Wills, Trusts & Estates Prof Blog

Charles Manson’s Pen Pal Files the Killers Last Will and Testament in Court After Saying ‘He’ll Go into the Ring’ If Anyone Challenges the Document

Michael Channels was recently revealed as the anonymous pen pal to whom Charles Manson gave his will. Channels starting writing to Manson in the ‘90s and finally received a response in 1997. Channels visited with Manson in prison five years later. The 2002 meeting went well enough that Manson drafted a will naming Channels as the sole beneficiary to his estate. There are estimates valuing Manson’s estate in the millions of dollars after accounting for his music rights, artwork, and various memorabilia. Channels, apparently a fan of the cult leader, has a secret shrine dedicated to him and touts himself as an expert on Manson and the Manson family. Channels has said that he is prepared to fight anyone who wants to challenge his claims.

See Abigail Miller, Charles Manson’s Pen Pal Files the Killers Last Will and Testament in Court After Saying ‘He’ll Go into the Ring’ If Anyone Challenges the Document, DailyMail.com, November 28, 2017.

Special thanks to Joel C. Dobris (Professor of Law, UC Davis School of Law) for bringing this article to my attention.

Charles Manson's Pen Pal, Grandson Battle For His Body

Jason Freeman, who claims to be Charles Manson’s grandson, and longtime pen pal Michael Channels are both in the process of attempting to claim Manson’s body. Channels’s wishes may take precedent over Freeman’s, as Channels actually has Manson’s original will. As of now, Channels has informed the Sheriff that he is the executor of Manson’s estate and has already filed the will in probate court.

See Charles Manson's Pen Pal, Grandson Battle For His Body, TMZ, November 29, 2017.

CLE on 2017 Arizona Asset Protection Symposium

The State Bar of Arizona is holding a conference entitled, 2017 Arizona Asset Protection Symposium, which will take place on December 1, 2017, at the Daniel J. McAuliffe CLE Center in Phoenix, AZ. Provided below is a description of the event:

Topics covered include: Jay Adkisson and Ike Devji present their annual Arizona Asset Protection Symposium covering a wide variety of practical asset protection and wealth preservation issues for attorneys and advisors.

-       Ethical and liability issues for planners

-       Essential Business Risk Management

-       Captive Insurance – cases and uses

-       Arizona Statutory Exemptions

-       Understanding the UVTA  - voidable transactions and fraudulent conveyance

-       Bankruptcy - A creditor’s  rights and perspective

-       Common Asset Protection Blunders by planners and clients

-       Practical Application – A look recent cases, case studies wins and failures 

Faculty:

Jay Adkisson, Riser Adkisson, LLP

Ike Devji, Esq.

*For more information about this program's faculty, please check out the faculty biographies page, available for download in the 'Materials' tab.

Lunch is included with your registration fee.  If you have a dietary restriction (gluten allergy, nut allergy, vegetarian etc.), please contact Sarah Fluke at [email protected].

What to Do When There’s No Clear Successor

Succession planning for businesses should ideally be an organized and systematic endeavor oriented toward turning over managerial responsibilities and ownership to a known successor. Though this is an unavoidable and crucial process, many closely held companies are completely unprepared for this event. Despite this, there are a number of potential short-term solutions for business owners who have not adequately prepared for their retirement, death, or incapacity. One possibility is interim management. This may consist of bringing in a retired executive or an executive waiting out a non-compete clause. Bringing in a professional to oversee operations may help prevent the forced sale of a business for less than its actual worth.

See Andrew Lohn, What to Do When There’s No Clear Successor, Wealth Management.com, September 12, 2017.

Special thanks to Jim Hillhouse (Professional Legal Marketing (PLM, Inc.) for bringing this article to my attention.

Kylie Jenner Starter Home Sold for Modest Profit

Kylie Jenner is parting ways with her 5,100 sq. ft. Calabasas starter-home. Jenner bought the residence in 2015 for $2.6 million and quickly began substantial renovations. She initially listed the house for $3.3 million, but ended up selling it for $3.15 million to Nikki Eslami, founder of Bellami Hair.

See Kylie Jenner Starter Home Sold for Modest Profit, TMZ, July 21, 2017.

Fiscalini v. Commissioner: Court Finds Part Gift Part Sale in Home Transfer

In Fiscalini v. Commissioner, the Tax Court examined three issues: 1) was the petitioner required to recognize some long-term capital gain on the sale of his home, 2) was he liable under section 6651(a)(1) for the addition to tax, and 3) was the petitioner liable under 6662(a) for the accuracy-related penalty. The court held in the affirmative for all three issues.

See Lewis J. Saret, Fiscalini v. Commissioner: Court Finds Part Gift Part Sale in Home Transfer, Wealth Strategies Journal, August 28, 2017.

Special thanks to Jim Hillhouse (Professional Legal Marketing (PLM, Inc.) for bringing this article to my attention.

CLE on Planning for Incapacity: Financial Powers of Attorney, Health Care Directives, and Ethical Challenges

The American Law Institute is holding a conference entitled, Planning for Incapacity: Financial Powers of Attorney, Health Care Directives, and Ethical Challenges, which will take place on Wednesday, December 6, 2017, via telephone seminar and audio webcast. Provided below is a description of the event:

Why You Should Attend

Do you find yourself going to standard forms to draft durable powers of attorney and health care directives—after carefully constructing a customized will and/or trust to meet your client’s planning objectives? Are you aware of ethical obligations in connection with representing clients with diminishing capacity?

Protecting your client in life is just as important as easing the orderly disposition of property after death. Powers of attorney and health care directives are significant tools that ensure that the clients’ wishes are honored and financial assets are protected while they are incapacitated.

Join experienced estate planners for an in-depth exploration of how to effectively draft and use durable powers of attorney and health care directives. Faculty will also address ethical obligations of attorneys to protect clients’ financial interests and minimize their financial exploitation if clients become unable to conduct their own affairs.

What You Will Learn

Topics of discussion will include:
Financial Powers of Attorney
Health Care Directives
Ethical considerations, including interaction of Model Rules 1.6 and 1.14

Who Should Attend

Estate Planners who represent disabled and elderly clients will benefit from this focus on preserving and managing assets and preserving estate planning goals in the event of disability or other incapacity.

Tuition for the telephone seminar includes a set of electronic course materials and access to the telephone seminar.

Tuition for the webcast includes a set of electronic course materials and access to the webcast.

Under ‘Observation,’ Some Hospital Patients Face Big Bills

Under the current Medicare regime, those requiring inpatient care are covered under Medicare Part A, and those only needing outpatient care are covered under Part B. This difference in classification is important as outpatients can face higher coinsurance, drug, and nursing home costs. For inpatients, after a consecutive three-day stint in a hospital, Medicare covers 100% of skilled nursing costs for 20 days and the majority of total costs for up to 100 days. Medical will not cover these costs for outpatients or inpatients with a stay shorter than the three-day threshold. This has become increasingly problematic as hospitals have started classifying a growing number of patients as outpatients, even when they provide medical services for extended periods of time. These patients are then forced to pay for the entirety of their nursing care expenses. This status classification has previously not been an appealable issue, but this may change with a recent ruling by a federal judge in Connecticut.

See Paula Span, Under ‘Observation,’ Some Hospital Patients Face Big Bills, The New York Times, September 1, 2017.

Special thanks to Lewis Saret (Attorney, Washington, D.C.) for bringing this article to my attention.  

Family Wealth Advisors Get Richer Right Along With Their Clients

As the ranks of extremely affluent continue to swell, those tasked with overseeing their assets are enjoying a similar rise in fortune. According to research performed by UBS Group AG, salaries at firms managing the wealth of the ultra-rich have skyrocketed over the past year. CEOs at family firms saw an average 10% increase in base salary while CIOs received around 8%. Accounting for bonuses, the CEO of the typical family office in North America can now expect to earn over $600,000 per year in compensation.

As these family offices expand and grow in complexity, they begin to resemble hedge funds or small investment banks. With so much at stake, many of these firms have looked to Wall Street to find new talent. Stewart Kesmodel, head of the UBS family office in America, commented that the “family offices which are looking beyond preservation of capital have become more aggressive in their thesis, as well as, the talent they hire for execution.”

See Simone Foxman, Family Wealth Advisors Get Richer Right Along With Their Clients, Financial Advisor, September 12, 2017.

Special thanks to Jim Hillhouse (Professional Legal Marketing (PLM, Inc.) for bringing this article to my attention.

Article on Testamentary Freedom Reaffirmed in the Supreme Court

Brian Sloan recently posted an Article entitled, Testamentary Freedom Reaffirmed in the Supreme Court, Wills, Trusts, & Estates Law eJournal (2017). Provided below is an abstract of the Article:

The case now known as Ilott v The Blue Cross [2017] UKSC 17 was the first time that the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 was considered at the highest judicial level. The Court of Appeal ([2015] EWCA Civ 797, noted [2016] C.L.J. 31) had significantly enhanced the award given to an estranged and “disinherited” but needy daughter (Heather Ilott) at the expense of the charities (the Blue Cross, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) who were the principal beneficiaries under her mother (Melita Jackson)’s will, leaving her with £143,000 out of the £486,000 estate primarily to purchase the council house in which she and her family were living. The Supreme Court unanimously allowed the charities’ appeal, restoring Judge Million’s original £50,000 order. Giving the lead judgment, Lord Hughes reasserted the centrality of testamentary freedom in English Law, emphasised the importance of the Act’s limitation to “reasonable financial provision” for maintenance for non-spouse/civil partner applicants (s. 1(2)(b)), and held that a need for maintenance was a necessary but not sufficient condition for a successful claim. He approved previous case law in holding that maintenance could not “extend to any or everything which it would be desirable for the claimant to have”, but was not limited to “subsistence” either. He also confirmed that the focus of the correct test under the 1975 Act is not on the behaviour of the testatrix, but opined the reasonableness of her decision may still be a significant consideration, as may the extent of any “moral claim” even if that is not a “sine qua non”.