Tuesday, September 2, 2014
Michael Sneeringer (Law Offices of Nelson & Nelson, P.A.) recently published an article entitled, Drafting Attorneys and Litigation Attorneys Need to Collaborate. Provided below is the introduction of the article.
Solo practitioners and smaller law firms practicing trusts and estates law often specialize in either the planning or litigation of estate plans. For some trusts and estates drafting attorneys (“drafting attorney”) the situation often is as follows: (i) take a client that poses problems and hope the case does not lead to litigation down the line (wherein the drafting attorney attempts litigation his or her self); or (ii) simply not take on the engagement at all and pass on the case to a trusts and estates litigator (“litigation attorney”), thereby hoping that the litigation attorney one day returns the favor with a referral. Instead, the drafting attorney should collaborate with the litigation attorney. This relationship is of mutual benefit to both attorneys.
This article provides eight scenarios where the drafting attorney can be of help to the litigation attorney and underscores why collaboration is absolutely necessary.
Monday, September 1, 2014
Jay A. Soled (Rutgers University), Dena Wolf (Independent) and Nathan Arnell (Independent) published an article entitled, Funding Marital Trusts: Mistakes and Their Consequences, Real Property, Probate and Trust Law Journal, Vol. 31. No. 88, 1996. Provided below is the abstract from SSRN:
Mistakes occur in every profession, and attorneys practicing estate administration are not immune from this phenomenon. Funding marital trusts at the death of the first spouse engenders numerous opportunities for mistakes given the complex and technical nature of the tax law and the variety of funding clauses. Mistakes in funding marital trusts remain prevalent and cannot be overstated, as the result is often lengthy litigation and endless estate and gift taxes. Therefore, the practice of estate administration and funding of marital trusts demands an awareness of both the possibility of these errors and the various available remedial options.
Steve R. Akers (Bessemer Trust), recently published an article entitled, ACTEC 2014 Summer Meeting Musings. Provided below is an excerpt from the introduction of the article.
Some of my observations from the 2014 ACTEC Summer Meeting Seminars in Dana Point, California on June 19-21, 2014 are summarized below. (At the request of ACTEC, the summary does not include any discussions at Committee meetings.) This summary does not contain all of the excellent information from the seminars, but merely selected issues from the seminars that I attended. (Recordings of all of the seminars are not yet available.) The summary is based on the presentations at the seminars, but the specific speakers making particular comments typically are not identified.
Special thanks to Jim Hillhouse (Professional Legal Marketing (PLM, Inc.)) for bringing this article to my attention.
Sunday, August 31, 2014
Jeffrey A. Cooper (Quinnipac University School of Law) and John R. Ivimey (Reid and Riege, P.C.) recently published an article entitled, 2013 Developments in Connecticut Estate and Probate Law, 88 Connecticut Bar Journal (2014). Provided below is the abstract from SSRN:
This Article provides a summary of recent developments impacting Connecticut estate planning and probate practice. Part I discusses 2013 legislative developments. Part II surveys selected 2013 case law relevant to the field.
Saturday, August 30, 2014
I recently published an article entitled, A Guide to Fiduciary Selection, Estate Planning Developments for Texas Professionals (July 2014). Provided below is the abstract from SSRN:
Your clients must exercise great care in selecting fiduciaries such as executors, trustees, and agents. These decisions may affect the client and the client’s family members for many years. Decisions regarding the appropriate persons to select are, naturally, for your clients to make. However, you have a duty to explain to your clients the factors they should consider before making designations in wills, trusts and powers of attorney. This article focuses on these considerations.
The article begins with a discussion of legal criteria based on the law of Texas.
The remainder of the article has general application and discusses the factors from a practical standpoint which a client should consider as well as the pros and cons of using a corporate fiduciary and of appointing co-fiduciaries.
Friday, August 29, 2014
Rahul Suresh Sapkal (University of Hamburg Institute of Law and Economics; Erasmus University Rotterdam) recently published an article entitled, From Mother to Daughter: Do Equal Inheritance Property Laws Reform Improves Female Labour Supply, Female and Their Daughter’s Educational Attainments in India? (July 2014). Provided below is the abstract from SSRN:
In 2005, India witnessed a constitutional amendment to the Hindu Succession Act of 1956, giving daughters the equal inheritance rights as sons. However, fives states in India had earlier amended the same Act in favour of daughters. Using this exogenous variation created by legislation on inheritance property rights, I exploit a difference-in-difference estimation strategy to estimate the impact of reform on female education, labour force participation and their daughter’s educational attainment. The study find that women who were exposed to the reform experience increase in their average schooling years and average months of labour force participation. It is interesting to note that this positive effect is also observed for their daughter’s educational attainment. Results obtain from this study are consistent with complementary and equalising effects hypothesis.
Jonathan Strom (J.D./M.B.A. Candidate, Texas Tech University School of Law, May 2015) recently published a comment entitled, Putting Our Trust in the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA): How Creating Trusts for Student-Athletes Can Save the NCAA From Itself, Estate Planning and Community Property Law Journal, Vol. 6 Bk. 2, Summer 2014. Provided below is an excerpt from the introduction of the comment:
“[A]mateurism is not a moral issue; [rather,] it is an economic camouflage for monopoly practice.” This is a harsh reality for the current state of college athletics. Finding the proper balance between maintaining amateurism status and compensating student-athletes is becoming a more controversial issue, with players like Johnny Manziel and Jadeveon Clowney brining in millions of dollars in revenue for their respective schools. Recent lawsuits have forces the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) to go into full defense mode, in hopes to maintain its current status quo.
This Comment addresses the recent issues facing the NCAA; specifically, it discusses the concern surrounding the O’Bannon lawsuit and its impact on player compensation. The O’Bannon lawsuit pertains to the use of student-athletes’ likeness in video games and massive television contracts for profit. Pulitzer Prize winner Taylor Branch ardently argues for compensating student-athletes. Branch asserts that student-athletes deserve compensation apart from college scholarships. Clearly, NCAA change is imminent whether it comes through restructuring or through the court system.
This comment presents a proposal for implementing trusts for student-athletes that will address the issue of compensation. The proposal for the creation of trusts for student-athletes allows the NCAA to address the issue of compensation and still maintain its core objectives. . . .
Thursday, August 28, 2014
Patricia A. Cain (Santa Clara University School of Law) recently published an article entitled, Family Drama: Dangling Inheritances and Promised Lands (2014). Tulsa Law Review, Vol. 49 (2013); Santa Clara Univ. Legal Studies Research Paper No. 10-14. Provided below is the abstract from SSRN:
This paper reviews Hartog’s 2012 book, Someday All this will be Yours: A History of Inheritance and Old Age. Relying on case documents from trial courts in New Jersey in the early twentieth century, Hartog tells the rich stories behind these cases. The cases involve claims by family members, usually sons or daughters, who were promised inheritances in exchange for taking care of an aged parent. Sometimes those promises are enforced and sometimes not. The stories behind the cases, and Hartog’s observations about them. should be of interest to teachers and scholars of wills, trusts, and estates.
William S. Echols (J.D. Candidate, Texas Tech University School of Law, May 2015) recently published a comment entitled, Action in the Chasm: Defining Duties of the Trustee’s Delegates, Estate Planning and Community Property Law Journal, Vol. 6 Bk. 2, Summer 2014. Provided below is the introduction of the comment:
The first question begged by the title, is “what is a chasm?” The answer to that, within the confines of this Comment, is the space that either legislative of judicial action leaves undefined. The specific chasm in this piece is that of the duties owed by a person to whom the trustee delegates fiduciary authority. In most instances, this will be an agent of the trust, whose duties to the beneficiaries are undefined by the contract or the trust instrument, which makes the agent’s liability an open question. This question of liability is an area that remains unanswered by the judiciary and substantially so by legislatures as well.
Wednesday, August 27, 2014
Article on The Public Trust Doctrine and Issues Regarding Estate Planning for the Cervid Breeding Industry
Kirby L. Crow (J.D. Candidate, Texas Tech University School of Law, December 2014) recently published a comment entitled, Oh Deer: The Public Trust Doctrine and Issues Regarding Estate Planning for the Cervid Breeding Industry, Estate Planning and Community Property Law Journal, Vol. 6 Bk. 2, Summer 2014. Provided below is the introduction of the comment:
The purpose of this Comment is to describe different routes that an estate planning professional can take to effectuate an estate plan for a cervid breeding operation, with emphasis on Texas regulations. A cervid is “any member of the deer family, Cervidae . . . characterized by the bearing of antlers in the male or in both sexes.” To begin the analysis, it is critical to understand the history of the industry, the economic impact of the industry, and the current direction of the industry. Next, a discussion of opposition groups, regulating agencies, the unique way that the state holds cervids in trust for the people, and the financial burdens of the cervid breeding industry will help determine what kind of business entity would best serve the owner’s goals and whether a trust would serve as the best estate planning technique for the business.
This Comment will also briefly consider the role of the personal representative and the role of the trustee in the cervid breeding industry. The main objective of this Comment is to demonstrate how different types of business entities establish a cervid breeding operation and why a revocable living trust (as compared to a pet trust) is the best vehicle for a cervid breeding operation to convey an owner/operator’s interest at death.