies
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr’s estate is not technically what many would consider an estate in the traditional sense. It is not a probate estate, with his assets being liquidated according to his will. Rather, Dr. King’s estate is the for-profit Martin Luther King Jr. Estate Inc. with his three surviving children being the sole shareholders and directors. As the sole shareholders and directors, his three children control Dr. King’s name, image, likeness and his possessions.
What’s In a Name Depends on Who You Are. It Could Be Hundreds of Millions According to the IRS
There has been an ongoing battle in recent years between decedents’ estates and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). While it is only to be expected that the IRS attempt to collect as much as it can, their recent focus has turned to a rather contentious area in their quest for collections: intangibles. This category that includes property interests like computer software, patents, copyrights, publicity rights and literary, musical and artistic compositions can be difficult to put a price.
Most recently, the estate of former singer Whitney Houston has been fighting off an inexplicable valuation of Ms. Houston’s publicity rights, according to The Hollywood Reporter. Ms. Houston’s estate is just one of many in recent years, most notably, Michael Jackson, who are embroiled in heated tax claims over the valuation of certain assets, most contentiously the valuation of the celebrity’s public image. How exactly does the IRS come to the conclusion of the worth of the decedent’s image, and why are valuations of this intangible so hard to get right?
LARGE NEED TO REDUCE AND PREVENT FINANCIAL EXPLOITATION
The American Bankers Association is looking to serve a large market that is only getting larger by the day. At the same time, they are working to shore up the larger financial markets in a larger effort to prevent financial fraud perpetrated against seniors. As one banker noted during a speech on the topic, the banking community responded to the need to protect those with diminished ability to discern the difference between a real deal being sold by a legitimate vendor and a scam by predators. In February, 2016 it launched the Safe Banking for Seniors program, with various state bankers association across the nation rolling out their own version modeled on the American Bankers Association.
As of the inception of the program, 30 states joined in to help usher in the program. The New York Bankers Association is not one of the 30 states and does not currently such a program. Nevertheless, it is gaining popularity across the nation and many states bankers associations are seeing the utility and popularity of such a program. Furthermore, the program is not restricted to states bankers associations, individual banks, regional banks and bank chains can join in the program. As the American Bankers Association notes, 30% of the population of the country will be 60 or older by 2025. The Consumer Finance Protection Bureau and the American Bankers Association both note that $2.9 billion per year is lost to fraud perpetrated against elder Americans. Some estimates are as high as $36 billion per year, with only one in 43 cases of financial fraud against an elderly American properly documented and reported. The primary program is designed for banks and bankers associations, which will in turn filter down to individual elderly bank customers.
ORDER OF PAYMENT
It should not be a surprise to anyone that when someone passes away, their estate must pay for all legally binding outstanding debt owed by the decedent just prior to passing. New York as well as just about every other jurisdiction has laws that address how the estate puts creditors on notice that they must file a claim, but how the creditor must go about making a claim and getting paid from the estate. As in other areas of the law, there is an order and priority to the claims that can be paid. The administrator has a fiduciary obligation to the heirs to distribute the estate to the terms of the will. That fiduciary obligation also extends to creditors of the estate. The payment of expenses, ensuring that all disbursements are properly documented and all taxes and fees are paid are core responsibilities of the estate administrator.
To do this, the estate administrator must first understand what assets the deceased owned, the value of those assets, which in and of itself costs money. When an estate is insolvent, the creditors will surely examine every expenditure by the administrator to determine if they acted appropriately. On the other side of the ledger, the administrator must determine if the claims are valid or overpriced and inflated. The estate administrator has an obligation to dispute all claims, except properly owed, legally enforceable obligations. Since the final accounting by the estate administrator presupposes that all parties are already involved in litigation and there is a Court already scrutinizing all credits and debits, the likelihood that a party will enforce their rights, or, more specifically, object to the final accounting, is all the much greater. The balancing act that the estate administrator must engage in can be a complicated endeavor.
BEST LAID PLANS DO NOT ALWAYS WORK OUT
A case with an interesting factual background came out of Texas recently. While it was based on Texas law and the case is binding in only Texas, the legal principles discussed by the Court are equally applicable to New York or any other jurisdiction for that matter. More importantly, the set of events that gave rise to the case could happen anywhere. It just so happened that it occured in Texas rather than New York or somewhere else. The Texas Court of Appeals case of Gordon v. Gordon revolved around a trust that took ownership of a specific peace of real estate property and how that transaction related to a will signed subsequent to the trust. More specifically, the Court determined that the act of creating and endorsing a will by the testator subsequent to the transfer of the real estate did not overturn or cancel the previous transfer of the real estate to the trust. The will, however, contained language that by endorsing the will, the testator supersedes all previous transactions indicated in the trust documents, such as annuities or certificates of deposit. It never mentioned the real estate.
In 2009 (Mother) Beverly Gordon and (Father) Patrick Gordon executed a trust document which they funded with personal property and real estate. The very terms of the trust indicated that the trust could only be revoked by either Father or Mother and only by following the specific set of instructions laid out in the trust document, namely by signing and delivering a letter to the trustee. The letter had to indicate that they individually or jointly are going to cancel or revoke the trust. The trust further provided that upon the death of either of them the trust become irrevocable. They funded the trust with personal property and real estate. Soon thereafter, their son John sought to reduce the risk of an estate battle by creating a will that specifically stated that the parties want to cancel the terms of the trust. Neither Mr. Gordon nor Mrs. Gordon did anything to transfer their personal property or real estate out of the trust. Moreover, John did not act to convince his parents to move the property out of the trust. Mr. Gordon passed away within a year of signing the new will.
HUGUETTE CLARK AS EXEMPLAR
The last member of the gilded age passed away just a few years ago. Huguette Clark’s life, in some ways, seems to mirror the classic Orson Welles classic
One of the first things that she did to insure an estate battle was to pass the entirety of her estate via a will. While the larger family itself may have created various trusts for family members to pass on the overwhelming wealth, Ms. Clark herself chose to pass her wealth via a will. While it is alleged that Ms. Clark’s attorney and accountant had something to do with these limited and financially irresponsible decisions, Ms. Clark did not create a trust to ensure the passage of her large and very valuable art collection to charity, which included a painting by Monet, valued at at least $25 million as well as a Picasso worth over $31 million.
New York Estate Planning & Elder Law Blog