New York Probate Lawyer Blog

A recent article by Thomson Reuters details how the late Apple CEO Steve Jobs has done a good job of moving assets into trusts in order to keep them private from the public.

Jobs, who has a reputation for being secretive of his company's products as well as his personal life, knew the advantages of will and estate planning when it comes to privacy and distribution of assets.

There have been many examples of celebrities who have squandered millions they have earned during their careers because of poor planning and bad decisions. What isn't reported in the media are the millions of everyday, middle-class Americans who do the same. Those from more modest means can still reap all the advantages by consulting with a New York estate planning lawyer. Even if you don't have millions to leave behind, you should make sure your children, spouses and other survivors can deal with the stress of handling your estate issues without undue complications.

Jobs, the man who is credited with inventing or reinventing the personal computer, mobile phone, music business and tablet devices, died recently at age 56 of pancreatic cancer. Battling the illness for some years, he stepped down as Apple CEO in August.

Two years ago, he and his wife established trusts and put real estate investments in them. Trusts can minimize the amount of taxes survivors must pay and can keep the assets from being disclosed to the public in probate court.

On top of his shares of Apple, he had a fortune after selling Pixar to Disney, receiving $138 million in Disney shares in 2006. In September, Forbes estimated Jobs' worth at $7 billion.

Public records show that Jobs and his wife own property in Palo Alto and two pieces of property in Woodside. In March 2009, those properties were put into two different trusts.

If a trust is used, even a publicly recorded will could have very little information. It could say that the assets in a trust are left to a trustee. And they would be handed out according to the trust provisions, which are typically private.

Whether you have millions of dollars or not, every person can benefit from from estate planning.

Continue reading "Steve Jobs Puts Real Estate in Trusts in New York " »

Administrators and Executors in New York, sometimes referred to as estate fiduciaries, have many powers and responsibilities. The New York Probate Lawyer Blog has discussed many of these aspects of estate settlement including the identification and collection of a decedent's assets and the payment of expenses, debts and taxes.

Reference has also been made previously to the common situation that occurs upon a person's death when decisions need to be made concerning burial and funeral arrangements. When preparing a Last Will, a person can set forth provisions that direct the manner in which he or she is to be buried. For example, a Last Will can state that the person wants to be cremated or to be buried in particular ceremonial manner. Although such directions in a Last Will can be enforced, they are problematic since a Will may not be looked at or even located until after a person's funeral and burial take place. Moreover, the validity of a Will and the appointment of an estate fiduciary may not occur until many weeks or months after death.

When discussing burial issues with clients, I typically suggest that a good estate plan includes a pre-death discussion of all funeral and burial desires and arrangements with the close family members or friends who would be most likely to make certain that the decedent's instructions are followed. However, disputes can and do arise regarding the control of a decedent's remains and its disposition. Section 4201 of the New York Public Health Law attempts to limit such disputes by providing a list of the individuals who have priority to control the disposing of a person's remains. First and foremost, the statute provides that priority is given to a person who is named in a writing that is signed as provided for by the statute. Absent such designation, a spouse or domestic partner and surviving children are given primary authority. The statute also provides in paragraph 2(a)(viii) that "a duly appointed fiduciary of the estate of the decedent" may control the disposition of remains.

Many different controversies can arise concerning a decedent's remains. In a recent case, Freiman v. County of Nassau, decided by the Hon. Thomas Feinman (Supreme Court, Nassau County) on September 23, 2011 and reported in the New York Law Journal on September 30, 2011, the Executor of an estate sued the Nassau County Medical Examiner ("ME") claiming that the ME performed an autopsy without consent from the Executor and contrary to Public Health Law Section 4210. The Court dismissed the case finding that the limited extract of a blood sample was not an autopsy and was performed with consent.

As shown by the Freiman case, disputes regarding a decedent not only involve such common proceedings as Will Contests and kinship disputes, but can relate to events occurring immediately upon death involving the disposition and handling of a decedent's remains.

Continue reading "New York Executor or Administrator May Have Rights Regarding The Decedent's Remains" »

Forbes is reporting on a lawsuit that alleges political figures in Panama, including three Supreme Court judges, have ripped off poor children who were entitled to millions of dollars. The money was in a trust that instead allegedly was turned over to a non-beneficiary after accepting bribes.

Although this is a case of an American whose trust is being questioned in Panama, this happens in the United States as well. While most people consider that only wills are contested, the same can go for the trusts that are established to shepherd assets.

But there is a logical way to avoid postmortem legal challenges to your assets -- by smart planning of a New York trust or estate. These situations usually go bad when drastic changes are made to a will in the person's elder stages. Or when no will is present. Or when a trust is not updated for years or decades or old beneficiaries -- such as former spouses -- are not removed from accounts.

Employing an experienced New York City estate planning lawyer can provide you with peace of mind. Proper planning can help ensure that your wishes are followed after your death and that your estate doesn't burden your heirs.

The situation in Panama is compelling. An American living in Panama died in June 2006 at age 88. A year before he died, the man signed a will that left the majority of his $50 million fortune to a trust fund that would benefit needy and poor children in that country. A large part of the trust includes ocean-front property that has tripled the value of the trust to more than $150 million.

But the man's widow, a well-connected Panamanian, challenged the will despite receiving a $20,000 allowance, as well as the right to live in their home and having her children receive bequests.

She sued to challenge the will, claiming that her late husband's Florida attorney coerced him into signing the will so that he could manage the charitable trust, which is the primary beneficiary of the estate.

A court removed the attorney as the executor, but found the will valid. A second court found the will valid. But the Supreme Court overturned the distribution of the fortune and naming the widow as "universal heir."

The notary who signed the will and a prosecutor filed challenges to the decision by the three-judge panel, causing the entire Supreme Court of Panama to look at the case, and putting the funds in limbo.

The man's attorney in Florida, in turn, filed a federal lawsuit, alleging the widow bribed the justices to the tune of $1.5 million each. He further alleges they violated racketeering charges and caused false criminal charges to be asserted against him, including murder, to strip him from acting as an estate executor.

In general, attempting to significantly disinherit a spouse or child can cause legal complications. Proper estate planning and engaging the services of an experienced law firm is your best bet when it comes to ensuring that your wishes are carried out after your death.

Continue reading "Trusts In New York, Not Just Wills, Can Come Under Attack Without Strong Planning" »

The New York Probate Lawyer Blog has talked about many situations involving the probate of a decedent's Last Will or the intestate administration of an estate where there is no Will. These proceedings comprise the most basic avenues for a decedent's estate settlement.

However, even more fundamental, and as a preliminary step to commencing such proceedings, a determination needs to be made as to whether the New York Surrogate's Court is the appropriate Court to initiate the case. If New York is not the proper forum, the Court will not allow the proceeding to be filed. It may be that another state (i.e., Florida, New Jersey), may be the proper place to file and administer the estate proceedings.

Choosing the proper forum or Court is not always an easy task. This choice of forum begins with a finding of the decedent's "domicile". Domicile is an extremely important issue since it will not only affect the location of the Court that is appropriate to process the decedent's estate, it may very well determine the State law that controls the issues surrounding estate administration such as spousal and kinship rights. Domicile also affects many other issues such as taxation.

Domicile essentially refers to the place that is considered a person's primary home. A person can have many different residences around the world but only one primary home or domicile. Domicile is defined in the New York Surrogate's Court Procedure Act Section 103 (15) as "A fixed, permanent and principal home to which a person wherever temporarily located always intends to return."

Domicile can be difficult to determine where a person has residences in more than one state or country and divides his or her time between these locations. Among the factors that a Court reviews in deciding an issue of domicile are where a person files state and local income taxes, and where a person has a driver's license, voting registration, and other social and business connections.

As noted, domicile is important because it may determine various rights. For example, a decedent who is a domiciliary of New York will be subject to New York statutes for the purposes of determining the decedent's distributees or next of kin. Statutes of a different state, for example, New Jersey, may differ from those in New York and specify different individuals or interests in a decedent's estate. The result may cause variations in amounts inherited or even rights to an inheritance.

A recent example of the importance of determining domicile was seen in Matter of Ranftle, decided by New York County Surrogate Kristin Booth Glen on September 14, 2011 and reported in the New York Law Journal on September 23, 2011. In Ranftle a question arose concerning whether a decedent was domiciled in New York or Florida. The importance of this question centered around the fact that unlike New York, Florida would not have recognized the decedent's same-sex marriage that took place in Montreal, Canada. Therefore, if Florida law controlled, the decedent's spouse may have lost inheritance rights in the Court proceedings. After an extensive review of the numerous factual contacts the decedent had both in New York and Florida, Surrogate Glen determined that the decedent was a New York domiciliary.

As a New York Probate attorney I have reviewed many cases with clients where an initial determination must be made as to the proper Court in which to commence a probate or intestate administration proceeding. Additionally, a thorough review of a client's domicile is imperative when preparing an estate plan so that the provisions of a Last Will or Trust will be in accordance with the relevant State laws.

Continue reading "New York Probate and Administration Depend Upon the Domicile of a Decedent" »