Thursday, December 5, 2013
Calling it a "matter of first impression," an intermediate appellate court in Pennsylvania has ruled that a woman's renunciation of her interest in a dissolved marital support trust was a transfer "for less than fair consideration," thus triggering ineligibility when she entered a nursing home and applied for Medicaid.
As reported in Schell v. Pa. Department of Public Welfare, decided December 4, 2013 by the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court, a testamentary trust was dissolved in 2009, leaving approximately $300,000 to be distributed to the settlor's widow. The widow formally renounced her interest in the distribution, permitting the sum to be divided equally between the couple's two children, one of whom was disabled. Two years later, in 2011, the widow entered a nursing home and applied for Medical Assistance.
While DPW accepted the widow's "hardship" argument regarding the half distributed to the disabled daughter, the Court upheld DPW's challenge to the distribution of the other half to the son. The Court rejected the widow's argument that the penalty period could not apply to a trust created more than five years before her nursing home admission, on the ground that the key event was termination of the trust within the Medicaid lookback window:
"Once the trust was dissolved, Petitioner became entitled to any remaining income and principal therein. This income and principal was available for Petitioner to use for her support, but she made an affirmative decision not to receive the same, without any good cause explanation for so doing. . . . Upon Petitioner’s renunciation, the trustee distributed half of the remaining income and principal from the trust, $151,231.76, to her son. Petitioner received nothing in return, and, thus, the [Bureau of Hearings and Appeals] properly concluded that this transfer was for less than fair market value, thereby resulting in the imposition of a penalty period of 582 days."
Sunday, November 10, 2013
So-called "Slayer Rules" bar a murderer from inheriting from his victim, and often apply not only to intestate succession but also to gifts made under wills or nonprobate transfers. The bar may arise by common law, often rooted in equity, or statute.
As Harvard Law Professor Robert Sitkoff summarizes well in his 9th edition (Dukeminier) of Wills, Trusts & Estates, "Nearly every state has enacted a statute dealing with the rights of a killer in the estate of a victim, but the details of these statutes vary considerably and often leave gaps to be resolved by the courts."
However, states have also been expanding the notion of "no profit" from wrongdoing to include abusers -- and theories regarding elder abuse appear to be part of the reason.
For example, in a 2013 case, the Washington Supreme Court analyzed application of a 2009 amendment of that state's slayer statute to include "abusers," defined as "any person who participates, either as a principal or an accessory before the fact, in the willful and unlawful financial exploitation of a vulnerable adult." The court concluded in a 5-4 decision that the date of filing of a petition to declare a beneficiary an abuser serves as the trigger for timing questions.
The Washington case involved allegations made by three surviving children against their father's second wife. The father was in his late eighties when he married the younger woman, who was younger by fifty years. The history of the case includes a discussion of the father's dementia, and allegations the wife made large transfers to herself and others before his death. See In re Estate of Haviland, 301 P.3d 31 (Wash. 2013).
In 2012, Michigan amended its slayer statute to include abusers, as part of a series of changes to state laws reportedly intended to provide better protection for elderly and vulnerable adults. Cooley Law Professor Linda Kisabeth analyzes the Michigan changes in her recent article "Slayer Statutes and Elder Abuse: Good Intentions, Right Results? Does Michigan's Amended Slayer Statute Do Enough to Protect the Elderly?" in 26 Quinnipiac Prob. L. J. 273 (2013).
And for an interesting alternative take on slayer laws in their more traditional application, to "murderers," see the 2013 article by Professor Carla Spivack (Okla.City Law), "Killers Shouldn't Inherit From the Victims -- Or Should They?"
Hat tip to Professor Harvey Feldman for pointing the way to the Washington case.
November 10, 2013 in Cognitive Impairment, Crimes, Dementia/Alzheimer’s, Elder Abuse/Guardianship/Conservatorship, Estates and Trusts, State Cases, State Statutes/Regulations | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
And along that line, I was interested to read in the October 24 issue of the Chronicle of Philanthropy, that AARP Foundation is No. 348 of 400 nonprofits ranked by the Chronicle for "raising the most money from private sources in 2012."
What surprised me was an asterisk denoting 2012 as the first year that AARP Foundation was on the list. AARP Foundation reported $61,600,212 in "private support" for 2012, a number that represents a 36.4% increase over the previous year. At the head of the list was United Way Worldwide with just under $4 billion in private support, with Fidelity Charitable coming in at #2 with $3.2 billion.
The issue includes background on Fidelity Charitable's growth, pointing out that it was founded 22 years ago and recent growth is likely due to the "number of affluent Americans who are putting stock-market gains to work in their charitable giving."
According to the Chronicle, the rankings "reflect cash and product donations as well as stock, land and other gifts from individuals, corporations, and foundations." Further, the Chronicle explains the ranking is "designed to show which groups do best in appealing to donors," and therefore income from non-gift sources is not counted. Future pledges are also not counted.
Despite gains for individual organizations such as AARP Foundation and others, according to the Chronicle, overall the 400 rated charities "grew just 4 percent, slightly more than half the gain in 2011."
AARP Foundation has identified four priority areas where it hopes to have the greatest impact in helping older persons: hunger, income, housing and isolation, with the work in these areas supported by a "longstanding commitment to legal advocacy on behalf of older Americans everywhere." For more on AARP Foundation's legal advocacy roles, see here.
Thursday, October 31, 2013
In Hughes v. McCarthy, decided October 25, 2013, the Sixth Circuit reversed a distict court judgment and approved the right of an Ohio Medicaid applicant to receive coverage for her nursing home care, without penalties tied to her husband's purchase of a single premium annuity. The husband's actuarily sound annuity named himself as the primary beneficiary, using $175,000 from his IRA account.
By the way, in reaching its decision, the Sixth Circuit appellate court cites analysis from National Senior Citizens Law Center's Eric Carlson, pointing to his chapter in Matthew Bender's Long-Term Care Advocacy treatise.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there are now appellate decisions from five circuits approving Medicaid eligibility based on specific facts involving spousal annuities: the 2d Circuit (Lopes case), 3rd Circuit (James case), 6th Circuit (Hughes case), 8th Circuit (Geston case), and 10th Circuit (Morris case). Am I missing any key appellate cases in this fast moving arena?
For links to several of these cases, see my September post on the Geston case.
Friday, October 25, 2013
This semester in my course on Wills, Trusts & Estates we have talked about the trend in modern cases to resolve conflicts over wills and trusts by attempting to respect the "intent" of the testator or settlor, even when imperfectly expressed in a written document. But, there are often lines beyond which courts will not go to supply missing words or resolve ambiguity.
In Estate of George Zeevering, decided by an intermediate appellate court in Pennsylvania on September 26, 2013, the court was facing an incomplete do-it-yourself will. The testator had not consulted with a lawyer. He attempted to make specific bequests. One bequest was deemed a "nullity" because the property was already titled in the names of the decedent and a son as joint tenants with right of survivorship. The father also stated that the "failure of this will to provide any distribution" to three of his daughters was "intentional."
However, there was no provision made in the will for any residuary and the residuary estate, after payments of debts, totaled over $200,000.
The appellate court upheld the distribution of the residuary to all of the children:
"[I]t was proper for the orphans' court to conclude that where the intent of the testator is not clear from the will, where the will fails to dispose of a decdent's entire estate, and where the will fails to provide a residuary clause, the residuary estate is to be distributed under intestacy laws."
Wednesday, October 23, 2013
Powers of Attorney (POAs) are a key tool in estate planning and Medicaid planning. A thoughtfully drafted POA can avoid the need for a guardianship, for example, and thus avoid delays, embarrassment and greater expense for a principal who later becomes incapacitated.
Unfortunately, POAs can also be a tool for misuse by agents who can't resist the temptation to help themselves, rather than their principals. For a number of years, states have been struggling to balance utility against risk.
In Pennsylvania, for example, prior to 1999, statutory law governing POAs permitted principals to grant agents the authority to make gifts. Civil case law interpreted such gift-giving authority, unless expressly limited, as permitting agents to make "self-gifts." Even if the agent's self-gifting put the principal in serious financial jeopardy, some prosecutors declined to prosecute. Following a series of troubling reports and cases, in 1999 the Pennsylvania legislature amended state law to declare that all agents appointed under POAs were subject to specific fiduciary duties. The change also imposed a statutory presumption of limited gift authority (tied to annual federal gift tax exclusions) unless the principal expressly granted the agent "unlimited" gift authority.
Concern about misuse of powers of attorney has grown on a nationwide basis,especially after high profile cases such as that of New York heiress Brooke Astor, where her son used a POA to sell off artwork and other valuable property, while reportedly keeping his mother isolated from friends.
Even before the Brooke Astor case came to light, academics, legislators, judges and practitioners worked together in the Uniform Law Commission to propose amendments to statutory authority governing POAs, resulting in the Uniform Power of Attorney Act of 2006 (UPOAA), which superseded prior uniform law proposals. The UPOAA attempts to rebalance risk and power, or as the Commission summarizes:
"The UPOAA seeks to preserve the durable power of attorney as a low-cost, flexible, and private form of surrogate decision making while deterring use of the power of attorney as a tool for financial abuse of incapacitated individuals. It contains provisions that encourage acceptance of powers of attorney by third persons, safeguard incapacitated principals, and provide clearer guidelines for agents."
Adoption of the UPOAA has been fairly slow. As of today, only 13 states plus the U.S. Virgin Islands, have enacted the UPOAA.
In 2013, legislatures in Mississippi (H.B. 468) and Pennsylvania (S.B. 620) are considering adoption. In Pennsylvania, the need for clarification has been heightened by reaction to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's opinion in Vine v. Commonwealth, 9 A.3d 1150 (Pa. 2010), where a POA was signed by a hospitalized principal, and used by the husband/agent to make self-benefiting changes to his wife's retirement accounts, while his wife was incapacitated.
Court practice and enforcement policies on POAs, guardianships and elder abuse are also under consideration by the Pennsylvania Elder Law Task Force (2013), chaired by Justice Debra Todd of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
In Pennsylvania, views on what changes to POA laws are necessary differ in small or large ways among bankers, estate attorneys, elder law attorneys and district attorneys, just to name a few of the interested parties.
The scholarship of law professors has been important to the debate over proper use of POAs, including two articles by Valparaiso Law Professor Linda Whitton, "Durable Powers of Attorney as Alternatives to Guardianship: Lessons We Have Learned" and "The New Power of Attorney Act: Balancing Protection of the Principal, the Agent and Third-Persons."
By the way, when I first drafted this post, I titled it "The Problem(s) with Powers of Attorney." Overnight, I rethought that title, because many POAs are never abused and agents frequently go above and beyond in performing uncompensated services, including financial management, for aging principals. I therefore retitled the post. What law reform movements are attempting to do is reduce the potential for abuse. Human nature being what it is, there is probably no law that can prevent abuse by a wrongly motivated agent. Who to trust with powers granted under a POA will always be an important matter for families to consider and discuss with their legal and financial advisors.
October 23, 2013 in Advance Directives/End-of-Life, Current Affairs, Estates and Trusts, Ethical Issues, Medicaid, Property Management, State Cases, State Statutes/Regulations | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Thursday, October 17, 2013
I have to admit that I pass over a fair number of opportunities to write in this Blog about problems in nursing homes. Experience tells me that nursing homes are on the front lines of the care battle, are heavily regulated (for good reasons), and are trying to do a tough job with ever decreasing resources. There are problems, but the problems also exist with other forms of facility-based care that don't receive the same attention by regulators and the media.
But today's USA Today's article on "Thefts From Nursing Home Trust Funds Target the Elderly," addresses a form of abuse that is particularly troublesome, in part because it should be darn easy to prevent with proper accounting safeguards for client funds. Here's the opening to the story:
"The administrator at the Vicksburg Convalescent Center knew something was wrong when she saw the receipt: a $90 debit from a resident's trust fund account for a pair of designer jeans.
Of all the elderly residents at the 100-bed nursing home, Amy Brown figured, this one was especially unlikely to spend his savings on pricey pants.
Both of his legs had been amputated."
As Kim Dayton reminds us in her separate post, "October is Residents' Rights Month." Of course, abuse is wrong on any day of the year.
Sunday, September 15, 2013
New York City, Two Wills, 100+ Year-Old Testator, $300 Million Estate: Can You Guess Where This is Going?
Bingo. Although this time the court case (cases?) is not about Brooke Astor. This time the tragic subject is another heiress, the reclusive Huguette Clark. The will contest case is scheduled to start jury selection on September 17.
Thanks to Professor Ann Murphy, Gonzaga School of Law, for pointing us to the September 15 New York Times article by Anemona Hartocollis, "The Two Wills of the Heiress Huguette Clark."
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
In the most recent federal appellate court ruling on spousal annuities as a Medicaid planning tool, the 8th Circuit ruled on September 10, 2013 that under existing Medicaid law, the wife's irrevocable spousal annuity (purchased before the husband's application for Medicaid, using $400,000 of the couple's savings) was not a countable resource, and therefore did not make the applicant-husband ineligible for Medicaid.
The 8th Circuit in Geston v. Anderson cites Lopes v. Department of Social Services, 696 F.3d 180 (2d Cir. 2012) and James v. Richman, 547 F.3d 214 (3d Cir. 2008) as support for the decision that the annuity in question must be treated as the community spouse's unearned income, and thus exempt from treatment as a resource available to the applicant spouse.
Hat tip to Robert Clofine, Esq. for latest news.
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
From a search on SSRN for recent academic articles using the words "Medicaid Planning":
Sean Bleck, Barbara Isenhour & John A. Miller (University of Idaho), "Preserving Wealth and Inheritance Through Medicaid Planning for Long-Term Care," (last revised 3/8/2013)
Gerry W. Beyer (Texas Tech) & Kerri G. Nipp, "Updated Primer on Lady Bird Deeds," (3/1/2012)
Diane Lourdes Dick (Seattle University School of Law), "Tax and Economic Policy Responses to the Medicaid Long-Term Care Financing Crisis: A Behavioral Economics Approach," (11/21/2010)
David Bernstein (U.S. Treasury Department), "A Discussion of Medicaid Eligibility Rules and Potential Reforms," (11/26/2008)
Richard K. Kaplan (University of Illinois), "Retirement Planning's Greatest Gap: Funding Long-Term Care," (6/22/2007)
Marshall B. Kapp (Florida State University), "Medicaid Planning, Estate Recovery, and Alternatives for Long-Term Care Financing: Identifying the Ethical Issues," (12/22/2006)
Certainly many big names, but a bit surprising not to find a larger number of recent articles?
Monday, September 9, 2013
Recently a colleague described an estate planning dispute. After the death of the first spouse, it came out that the surviving spouse had never read the couple's estate plan, but had signed the documents in the attorney's office when they were presented. The individual failed to realize the documents were not entirely consistent with what the survivor believed to be the couple's plan. The problem may be hard to solve now that the first spouse has passed. Why would someone sign estate planning documents without reading them?
In this instance, the individual in question, a successful entrepreneur, was dyslexic; reportedly it would have taken the individual hours to read the will or trust carefully, and although the individual planned to read the documents upon returning home, that did not happen.
I suspect this happens far more often than lawyers would like to believe.
As explained by the International Dyslexia Association (IDA), dyslexia is a "language-based learning disability." According to the IDA, an estimated 15 to 20% of the population has a language-based learning disability, with some estimates suggesting one in nine individuals can be classified as having a severe disability. Dyslexia can involve a cluster of symptoms, but is most commonly associated with difficulty in reading.
According to some researchers, dyslexia may also by associated with problems in oral communication. For example, IDA advises:
"People with dyslexia can also have problems with spoken language, even after they have been exposed to good language models in their homes and good language instruction in school. They may find it difficult to express themselves clearly, or to fully comprehend what others mean when they speak. Such language problems are often difficult to recognize, but they can lead to major problems in school, in the workplace, and in relating to other people. The effects of dyslexia reach well beyond the classroom."
It is possible that by the time people get to the estate planning phase of life, they have developed or learned individual strategies for coping with dyslexia. Or, they may have become experts in hiding the fact of their dyslexia.
As lawyers, perhaps it is incumbent upon us to inquire tactfully about each client's comfort level in reading, especially in reading often-complex estate planning documents. Lawyers can offer alternatives to a formal "signing" session that puts pressure on even the strongest readers to sign without informed understanding of the documents.
Strategies may include remembering to provide all clients with quiet time to read the documents, before any signing session is planned. The lawyer can also "chart" the estate plan, to provide a pictorial image of the plan for clients. Lawyers and their staff can be patient in reviewing each aspect of the plan carefully, also involving the clients with conversation and dialogue (rather than monologues). I'm sure experienced practitioners and academics have developed a whole host of key strategies that can assist not only those with dyslexia, but those with other common barriers to understanding. Is dyslexia an understudied phenomenon in attorney-client relations? "Comments" open below.
And before anyone brushes off the topic as not relevant to "their" clients, let's remember that dyslexia can be present with highly successful people, and thus there is the potential for impact on families with significant estates.
Tuesday, September 3, 2013
The New York City Bar is hosting an evening program on October 24, 2013 on Tax & Estate Planning under the Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012. The CLE program will be available in multiple formats, including a live Webcast.
The program description:
"Estate planning has become more complicated as a result of the new tax law, especially in decoupled states such as New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. Preparing an estate plan involves the interplay of the Federal estate tax, the state estate tax, portability, higher income tax rates, basis step-up, and asset protection. This course will cover the provisions of the new law and how the new law and its interaction with state law affects the planning for clients with various size estates. Income tax issues including the benefits of the Roth conversion under the new law will also be discussed."
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
We are seeing a lot of information coming out from the federal government as a result of the Windsor ruling. Most recently, a colleague sent me a link from the IRS site with Answers to Frequently Asked Questions for Same-Sex Couples (last updated July 2, 2013). Among the 8 FAQ (in no particular order) are: "Can same-sex partners who are legally married for state law purposes file federal tax returns using a married filing jointly or married filing separately status?"; "Can a taxpayer use the head-of-household filing status if the taxpayer’s only dependent is his or her same-sex partner?"; and "If a taxpayer adopts the child of his or her same-sex partner as a second parent or co-parent, may the taxpayer (“adopting parent”) claim the adoption credit for the qualifying adoption expenses he or she pays or incurs to adopt the child?".
Meanwhile, over at Social Security, Acting Commissioner Carolyn W. Colvin issued a statement on August 9th "that Social Security is now processing some retirement spouse claims for same-sex couples and paying benefits where they are due." SSA offers several articles on benefits for same-sex couples.
The U.S. Department of Labor (by the way, they have a nifty little intro page about their upcoming 100 year anniversary) issued a revision to Fact Sheet 28F that includes in the definitions spouses in same-sex marriages. LexisNexis Legal Newsroom on Labor and Employment Law, has an interesting article on the extension of FMLA as a result of Windsor, written by Barran Liebman LLP attorneys.
Further, on August 14th, 2013, the Department of Defense announced that it was extending spousal benefits to same-sex spouses of civilian employees as well as uniformed service members. The DoD indicated the benefits would be available no later than September 3, 2013 for those with a valid marriage certificate.
"Entitlements such as TRICARE enrollment, basic allowance for housing (BAH) and family separation allowance are retroactive to the date of the Supreme Court's decision. Any claims to entitlements before that date will not be granted. For those members married after June 26, 2013, entitlements begin at the date of marriage."
The Secretary of Defense sent a memo that explained the actions and noted that since not all jurisdictions allow same-sex marriage, the DoD will issue a "non-chargeable leave" policy for military personnel who have to travel to a state to be married, with an immediately-effective memo supplementing the existing leave policy.
Stay tuned-we will keep you posted with further updates.
Photo by Kim Dayton, © 2013
Tuesday, August 20, 2013
Completed by the Uniform Law Commission in 2009, and thus opening the window for adoption by state legislatures, the Uniform Real Property Transfer on Death Act allows an owner of real property to pass the property directly to a beneficiary on the owner's death, without probate. The property passes by means of a recorded TOD or "Transfer on Death" deed. This seems like an uncontroversial and helpful clarification in the law. Any comments, especially from those who see potential problems? (Add your comments below -- I'll post them soon.)
Jurisdictions that have so far adopted the law are Hawaii, Illinois, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, Virginia, and most recently, D.C. Legislation is also pending in Alaska, Connecticut, Maryland, South Dakota, Washington and West Virginia.
In D.C., there is an Estates, Trust & Probate Bar Lunch program scheduled to discuss the new law, for September 18, 2013.
Wednesday, August 14, 2013
In the latest case to address the effect of mandatory arbitration provisions in nursing home contracts, the Pennsylvania Superior Court (an intermediate court of appeals) has concluded as a matter of first impression that a wrongful death claim is not controlled by the contractual language. Tracking the history of Pennsylvania's statute and distinguishing survival claims from wrongful death claims, the court concluded that "wrongful death actions are derivative of decedents' injuries but are not derivative of decedents' rights." Therefore, the arbitration agreement, signed by the resident's daughter as an agent, was not binding on the other claimants under Pennsylvania's wrongful death statute. The agent/daughter had expressly disclaimed and renounced any rights to a recovery from the wrongful death claim, and therefore was not a claimant in the suit.
The decision offers discussion of "extra-jurisdictional authority" on the effect of other states' wrongful death statutes on arbitration agreements, including decisions in Texas, Florida, Washington, Mississippi, Utah, Illinois, Missouri, and Ohio.
For the full opinion in Pisano v. Extendicare Homes, Inc, issued August 12, 2013, see here.
Hat tip to Jeffrey Marshall, Esq. for alerting us on this interesting decision.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Consumer Voice hosts two-part Webinar Series on Guardianship, Financial Powers of Attorney, and Advance Care Planning
Join Us for a Two-Part Webinar Series on
Guardianship, Financial Powers of Attorney, and Advance Care Planning
The National Consumer Voice for Quality Long-Term Care (the Consumer Voice) is hosting a two-part webinar series designed to give advocates, ombudsmen, consumers, families, providers and others a deeper understanding of guardianships, financial powers of attorney and advance care planning. Participants will gain a basic understanding of these three important legal protections and how best to work with and support an individual who has a guardian or agent. Suggestions and approaches for handling challenging situations will also be covered.
The series is designed for both beginners and those with advanced knowledge!
Series Topics and Dates:
- Guardianship, Financial Powers of Attorney and Advance Care Planning: What You Need to Know (Beginner/Refresher) - March 13, 2012; 3:00 - 4:30pm ET
Three national experts from the ABA Commission on Law and Aging will provide an overview of guardianship, financial powers of attorney, and advance care planning. For each of these topics, speakers will present the fundamentals, explain the individual’s rights, and discuss the roles and responsibilities of guardians, agents, nursing home or assisted living providers and staff, ombudsmen, and consumer advocates.
- Guardianship, Financial Powers of Attorney and Advance Care Planning: Taking it to the Next Level (Advanced) - April 4, 2012; 3:00 - 4:30pm ET
What do you do when a nursing home resident with unclear decision-making capacity disagrees with her daughter who is the agent? What happens when a guardian wants to make a decision that the resident adamantly opposes? Members of a panel representing the legal community, advocacy and providers will discuss how to approach and resolve these and other difficult situations.
- Consumer Advocates: $35 per session or $65 for the series
- Providers: $99 per session or $175 for the series
- Recording (mp3 by e-mail): $15 per session or $25 for the series
Monday, November 14, 2011
Politics, the weak economy and low interest rates have combined to create one of the best environments for estate planning in a generation, according to experts. “If individuals are trying to transition assets to the next generation, we currently have a perfect storm — in a good sense — to do it,” said David Scott, vice president of advanced sales for Penn Mutual Life Insurance Co. The elements of that perfect storm begin with a $5 million exemption from estate taxes ($10 million for married couples), which was part of the Middle Class Tax Relief Act of 2010 enacted in December. The value of real estate assets and securities are at low levels, making it more attractive to give such assets to other individuals. And with interest rates near zero, wealthy clients also can make loans to their children and to trusts at a very low cost.
The Republicans, fresh off their midterm-election victories last year, agreed to reinstate the estate tax for 2011-12, after it had lapsed in 2010, but raised the exemption to $5 million per person and $10 million for married couples. The unused portion of the exemption is portable between spouses as long as an estate tax return is filed within nine months of a person's death. The tax rate on amounts over that threshold is 35%.
Source/more: Investment News (requires registration)
Friday, September 16, 2011
Oct. 19-21, 2011
Loews Don CeSar Hotel
St. Pete Beach, Fla.
In its 13th year of teaching excellence in the field of special needs trusts, the National Conference will provide an in-depth review and discussion on both basic and advanced levels of the major issues presented in the creation, administration, and monitoring of special needs trusts. Attorneys, trustees, estate planners, financial advisors, CPAs, and special needs professionals will benefit from attending this cutting-edge seminar that will cover critical topics about special needs trusts.
The Pre-Conferences (Wednesday, Oct. 19, 2011)
The National Conference is offering two pre-conferences this year. One pre-conference workshop will be oriented toward legal assistants, case managers, financial/investment staff, property managers and related professional; the other pre-conference workshop is designed for issues for pooled trust administrators and attorneys. Please note: For the pre-conferences, tuition includes pre-conference materials on a flash drive, as well as individual, per person admission to all sessions and refreshment breaks. If purchasing attendance to both pre-conferences, tuition will include all of the above for both pre-conferences. If purchasing attendance to only one individual pre-conference, tuition will include all of the above only for the purchased pre-conference.
The Conference (Oct. 20-21, 2011)
The National Conference is hosting a two-day main conference offering excellent speakers and support materials on basic and advanced topics for a variety of professionals who work in the field. Please note: For the main conference, tuition includes conference materials on a flash drive, as well as individual, per-person admission to all sessions, continental breakfasts, refreshment breaks, lunches, and the attendee reception. If purchasing attendance to both days of the main conference, tuition will include all of the above for both days. If purchasing attendance to only one individual day of the main conference, tuition will include all of the above only for the purchased day. However, the attendee reception is only included with Thursday individual day tuition purchase or Thursday/Friday both day tuition purchase.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
The remains of chess champion Bobby Fischer are to be exhumed in order to settle a paternity claim, an Icelandic court has ruled. The Supreme Court in Reykjavik said a tissue sample was needed to prove whether nine-year-old Jinky Young was Fischer's daughter. Fischer, who died in Iceland in 2008, left no will. His estate, estimated to be worth $2 million (£1.4m), has been at the heart of several inheritance claims. Fischer's former wife, relatives and the US government - which claims it is owed taxes - are also involved in the dispute. Ms Young, a Filipina, is the daughter of Marilyn Young, who had a relationship with Fischer. "In order to obtain such a sample it is unavoidable to exhume his body," a court document said. The verdict overturned a ruling by a district court, which said earlier this year that the grounds of the request were not strong enough. Thordur Bogason, lawyer for Marilyn Young and her daughter, said the exhumation was a "last resort", saying they had hoped that blood samples had been kept in an Icelandic hospital. He said they had presented evidence that his clients had received regular payments from Fischer in the years before he died.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Call for Papers – Future of Elder Law Practice
William Mitchell Law Review, Vol. 37, Issue I (Fall 2010)
The William Mitchell Law Review is proud to dedicate its first issue of the 2010-11 academic year to Elder Law in its upcoming Volume 37 (Fall 2010). We are currently seeking papers that examine the future of elder law practice. Submissions may either take the form of shorter commentaries or longer law review articles. The deadline for submissions has been set for July 1, 2010.
The William Mitchell Law Review is highly regarded both regionally and nationally. Our Law Review recently ranked twenty-second in citations by judges and ranked fifty-seventh in citations by other law journals, culminating in an overall ranking of seventieth. Over the years, the William Mitchell Law Review has featured the works of various scholars and practitioners such as Congressman Tim Penny, and former Vice President Walter Mondale. The William Mitchell Law Review has also published nationally known legal experts ranging from Philip Bruner, to Supreme Court Justices Sandra Day O’Connor, Byron White, and Harry Blackmun. Now, we would like to invite you to join us to publish in our upcoming volume.
Please direct inquiries to Executive Editor Sanjee Weliwitigoda at firstname.lastname@example.org. Please send submissions to email@example.com or mail them to our Editorial Office. Please note that the Law Review prefers electronic submissions.
March 17, 2010 in Current Affairs, Discrimination, Elder Abuse/Guardianship/Conservatorship, Estates and Trusts, Ethical Issues, Health Care/Long Term Care, Housing, Medicaid, Medicare, Property Management, Retirement, Social Security | Permalink | TrackBack (0)