NJ Phone: 609-818-1555 * FL Phone: 561-247-1557

Showing posts with label Estate Litigation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Estate Litigation. Show all posts

Monday, January 23, 2017

Why Titling Of Assets Is So Important In Second Marriages

I was talking to another estate planning recently and discussing how much of our work involves assisting clients who have blended families.  Blended families generally refers to clients who are married but at least one of the spouses has a child from a previous relationship.

In comparing stories and ways that we can assist clients, we discovered that the biggest hurdle that we face is with respect to titling of assets.  To understand the problem, you must realize that the following are examples of things generally trump whatever you put in your Will or Trust:


  1. Life insurance beneficiary designations;
  2. IRA/401k/403b and other retirement beneficiary designations;
  3. Annuity beneficiary designations;
  4. Owning real estate as husband and wife;
  5. Owning real estate with a survivorship clause;
  6. Owning real estate with a life estate;
  7. Having someone on your bank account as a Pay on Death (POD) or Transfer on Death (TOD) beneficiary;
  8. Owning a bank account or brokerage account jointly with someone;
  9. Contractual agreements (such as a buy-sell agreement or divorce decree);
  10. Joint ownership of cars and other vehicles; and
  11. Joint ownership of bonds.

So, to put this another way, if you have two children from a previous relationship and are married to a new spouse, you may want 1/3 to go to each of your two children, and 1/3 to your spouse.  Well, even if you have a Will which says 1/3 goes to each person, this will not happen if some of your assets name a beneficiary or are in a joint account with someone.

Let's say in the example above Husband is the parent to 2 children and he owns the following:  A $400,000 house in New Jersey with Wife (who has no children), a $1,500,000 apartment in New York in just his name, a business worth $10,000,000 owned 70/30 with a partner, a 401k worth $3,000,000 naming his wife the beneficiary, a life insurance policy worth $1,000,000 naming his wife as a beneficiary, a brokerage account in his name worth $2,000,000 and a checking account with Wife worth $100,000.   Accordingly, the Husband has a net worth of $15,000,000.  (I'm only including $7M of the $10M business.)  It is Husband's desire to give $5M to each.

Without any additional planning and assuming that Husband and business partner have no agreement in place, a Will that leaves everything 1/3 to each child and Wife has the following consequences:

1)  The Wife would get the NJ house, the 401k, the life insurance, plus the joint checking account for a subtotal of $4,500,000.  Additionally, she would receive 1/3 of everything else (another $3,500,000) for a total of $8M.
2)  Each of the kids would receive $3,500,000 of assets - far less than what H intended.
3)  The business would be owned 23.33% by each of the children, 23.33% by the Wife and 30% by the business partner.

Unfortunately, however, life is usually even more complicated than this!  Frequently, there is a divorce agreement that might require that the life insurance be payable to the children.  Sometimes either the surviving spouse or the child is named as executor - and then the surviving spouse does not get along with the children.

Because these situations are so complex, they are very likely to result in estate litigation.  To minimize the costs of an expensive an hostile administration, it is very important to understand that title of assets frequently overrides what a Will or Trust might state and plan accordingly.




Tuesday, November 17, 2015

Trouble with Probate

Sometimes probate can be a simple process.  Sometimes it can be a royal nightmare... and sometimes it can be an expensive royal nightmare.

I'm not sure if it is a sign of the times or just a coincidence, but our office has had numerous estates where the probate has not been very easy.  To give an example of some of the problems we have run into recently:
1) An estate where even though there was a Will, the beneficiaries were not the next of kin.  While there was nothing untowards going on as the next of kin were very remote, we had to spend a lot of time and money tracking them down because state law required us to give notice to all next of kin, regardless of whether they are a beneficiary in the Will or not.
2) An estate where the decedent owned worthless land in another state.  This was an estate that was otherwise taxable, so we needed to get a valuation for this property and figure out how to dispose of it because no one wanted the headache.
3) Preparing a last minute amended estate tax return before the time to amend lapsed.  A bad return was prepared by an accountant and when the client came to us to review it, we had to stop all other work to prepare a revised return in order to save our client over $100,000.
4) An estate where the original Will could not be found, so we requested that the Court probate a copy of the Will.
5) An estate where the Will is unclear and requires judicial interpretation on who the beneficiaries are.
6) An estate where the client had many different types of assets and assets located in more than one country.
7) An estate where the executor is unable to travel, so our office is handling all the affairs of the estate and assisting in finding other professionals to value and sell local assets at a fair value.
8) An estate where the beneficiary has contacted us to obtain information from an executor who is refusing to disclose information.
9) An estate where the decedent, rather than formally update his Will, wrote a side letter saying where he wanted some of his assets to go - begging the question of how to handle that letter.

In most of these situations, considerable time and expense could have been saved if the decedent had consulted with an estate planning attorney on a regular basis.  While having a Will and trust can certainly make the estate administration process easier and less expensive, the benefit of hiring an experienced professional is not just that we can draft the routine paperwork.  An attorney that focuses on tax and estate planning can also make sure that you title assets in such a way as to make things smoother and more cost efficient.

Wednesday, July 16, 2014

Duty of Executor to Defend a Will Against a Will Contest in Pennsylvania

In most states, when a person is named as an executor in the Will, the executor has an affirmative duty to defend the Will from Will contests.  For example, if mom dies testate leaving her entire estate to child one, cutting out child number two, and child number two sues to say the Will is result of undue influence, the executor would be obligated to defend the validity of the Will and could hire an attorney using estate assets to aid in the defense.  Unless the executor caused the undue influence, he would not be personally liable to the estate for the cost in defending the validity of the Will.

Pennsylvania law is quite different from most other states in that while an executor is a necessary party to a contest involving the Will, the executor is generally not a party in interest who has standing to instigate a contest or to appeal a decree of distribution. (In re Estate of Fleigle, 664 A.2d 612, 444 Pa Super. 632 (1995))  An executor who has not been surcharged or is not required to distribute an amount larger than the total assets of the estate has no standing to except to an adjudication of the auditing judge regarding payment of claims against an estate unless the executor is also a residuary beneficiary of the estate.  (Appeal of Gannon, 428 Pa. Super. 349, 360-61, 631 A. 2d 176, 181 (1993))  The executor is entitled to notice and may then elect whether to become a party (Royer’s Ap. 13 Pa. 569; Yardley v. Cuthbertson, 108 Pa. 395, 445-448), although if he does become a party his costs and counsel fees must be paid by him or those who authorize him, not by the estate.  (Faust Estate, 364 Pa. 529 (1950))

The Faust case is extremely important because it shifts the burden for payment of legal fees from the estate to the executor personally if the executor decides to insert himself or herself into a Will contest.  Additionally, if executors engage in an act that is beyond their scope as representatives of an estate, they risk losing their executor's commission.

Pennsylvania law does have a few exceptions for when an executor can get involved in a Will contest.  An exception exists where a testator directs or imposes a duty on the executor to defend the Will against contests.  (Bennett Estate, 366 Pa. 232 (1951); See also:  Tutelea Estate, 4 Pa. D. & C. 3d 199 (1974))  Another exception to the Pennsylvania rule is where the executor is also a trustee and is required to defend the trust.  (Fetter's Est., 151 Pa.Super. 32, 29 A.2d 361 (1942)).

We also need to differentiate cases where an executor is being sued for his services as executor.  (Browarsky Estate, 437 Pa. 282 (1970))  Because the executor is placed in the position to be sued because of duties he had performs for the estate, it would be unjust to require him personally to bear the reasonable costs of the defense of suits brought against them solely by reason of their positions as executors. "It is well established that whenever there is an unsuccessful attempt by a beneficiary to surcharge a fiduciary, the latter is entitled to an allowance out of the estate to pay for counsel fees and necessary expenditures in defending himself against the attack [citing cases]." Wormley Estate, 359 Pa. 295, 300-01, 59 A.2d 98, 100 (1948). Accord: Coulter Estate, 379 Pa. 209, 108 A.2d 681 (1954).

Finally, there is very old case that stands for the proposition that: “The executor propounding a Will for probate, acting in good faith, is entitled to costs out of the estate, whether probate is granted or refused.”  (Ammon’s Appeal, 31 Pa. 311).  I note that I can’t find the case, only a cite in a treatise, but I believe this to still be good law if the executor does not get involved in a Will contest.

If an executor uses estate assets to pay for legal fees related to a lawsuit against himself or because the executor impermissibly got himself involved in a Will contest, a judge can surcharge counsel of an estate or counsel for an executor. (Faust)

The rationale behind the Pennsylvania case law is that a Will contest is between the testamentary beneficiary and the heirs or next of kin, therefore the executor should not waste estate assets on their dispute.  The rationale behind the rules in most other states presumes that the testator wrote the Will the way he or she wanted it and the executor should try to uphold the testator's intent.

From a practical point of view of estate administration attorneys, we need to consider three things.  One, we need to understand the source of the money from which we are getting paid and keep track of it. If we are paid from the estate for a Will contest or for an objection to an accounting, we may be required to give the money back to the estate.  Personally, we always ask for a retainer from a proposed executor before they have qualified executor.  Accordingly, they are paying me with their own money and getting reimbursed from the estate later.  Also, attorneys should put language in their retainer agreements stating that the proposed executor is personally liable for the legal work if he cannot qualify as executor or if we wind up doing work for the executor in an individual capacity.

Second, in the event of a Will contest or an objection to an accounting, attorneys should track their time separately.  Time spent on the Will contest or an objection to an accounting should be differentiated from time spent administering the estate.

Finally, attorneys should consider whether they want to draft their estate planning documents in a way to change the default rules regarding an executor's duty to defend the Will.  Personally, I think that it makes more sense for an executor to use estate assets to defend the integrity of a Will and that the executor shouldn't be personally liable absent gross negligence, willful misconduct or bad faith. After all, some beneficiaries might not have the resources or the mental capacity to act in their own best interests.
--------------------
Thanks to Pierson W. Backes, Esq. for his help with this article.

Friday, September 3, 2010

Estate and Trust Litigation

Unfortunately I have been given another reminder of how important it is to select appropriate executors for your Will, trustees for your trusts and agents in your financial powers of attorney.

No matter how good an attorney does in drafting your estate planning documents, if there is a person in charge of the money who is not honorable, a large portion can be easily stolen. The person who you put in control of such money is known as a fiduciary.

When you name someone as a fiduciary, you must realize that while they are legally forbidden from taken this money for their own personal benefit, mechanically it is very easy to do. For this reason I always recommend that when deciding on who should be in charge of your finances you always choose someone who is trustworthy rather than someone who is good with money. A trustworthy person can always hire others to help who are good with money. You would be hard pressed to discover the money from someone who is smart and sneaky.

For people who want to do everything they can to avoid probate - just realize that by avoiding probate you are also avoiding oversight. So if you have named a bad trustee, it will just be that much harder to prove that they in fact stole the money.

If your heirs find themselves in a situation where they think that money has been stolen from an estate or trust, the first remedy is an accounting. Unfortunately there is very little satisfaction in this because it can take years and can be very costly. It is not uncommon for this type of litigation to start at about $40,000.

The best way to avoid estate and trust litigation after you are gone is to really think about the people you name as fiduciaries. If you can't trust anyone, there are plenty of independent fiduciaries that you can hire.

Friday, April 16, 2010

How to Avoid Estate Litigation - Communication

Sometimes there is no preventing an estate litigation. When a family member steals items from the estate, or when the Will is poorly drafting making it confusing, litigation is sure to follow.

However, most good estate attorneys will tell you, one of the biggest reasons that unnecessary litigation results is due to family members not communicating with each other. Lack of communication by the person in charge of the estate leads the other family members to believe that the executor (or administrator) is hiding something. More often than not, the person in charge is just too busy or overwhelmed. Things get said which are better left unsaid, and then the worst of all situations arises - it no longer is about getting what you are entitled to under the Will, but about how Mom or Dad always loved the other one more.

Once the administration of an estate is no longer about getting through the difficult administration process, but about opening old family wounds, people seem more than happy to hire aggressive litigators to settle the score. In the long run, this ALWAYS costs the estate far more. It costs the estate more money in attorneys' fees and it costs the family any semblance of family unity. It is rare that siblings, or cousins, will ever get along again after there has been an estate litigation.

Many times, you do not need to hire an attorney to handle the probate and administration of a loved one's estate. However, if you find yourself overwhelmed, you must not just sit and wait. It will cost you far more than money. A qualified estate administration attorney can guide you through the process. Moreover, the person named as executor is not individually responsible for paying for the fees - it comes from the estate off the top. After all, it is in everyone's interest to make sure Mom and Dad's wishes are carried out.