New York Probate Lawyer Blog

The proper execution or signing of a Last Will in New York requires that the formalities provided by statute be followed. The New York Probate Lawyer Blog has previously discussed these rules. The basic "formal requirements" for the signing and witnessing of a Will are set forth in Estates, Powers and Trusts Law section 3-2.1. Among other provisions, subsection (4) of the statute provides that "there shall be at least two attesting witnesses. . . ."

Thus, when a person dies and his or her Will is filed with the Surrogate's Court for probate, two of the attesting witnesses "must be produced before the Court and examined before a Will is admitted to probate. . . ." Surrogate's Court Procedure Act Section 1404(1).

In most uncontested matters an affidavit signed by the witnesses at the time of the Will execution will satisfy the requirements for examining the Will witnesses. This is the so-called self-proving Will. However, there are instances where a witness affidavit is not prepared at the Will signing or a Will contest requires actual live testimony of the witnesses.

Recently, Surrogate Edward W. McCarty III, of the Surrogate's Court, Nassau County, was presented with a Will that was 19 years old and the petitioner was unable to provide witness affidavits or testimony since one witness was deceased and the other witness could not be located. In Will of Jean Santoro, decided on May 3, 2011 and reported in The New York Law Journal on June 3, 2011, the Surrogate noted that the decedent's Will could not be admitted to probate as an "Ancient Document" since it was "less than 20 years old."

However, the Court became aware that the attorney who drafted Jean Santoro's Will, and who was one of the witnesses, had previously died and that his Will had previously been admitted to probate by the Court. Therefore, Surrogate McCarty ruled that since the deceased witness' signature was already on file with the Court, the petitioner could obtain an expert opinion as to the signature as a witness to the Will in question. The Surrogate also provided that an affidavit from a relative as to the signature of the decedent, Jean Santoro, would help prove the Will's genuiness.

The Santoro case illustrates that Courts generally favor finding the validity of a Will so as to carry out a person's estate plan and preferences for the distribution of his or her property. The Santoro case also shows the importance of up-dating a Will so that the persons involved with its execution are available in the event their testimony is required. Additionally, proper estate planning involves a periodic review of Will and trust provisions and beneficiaries and the selection of executors and trustees.

As noted, it is common for Courts to validate Wills to further a person's apparent testamentary desires. In a recent article by Arden Dale appearing in the Wealth Advisor on June 20, 2011 entitled California Court Gives 'Rogue' Wills More Validity, it was reported that a California court up-held a Will that was written by a decedent's friend while the decedent dictated its term. While courts may tend to overlook minor errors and approve "informal Wills", the article points out that "financial advisors still urge clients to get professional help if they want to change their estate plan."

Continue reading "Probate In New York Can Involve Unusual Circumstances" »

Barron's recently published an article regarding the five of the most common ways problems arise when establishing a trust, illustrating the importance of hiring an experienced New York Trust and Estates Lawyer.

Estate planning can be intimidating because it is a complex area of law that can bring stress to and cause strife among family members. But because of the financial implications, New York estate planning and wills must be taken seriously and require exceptional detail.

While some people only think about the "what am I getting" aspect of a will, much more goes into the preparation and planning. One area that must be addressed is minimizing the taxes that survivors must pay. And for the family member making such preparations, there are many questions to answer, such as whether a living trust or a will would be more beneficial and who should be appointed as executor of a New York estate.

Working with an experienced attorney that has handled countless probate matters is essential. Executors are responsible for collecting and distributing assets, paying taxes, debts and claims and handling other affairs. But the executor has many legal responsibilities and must be clear on how to proceed in accordance with New York law.

Barron's believes it is easy to mess up the three biggest questions in trust and estate planning: Who gets what, how do you minimize taxes and who is in control of the trust. On to the tips:

• Faulty records: Most states require trustees to provide regular accountings to the beneficiaries, which means keeping detailed records of income, assets and distributions. Failing to keep proper records could result in a lawsuit later on by a beneficiary.
Tip: Assemble a reliable team with a money manager, trust lawyer and tax pro.
• Failure to diversify: Trustees may be tempted to sit on a big chunk of stock that has served the trust well for years, especially if shares are company owned or run by the dearly departed, but it's a bad idea, the magazine says. Trustees are obligated to thoroughly diversify investments and it's a leading cause of litigation against trustees.
Tip: Read and follow the guidelines in your state regarding Prudent Investment Standards.
• Biased distributions: Trustees owe a fiduciary duty to all beneficiaries, including remaindermen, the down-the-line relatives who will receive principal once the trust has dissolved. So, making the right financial decisions is crucial.
Tip: Once you have made a distribution decision, set out in writing the reasons, including supporting documentation.
• Expecting a pay day: Individual trustees tend to assume they are going to get paid a trustee fee quickly. But it takes a lot of time to be paid, and time is given to beneficiaries to object to the payment.
Tip: Have the fee discussion early on and settle on appropriate payments. Commissions are usually set according to state statutes.
• False sense of safety: One may feel honored to be asked to be a trustee, but the job takes on a lot of legal risks and liabilities.

Continue reading "Five Biggest Ways to Bungle a Trust in New York and Tips to Prevent Them" »

CNN recently reported about a woman whose aunt gave nearly her entire estate of $300,000 to Family Radio, the non-profit California station that broadcast unsuccessful predictions about the end of the world.

Contested wills in New York probate court can be difficult because they require specific requirements other than a family member feeling slighted by a loved one who passed away. New York Estate and Will Lawyers have handled an untold number of these cases and are well-versed in this area of law. Whether it's contesting a will or planning an estate, it is a good idea to seek professional guidance.

Family Radio's owner, Harold Camping, has grown to celebrity status in recent months with his predictions that May 21 would mark the return to Earth of Jesus Christ, which would lead to a rapture of believers followed by five months of hell on Earth by non-believers before the world ends. His followers traveled across the country in RVs with large signs plastered on the sides, picketed busy intersections and even purchased billboards in foreign countries proclaiming their predictions. Camping has now said he miscalculated the date, which he now believes is October 21.

As CNN also reported, the non-profit organization is operated largely by donations and brought in $80 million between 2005 and 2009, including $18 million in 2009 alone.

Apparently, $300,000 of these donations came from a Queens woman who died in May 2010. As news of the doomsday prediction made news leading up to May 21, a relative of the woman said she and her sister were each left only $25,000 from her aunt's estate and the rest went to Family Radio.

While she believes her aunt was comforted by the radio's discussions about heavenly treasures, she didn't know it was the same group that was working people into a frenzy about the end of the world. Had her aunt lived to see the prediction fail, the aunt may have had second thoughts and might not have left her money to the organization. While the woman said she wasn't in need of the money, other family members could have benefited from a larger bequest.

Sometimes family members can successfully challenge whether the loved one had the mental capacity to make the decisions they made in preparing their end-of-life documents. It's also sometimes possible that executors and others involved in helping a person plan their will can unjustly influence their decisions.

These issues require court action and should only be tackled with an attorney who has the experience necessary to protect your inheritance and the integrity of a loved one's estate.

Continue reading "Doomsday Profit Gets Inheritance In Queens Woman's Will" »

The New York Probate Lawyer Blog has talked about many different situations where disputes and competing interests among family members can arise. For example, when a person prepares his or her estate plan many decisions must be made regarding the details and provisions in documents such as a Last Will, Living Will, Health Care Proxy, Power of Attorney and Living Trust. The selection of beneficiaries, executors, trustees and agents are usually made within the context of family dynamics where the personal preferences of the person creating the documents is mixed with the differing interests and sometimes long-standing antagonism existing between intended beneficiaries or appointees.

In a related situation, a person may become incapacitated due to an accident or medical condition such as dementia or heart ailment. It may be necessary to seek the assistance of the Court by applying for the appointment of an Article 81 Guardian. In many of these cases, particularly where the Alleged Incapacitated Person ("AIP") was ill prior to the Court application, various family members may have been involved with the AIP's property management or personal affairs prior to Court intervention. Other family members may believe that decisions previously made by the involved parties were improper. There also may be contested Guardianship proceedings regarding whether the appointment of a Guardian is appropriate or which family member is the proper person to be appointed. Family disputes regarding a loved one's long term care, property management and other end of life decisions are not uncommon.

For example, the recent death of T.V. star Gary Coleman highlighted some of these problems. Following his death, questions were raised as to whether Gary Coleman's ex-wife had the authority to remove him from life support and apparently a dispute developed between the actor's wife and his parents regarding his burial.

Many disputes among family members arise following a person's death. Will contests and lawsuits regarding improper transfer of assets can fill the Court dockets and make headlines. Just recently, it was reported that a number of lawsuits were filed in a Salem, Massachusetts case where a widow claimed that the decedent's sons, with the assistance of a retired judge and another lawyer, cheated her out of her inheritance. Many of the postings in the New York Probate Lawyer Blog have discussed similar legal battles.

Avoiding family disputes before and after an individual's death should be of paramount concern. While all controversies cannot be prevented, there are a number of steps that can be taken to reduce the likelihood of family warfare. A few are listed below.

First and foremost, proper estate planning, including advance directives such as a health care proxy, should be prepared by a New York estate planning attorney. It is important to have a complete understanding of the assets that are to be transferred and the terms of the Last Will, Trust papers and other documents that are to be signed.

I have helped many clients prepare estate plans and directives to fully reflect their wishes and protect their beneficiaries.

The selection of executors, trustees and agents is important. These appointees should be individuals you can trust and who can make appropriate decisions to carry out your plan. It is a good practice to discuss a person's appointment with them prior to naming them in a document so that it can be determined whether they are agreeable to being appointed and possibly advise them as to the terms of the appointment.

Lastly, continue to review and update an estate plan. Assets, family circumstances and planning goals tend to change over time. All planning documents should be periodically reviewed and updated to ensure that a person's estate plan and directives reflect current situations. Many problems arise where documents that are decades old need to be updated and no longer reflect present realities.

Continue reading "New York Estate Planning and Probate Should Avoid Family Disputes" »

The New York Probate Lawyer Blog has discussed many issues concerning New York Article 81 Guardianship proceedings. These issues included the appointment process for a Guardian and the powers that are given to a Guardian by the Court.

Section 81.02 of the Mental Hygiene Law (MHL) provides that the Court may appoint a Guardian with regard to an individual's personal needs and/or property management. Once appointed, the Guardian faces an array of issues in carrying out his or her fiduciary duties and obligations.

Initially, a Guardian must follow the directions and limitations provided by the Court Order appointing the Guardian. MHL Section 81.20(a)1 provides that "a guardian shall exercise only those powers that the guardian is authorized to exercise by Court order." MHL Section 81.21 provides a detailed list of the powers that a Court "may" give to a property management Guardian and MHL Section 81.22 provides a list of powers that "may" be granted to a Guardian for personal needs. The Court can limit or expand these powers as necessary.

When exercising his or her powers, the Guardian owes a fiduciary responsibility to the incapacitated person. As stated in MHL Section 81.20 (a)(3) "a guardian shall exhibit the utmost degree of trust, loyalty and fidelity in relation to the incapacitated person."

Since a Guardian is accountable for his or her acts, extreme caution and diligence should be exercised by the Guardian, particularly when faced with difficult or complex situations. These situations arise with regard to both personal needs and property management. Ultimately, a Court may approve or disapprove of the Guardian's conduct.

An example of a complex issue facing a Guardian regarding the personal needs of an incapacitated person arose in the Matter of Northern Manhattan Nursing Home, decided by Justice Laura Visitacion-Lewis (Supreme Court, New York County) on April 26, 2011 and reported in the New York Law Journal on May 26, 2011. In Northern the incapacitated person was a 92 year old man suffering from terminal cancer, dementia and hypothyroidism. The prognosis was that he would not live for more than 6 months. The Guardian had asked the Court for authorization to withhold consent to the insertion of a feeding tube and treatment for the cancer and to sign Orders of Do Not Resuscitate and Do No Intubate. Following a hearing and a review by the Court concerning the incapacitated person's end-of-life preferences and the provisions of the New York Family Health Care Decisions Action Section 2994-d(5), the Court granted the Guardian the authority to proceed as it had requested and withhold consent to further treatment and to sign the DNR and DNI.

The Northern case shows the seriousness and complexity of decisions that a Guardian may encounter. Having an experienced New York Guardianship attorney is important to provide a Guardian with guidance in exercising powers and obtaining Court directions and appointment. I have represented many family members and Guardians in these matters.

Unlike Northern, where the Court allowed the Guardian to proceed after a review of a request for authorization, a Court can admonish a Guardian who acts without or outside of his or her authority. This was the situation in Matter of Roy W. Lantigua, Jr. decided by Justice Betsy Barros (Supreme Court, Kings County) on March 31, 2011 and reported in the New York Law Journal on April 22, 2011. In Lantigua, after review, the Court denied a Guardian commissions and surcharged him for improper conduct. Among other things, the Court found the Guardian engaged in self-dealing and conflict of interests and expended guardianship funds improvidently. Thus, the outcome in Lantigua is in striking contrast to that in Northern where the Court pre-approved a proper request for a Guardian to pursue a certain course of conduct.

Continue reading "New York Article 81 Guardians Face Complex Issues" »