New York Estate Planning Lawyer Blog

Earlier this month we discussed the unique estate issues connected to the murder of a wealthy investor named Raveesh Kumra. Mr. Kumra was murdered during a robbery late last year. It has since been learned that the suspects include several men with connections to alleged prostitutes with whom Kumra apparently was connected. It is a tragic situations all the way around, and the man's family was understandably blindsided by the situation.

Making matters worse, a significant battle over Kumra's estate has been waged by various parties since the death. It is an example of the unique court challenges that often result when comprehensive estate planning is not conducted and all possible issues are not analyzed as part of that plan.

Out-of-Wedlock Children
As discussed in a new Mercury News story, the main estate issue centers on other women whom Mr. Kumra apparently had relationships, including the possibility of various children born from those relationships. Earlier this year a court already ordered that two children alleged to have been fathered by Kumra were entitled to a monthly allowance from the estate. A judge ordered several thousand dollars to be paid to those children per month until the remaining estate issues were decided.

The man's ex-wife (with whom he he still lived at the time of his death) and his two adult children from that marriage have refused to acknowledge that those other children are related. They refused a paternity test, but the court in the case found that paternity existed anyway from other evidence.

Now, the family has voiced concerns that they fear other women may come forward with similar claims. They are challenging the validity of the claims, but suggest that the mere possibility of gaining funds may allow the estate to be "fleeced" by false claims. One family member argued, "We are also hearing that there are other women waiting in the wings so they can claim the same thing. So we're very concerned about the larger plot at hand to defraud the estate."

All of this is on top of the fact that the same judge is still deliberating to determine if the other two children should inherit an equal share of the estate with the children born to his ex-wife.

The lesson: Even if it is impossible prevent all claims on an estate, taking account of the most likely legal challenges is crucial. Also, using more sophisticated tools, like trusts, that pass on assets automatically, outside of the court, ensure that the intended beneficiaries are forced to jump through far fewer hoops before finalizing the property transfers and ending the matter.

Virtually every month now has multiple awareness labels attached to them as advocates for various causes seek to raise public support for different causes. For example, this month is known in some international circles as "Leave a Legacy" month. Considering that many New Yorkers continue to delay estate planning and otherwise put off getting long-term affairs in order, this is certainly an awareness campaign that we can get behind.

In fact, some advocates are using a New York example as a reminder. We discussed the case last week of a man who apparently left his $40 million estate to no one, meaning that the funds will be end up in the state coffers. While most do not leave behind estates of that size, failing to create a will or designate how to allocate assets is far too common.

Estate Planning is About Your Legacy
In a Huffington Post story about "Leave a Legacy" month, one advocate explored various aspects to the idea of "legacy." Far more than merely giving stuff away, one's legacy is shaped by many factors and decisions geared toward the long game.

Of course creating a will, using trusts, ensuring proper alternative beneficiary designations, exploring insurance options, and similar financial details are important. But a legacy is also about giving back. Advocates encourage everyone, no matter how much money one is leaving behind, to consider giving some to a favored charity or cause. Even small gifts can have an oversized impact. Those gifts can be powerfully symbolic, letting those you are leaving behind know the value you place in service and the causes that you valued throughout your life.

Giving Back
The official "Leave a Legacy" website offers a detailed call for considering charities when conducting estate plans. It is noted that while "more than 80 percent of Americans contribute to the nonprofit groups of their choice throughout their lifetimes [...] according to research conducted in 2000, only around eight percent of people chose to continue this support through a charitable bequest."

This discrepancy is often not because individuals suddenly decide that they do not value charitable causes. Instead, many simply forget about this aspect of estate planning and legacy creation. That is particularly true for those who conduct planning without the assistance of a professional. Estate planning attorneys are more likely to at least ask if inclusion of a charity is somethings one wants to consider.

Hopefully more local residents will get serious about their legacies and consider exactly how they want to be remembered and what can be done now to create that lasting impact.

The New York Times published a story last week that reminds residents of the complexity of many estate planning matters. The story reiterates two key principles when it comes to long-term financial and inheritance planning: (1) It is a critical task for families of all income levels; (2) It requires frequent pruning and updating.

Not a Problem for the Wealthy
There remains a misconception that estate planning is a concern only for the wealthy. If one does not have assets over the $5.25 million federal estate tax exemption level, then there is no need to worry about visiting an attorney or otherwise handling this inheritance details, right? As we often point out: this is a huge misconception. The truth is that estate planning deals with a wide-range of issues beyond the estate tax. From ensuring proper designation of life insurance policies and retirement accounts to using trusts to avoid probate and save on expenses, properly planning for transfer of assets is necessary for families of all income levels.

Consider one of the most common problems: a will that contradicts provisions in beneficiary designation forms. Many New York families find themselves in sticky situations when someone creates a will that leaves provisions to one family member, even though the name on a beneficiary designation form for a retirement account or life insurance leaves it to someone else. In those cases, the will is overridden, even if it represents the true desire of the benefactor.

Not a "One Time" Task
Similarly, because of changes in the law and life circumstances, estate planning cannot be viewed as a chore that is finalized once completed. Instead, it must be a frequently updated process, with alterations to those beneficiary designations, will provisions, trust assets, and more. Understanding when a part of the plan needs to be updated is where professionals like an estate planning attorney are vital. These details are complex and serious enough that they should not be left to those unfamiliar with how it all works.

Obviously the birth of new children or grandchildren, a divorce, marriage, acquisition of a new asset, or other change in condition must be folded into an existing plan. In addition, many different legal changes may influence what options are available and when. Those legal changes go well beyond the estate tax, which seems to generate all the media attention. Many different kinds of tax rules can shift at any time, including types of available trusts, extent of charitable deductions, and more.

Forbes recently reported on a unique case that illustrates what happens when one fails to conduct any NY estate planning and does not have close heirs to take an inheritance via default intestacy rules.

The article explained how a man named Roman Blum died in January of this year. A former real estate developer, Mr. Blum was worth about $40 million at the time of his passing. He was 97. Remarkably, for one with such wealth, Blum did not have any estate planning conducted--no use of trusts or even a will to designate final wishes and property distribution.

When one dies without a will special rules apply which include a ranking list of possible inheritors. In New York, for example, an estate is usually split between a spouse and children (with a special $50,000 addition to the spouse). If there are no children, then everything goes to the spouse. If there is no surviving spouse, then everything goes to the children. If one has no spouse or children, then everything goes to parents, and absent living parents, siblings.

Importantly, these designations are made "by representation." That means that heirs of the intended beneficiary can claim in the other's name. For example, consider a man who dies intestate in New York. His spouse died first. He had two children, but one of them already passed away. He has four grandchildren, three from the child who is still alive, and one from the child who passed away. Under the law, the inheritance is split between his actual children--one alive and one deceased. Because it is divided "by representation," the deceased child's share will be given to that child's own issue (the grandchild).

The important thing to remember is that these rules generally ensure that at least some heir is found to receive an inheritance following a death. However, sometimes no heirs can be found at all. That is what seems to have happened in Mr. Blum's case. Officials have been searching for relatives to collect the $40 million but have thus far turned up nothing. If no one is found after three years, then in most cases the inheritance will go to the state government.

Of course, virtually no one, if given the choice, would simply give all of their assets to the government. Even if one does not have relatives or friends who they'd like to have funds, steps can be taken to give assets to a favorite charity or cause. All that it takes is simple visit to an estate planning lawyer to share wishes and get the details written up while following proper legal protocols.

Celebrity estate planning complications and feuds are often used to illustrate basic planning principles or common problems. Perhaps none of those examples are as well-known, especially for New Yorkers, as the sad case of the estate of Brooke Astor. The legendary socialite and philanthropist died several years ago. Since her passing, a wide-range of claims were made regarding the distribution of her assets and criminal activity on the part of those responsible for her care and affairs in the later years of her life.

Astor reportedly suffered from Alzheimer's at the end of her life--an affliction that similarly affects many New York seniors. Unfortunately, also like many others, it seems that her condition was abused by the very people who were supposed to look-out for her.

Astor's son, Brooke Marshall, was criminally charged with exploiting his mother to funnel more money to himself. Marshall was ultimately convicted, along with a co-defendant, of illegally giving himself a $2 million "raise" to administer the estate. Claims also suggested that an amendment to Astor's will in 2004 included a forged signature.

The criminal conviction actually came more than three years ago, when the pair was sentenced to serve between one to three years in jail for their conduct. However, they have yet to serve a day as various appeals are worked out.

As reported by the New York Post, Marshall was in court again a week ago. The Manhattan Supreme Court justice handling the matter allowed Marshall to remain out on bail while his final appeal request to the highest court in the state--New York's Court of Appeals--is considered. If the Court decides not to hear the case, then Marshall and his co-defendant will be completely out of options and likely report to jail in mid-June. That would mark the end to the most drawn-out, contentious, high-profile inheritance controversy in recent New York memory.

Seamless Estate Planning
While most may not have the wealth of Brooke Astor, the other dynamics of the situation are the same for many: declining health, disagreement among children about inheritance amounts, pressure from in-laws, last-minute will changes, and more.

The general lessons are myriad. Be sure to seek out the help of legal professionals with a reputation for honest dealing and whom you trust. Be forthright about various family dynamics that may come into play in the aftermath, even if it involves difficult conversations about family members. Do not delay, as one's health is never certain.

By following these basic principles, one can be in the best position to ensure an inheritance is handled efficiently and exactly as one wishes

Residents are often warned to complete their estate planning--wills and trusts--before it is "too late." Most assume that the planning is only "too late" if they die before getting it done. But that is a mistake. In many cases "too late" actually refers to losing the competency to create the legal documents. As a practical matter, it may even mean before one even has the appearance of mental health issues, because even a hint of problems may open the door to legal challenge from others.

Estate planning is about ensuring one's wishes are carried out and maximizing the preservation of assets without controversy. Limiting that controversy includes completing the planning early and efficiently, minimizing the risk of problems down the road. Thought of in that way, "too late" is far earlier than simply "before you die."

John duPont Estate
Legal issues related to the inheritance planning and mental stability recently made headlines with the passing of multi-millionaire (and convicted murderer) John duPont.

An accomplished natural scientists, duPont was known as a renaissance man of sorts, with a wide range of interests and quirks. He collected a shells and birds that now don the halls of natural history museums. He even authored and illustrated several books on birds that are highly regarded in the field. DuPont maintained an extensive stamp collection, at one point paying nearly $1 million for a single stamp from Britain. He also was an athlete, became a coach, and was a financial backer for various U.S. Olympic teams.

However, all of these interests were apparently tempered by mental instability. Eventually, in 1997, he was convicted of murdering a man in his home--a wrestler that he coached. At trial he was deemed mentally unstable, and many have assumed him to be a paranoid schizophrenic. The official adjudication was "guilty but mentally ill."

DuPont died in prison two years ago. At the time, his estate was valued at over $500 million. In the subsequent two years, much of the state was liquidated, and many of his famous collections and property continue to reach auction.

Since his passing his family and other interested parties have engaged in endless fighting over the future of the fortune. DuPont had several wills, but the most recent was signed only three months before his death. That document left most of the estate to a Bulgarian wrestler as well as some to his attorney. However, the duPont family is challenging the will, claiming that his previous adjudication as mentally unstable invalidated the most recent will. If a court agrees, they may go back to a previous will signed at a time he was stable or come up with alternative modes of dividing the assets.

Reports suggest that even though the feuding has been ongoing for years, it is far from complete. It now stands as another tragic example of the complexities of estate planning--a reminder of the need to act early and comprehensively to avoid infighting and settle matters outside the purview of the courts.

A case recently came before a New York court that delved into a very unique inheritance issue. The case, Matter of Svenningsen involved the inheritance rights of "rejected" adopted children. "Rejected" is a harsh word, but refers to children who were adopted and whose adopted parents terminate parental rights. It is a rare occurrence, but various health issues or circumstantial factors may make such change in parental rights necessary in some cases.

The circumstances in the Svenningsen case are somewhat complex. Essentially, a New York family adopted a child, Emily, from China in 1996. The family had executed a trust in 1995 the had specifically included adopted children. A second trust was executed in 1996 that specifically named Emily. Sadly, the patriarch of the family died the following year, in 1997.

Eventually, Emily began attending a boarding school for children with special needs. Apparently Emily developed a close bond with those working at the school. As such, several years later, in 2003, Emily's adopted mother agreed to terminate her parental rights under the assumption that Emily would be adopted by one of the director's of her boarding school. No mention of Emily's trust was provided during that second adoption hearing.

Emily's Inheritance Rights
Eventually the new adopted parents learned that Emily's first adopted father had created the trust in her name to pay for her medical and educational needs. The new parents sought to obtain access to those funds, but the first adopted family rebuffed the effort. The case escalated and ended up in a New York court. The original adopted family claimed that Emily's interests in the trust were terminated upon the second adoption.

However, in a first impression ruling, the court determined that Emily's inheritance rights were not actually terminated. The New York Surrogate's ruled that her interests in her original adopted father's estate (via trusts and inclusion in the will) were complete. Those interests had "vested" and she did not lose those inheritance rights because she was "adopted out" several years later.

The case is ultimately a re-affirmation that adopted children have equal standing with biological children in all regards. Previous courts had ruled that biological children who are "adopted out" do not lose inheritance interests in this regard. As a result of the ruling in this case, the same applies to adopted children who are "adopted out" again.

However, it is still important for families with adopted children to be careful to update estate plans following an adoption or other change in family structure. Depending on how trust documents or wills are written, children may be left out or desired protections may not actually be in place. Be sure to speak with your estate planning attorney after any major life event such as this.

A recent Washington Post article discussed the lethal combination of family and finances. The author recounts how even the most close-knit families can be torn apart by disagreements about money matters. The article included one reader to wrote a letter offering an example of how his parent's will is causing tension and turmoil.

The letter was written by an adult son who was asked by his parents to assist with their estate planning. He was named executor and helped with locating financial documents. The son saw a copy of the will after it was completed, noting that it left assets to a few charities and then split the remaining estate between himself and his one sibling--a sister. This represents a pretty common situation, with families assuming that such a simple estate plan and division will not come with any disagreement.

But then a few years later the parents updated their will. Instead of splitting the assets between their two children, they decided to split it in thirds. Their two teenage grandchildren (from their daughter) will receive a third, and the two adult children will each receive a third. The son noted with shock that his share suddenly went from one half to one third.

The son noted that he is confused and frustrated by the development. As a gay man with a long-term partner, he does not intend to have children. He noted that he was financially secure, and so the frustration is not bore by a need for the inheritance. However, he can't help but feel penalized for his situation for no reason.

These sorts of tensions occur all the time. At times, the frustrated parties may not speak up when first learning about the situation, because they may not want to seem greedy or motivated by a desire to get a larger share. But the frustration can boil over after a passing, leading to will contests and permanent family drama.

There is no right or wrong answer to the decisions made in situations like the one described here. However, there are prudent steps that can be taken--no matter what the terms of the will--to lessen the chance of ruined relationships. For one thing, it may be worthwhile to bring in a neutral third party to manage the estate. Having a son act as executor in a situation where he feels resentful about the will is a recipe for disaster. Inviting a professional, perhaps an estate planning attorney, to handle the situation will ensure that even accusations of impropriety are nipped early on.

The need to plan for the transfer of digital assets after a death is the "topic du jour" in many recent estate planning discussions. The issue remains timely because while more and more people are understanding the important role that online assets and accounts have on their lives, the law in many areas (including New York) has yet to fully catch up. Confusion, uncertainty, and disagreement reign, making it an important topic to be shared.

For example, PBS Newshour recently aired a segment on the minimal clarity in the digital estate process. A full transcript and video of the exchange can be viewed here. The segment includes a conversation between two involved in the issues--a law professor and legal author--who discuss both the legal as well as ethical issues that are tied up with transferring access to online accounts and property that exists solely in digital form.

The program mentioned how unlike some estate planning issues (dynasty trusts, estate taxes, etc.), this is not an issue that only affects a slice of the population. It affects virtually everyone. Consider just one social media site: Facebook. About one billion people worldwide currently use the site. Because of its size, about one user dies every three minutes. What happens to their profile, uploaded photographs, messages, history of postings, and other details? There is no easy answer. Courts, legislatures, social media operators, and community members have been grappling with the legal and ethical implications for the past few years.

The PBS program included a discussion with one father's about a sad case that highlights the real-world ramifications of the lack of legal clarity. The father explained how his 15-year old son committed suicide in 2011. The family was completely blindsided by the tragedy, without any idea what might be the underlying cause. In the hopes of getting insight into what might have spurred the suicide (and to receive even a fraction of closure), the family sought access to the young man's Facebook account. Unfortunately, Facebook officials did not allow the family access to most of the account, citing privacy issues and pointing to the agreement the minor accepted when creating the account.

This is not to say that the situation pits the family against the big-unfair social media giant. There are very good reasons why the social media company has a strict terms for service agreement that limits third parties from gaining access to personal profiles. More and more private, embarrassing, and otherwise intimate information is making its way onto online profiles, and most users have the expectation that the assets will remain private. It is not necessarily as allowing just anyone to control that space after a passing.

Until the law catches up, it is critical for private individuals to include information about handling these affairs in their estate planning documents.

If you pass away without a will designating how you'd like your affairs to be handled, you are deemed to have died "intestate." Some of the most significant legal battles and family feuding occurs in those situation because it is essentially a free-for-all. Generic legal rules apply, but without any indication of how to handle property distribution and other matters, all interested parties may decide to pursue different legal avenues to maximize their own interests. Legal fights can still occur when a will exists (often referred to a "will contests"), but the possibility of one's wishes being completely upended are far lower when at least some documentation exists.

Interestingly, it is not uncommon for various documents purporting to explain one's wishes to pop up later on--in the midst of a legal dispute. For obvious reasons, these documents should be examined with much scrutiny, but they still may influence a legal case.

New Document in Lottery Winner's Estate Feud
For example, ABC News recently reported on a new document that was shared with the court in the well-known case involving a poisoned lottery winner. The estate battle gained national attention last year when a lottery winner died suddenly after being given cyanide. Authorities have yet to make any arrests, but various parties (including the man's wife and father-in-law) have been under suspicion for involvement in the matter.

The lottery winner (who also owned a small business) died intestate. Since his passing, various family members have been fighting over the remains of his estate. Most prominently the man's widow and his siblings have spent significant time in court in an attempt to argue why they should receive the bulk of his wealth.

Recently, the widow came forward claiming that she found a new document signed by her husband which purports to leave all of his assets to his wife. Mysteriously, the letter was signed only two months before his untimely death. The document was allegedly an "operating agreement" that was drafted with his business partner. The agreement was submitted to the probate court last week. The man's brother questioned the timing of the find and argued that it was illogical for the agreement to be signed only two months before his death, as if he had any idea that he would ultimately be murdered.

Adding to the complexity are the possible inheritance rights of the man's child from a previous marriage and allegations that the man did not legally marry the widow. Considering all of the complications, this situation is the prototypical example of lack of estate planning gone awry. Accusations of murder, blended families, feuding in-laws, newly discovered documents, and lottery winnings all combined without use of trusts or a will.

Drafting a will can be a delicate process, because various legal requirements must be met before the document will have any legal effect. Cases abound of wills which were thrown out because they did not conform to the technical requirements. Ensuring that everything will be done pursuant to legal rules is one key reason to have the aid of an estate planning attorney.

Beyond that, when planning professionals are not involved in these matters, there is a far greater chance that fraudulent and illegal practices might be undertaken. When money is on the line, sometimes the worst characteristics in everyone seeps out. For one thing, it is not uncommon for entire wills to be forged, and when outside observers to the planning are few and far between, those forgeries sometimes even work.

Forged Will
Recently, RTE News published a story of this nature, as several men stand accused of trying to create fake papers following the passing of an 82-year old farmer. It is a cautionary tale, and an important reminder not to leaves loose ends when it comes to ensuring your inheritance wishes are locked in.

The man in this case died over fourteen years ago, on Christmas Day in 1998. At the time of his passing he owned 162 acres of land, property, and assets in various accounts. When he died a Last Will and Testament was produced which suggested that the man left everything that he owned to a distant relative. The will was allegedly signed about four month before the man's passing. The executors of the will happened to be the distant relative's best friend and the friend's brother.

Little did the authorities know at the time, but the will was apparently a fake--forged via agreement between the distant relative and two executors.

The crimes were only uncovered years later when one of the executors, for reasons that are not clear, felt guilty and confessed his crimes to local authorities. He explained how the distant relative was the instigator, convincing the other two men to participate with promises to pay money.

The three men involved in this case will face jail time and significant fines. However, it is impossible to know how many similar crimes are committed every year that never result in accountability. It is important for New York families to act prudently to forestall any chance of another using their passing as an opportunity to become unjustly enriched. You cannot speak for yourself after you are gone, so it is vital to ensure your voice is heard loud and clear via preparations made early on.

Yet another celebrity has passed away unexpectedly, perhaps without conducting any estate planning. She left behind a complex family arrangement filled with disagreement and a fortune estimated at nearly $25 million. Telemundo star Jenni Rivera was a household name in Mexico when she died last month in a plane crash at the age of 43. The tragedy struck just as the singer was poised to make a breakout in the United States entertainment industry with a starring role in an ABC television show.

Complex Family Life
Obviously using trusts and having a will for inheritance issues is critical for all families but especially for those with large fortunes and complex family arrangements. Rivera fit the bill on both accounts. According to a recent Forbes article, she was married three times. The first two ended in divorce, with her second husband passing away in 2009. At the time of her death she was technically still married to her third husband, but that marriage was in the midst of divorce at the time. Rivera had four children in total from her first two marriages. There are significant age differences between the children, as she had her first when she was only 15 years old.

It is obvious from even that brief explanation that there are a seemingly endless possibilities for infighting over the fortune. But it gets even more mysterious. That is because Rivera's sister has come forward with a letter that she claims laid out the singer's wishes. The letter seems to indicate that the singer wanted the sister to inherit her assets, manage her business affairs, and take care of her minor children.

So how will this all shake out if the singer did not use trusts or have an official will? It is impossible to predict, as the court battle will undoubtedly drag out for a length of time before any resolution is reached. On one hand, the state where the singer's affairs will be probated have intestacy rules that would seem to give half of the estate to the third husband. Unless they had put some legal documents in place ahead of time, the fact that they were in the midst of divorce is of no consequence. They were still technically married at the time of her passing, and that fact would determine the outcome.

It is also unclear whether the letter will be considered a valid holographic will. This refers to a will written by hand and signed by the individual who died. In New York, holographic wills are generally not acceptable, so the letter would likely have no effect here (even more reason for New Yorkers to visit with an estate planning professional). However, this rule differs state to state and so it may complicate matters in resolving this particular affair.

In any event, the sad passing of Jenni Rivera is yet another reminder of the fact that none of us knows for sure what tomorrow might bring. That is why prudent planning now--no matter what your age--is a wise choice.

Before being overshadowed by the election, the talk of the social media universe in the past week and a half was Disney's purchase of the George Lucas film business (LucasFilm). The film company owned all the rights to the mega-popular Star Wars francise, and the purchase might mean that another Star Wars film will be in the works in coming years. Perhaps the most eye-popping part of the deal was the sale price. Disney apparently paid a staggering $4.05 billion in cash and stock for LucasFilm.

Since the deal was announced many professionals in the fields of tax and estate plannining have chimed in, noting that the decision to sell now was likely a smart one by Lucas. It will probably pay many divideds in the future for himself and his family. At a general level, by cashing out now Lucas will spare his family the very difficult and complex challenge of handling these matters upon his passing. At 68 years old, hopefully that time is still several decades in the future; however, prudent planning is timely planning. In addition, selling the company allows Lucas to spend more of his times on philanthrophy--something that he has been committed to for decades. He explained recently that he plans to donate most of his wealth to educational efforts around the world.

Beyond that, the timing of the move was likely motivated by smart assessment of the current tax climate. As recently discussed in a Forbes article on the subject, the current capital gains tax rate and brackets are set to be far less favorable in the coming year. No matter who was elected this year, increases in the tax rates to some degree were likely. However, by acting now, Lucas may have saved significant sums on taxes as a result of the immense gain in value of his company since it was founded.

Estate Planning/Transition Lessons
Of course, the savvy move by Lucas is a reminder to all residents, particularly those with businesses of their own, to think prudently about these transitions details. This is true no matter how big the business. In fact, smaller business owners often require more complex transition details. That is because, unlike LucasFilm, most business owners cannot simply sell everything to a large conglomerate like Disney. Instead, more nuanced details have to be worked out to transition an enterprise to another while ensuring resources are available for retirement and an inheritance.

If you are in this situation, please act prudently and seek out help to ensure the best is done for you and your family long-term. In many situations a combination of estate planning lawyers, tax professionals, and others are needed to ensure that everything works to maximize your interests. Considering the likely tax and legal changes on the horizon at a federal level, it is also critical to act soon to best meet your goals.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Farm Families Reminded of Need for Unique Estate Planning

Succession Plans are Essential for Family Businesses

Do you really need to conduct estate planning if you are only in your 30s, don't have many assets, and don't have a lot of money to spend on legal and planning services? Absolutely.

The specific costs of these planning efforts can always be arranged to meet your resources. And it is critical not to forget that the planning includes components that apply to all parites, regardless of how old they might be or how wealthy. For one thing, an elder law estate plan in New York includes preparations related to long-term health and extreme medical care wishes. Serious accidents affect community members of all ages, and it is critical to have legal documentation in place to explain how you'd like things handled in the event you are seriously incapacitated or disabled.

The need for these documents is even more paramount if children are involved. It goes without saying that parents usually devote their lives to ensuring their children are cared for, protected, and secure in their future. Yet far too many young mothers and fathers forget to take a simple step to prolonged that security indefinitely--use legal documents to identify child care issues in the event of their passing. There is no way to completely prepare for the death of young parents on a child. Yet, dealing with the tragedy is always made a bit easier when the parent or parents had taken some time to identify clear successor guardian wishes in the event of their own death or disability. It is critical that all parents--no matter how old--have very clear plans in place for alternative caregiving.

Informal plans, however, are often of little use. Telling a relative or a friend that you'd lke them to take care of your child in the event of a tragedy is nowhere near enough. There has to be actual legal effect to one's wishes, otherwise, the long-term care of your child may be left to decisions made by the court and agents of the court who have no personal connection to you or your family. It is critical for guardian identification's to be made in a legal document, like a last will and testament, that will affect how the court handles these matters.

Many young parents assume that there is no need for this legal planning because there is an obvious choice for alternative guardian and the court will clearly see things that way. However, one of the most important lessons shared by estate planning attorneys is the fact that relationships are often frayed in the aftermath of a death. While it may not seem like a possibility now, in the aftermath of your death different family members may begin feuding over the guardianship of your child. This fighting will obviously leave real scars on family relationships and will have serious impacts on the child's long-term living. Taking away this uncertainty and doubt should be a high priority for all parents, and it is only fully accomplished as part of an estate plan that puts legal effects to your wishes no matter what the future holds.

See Our Related Blog Posts:
Court Rules Woman Must Give Up Kafka Papers She Inherited

Protecting Assets While Facing Uncertainty

Mystery permanently surrounded the heiress Huguette Clark--a reclusive woman whose $300 million estate is often referred to as the last collection of wealth drawn from the American "Gilded Age." Her father was a copper magnante many decades ago and was also a former senator from Montana. He is well known as the founder of the city of Las Vegas. Huguette inherited the fortune upon his (and her mother's) passing. However, she never sought business or public notoriety like her father. Instead, she was intimately private. In fact, she reportedly spent the last twenty years of her life inside a New York City hospital--even when she was healthy enough to live on her own.

Huguette eventually passed away in May of last year. As often happens in cases of great wealth--particularly when there is much mystery surrounding one's life--various fights ensued over control of the fortune.

A trial in the case is set to begin soon, according to a recent NBC report on the case.

A recent accounting this week in the Surrogate's Court found that the estate is valued at roughly $306.5 million when all of the real estate, cash, bonds, stocks, and personal property are taken into account. The largest piece of that estate is a summer home in California on 23.5 acres that is valued at nearly $85 million. In addition, she owned three New York City apartments collectively worth about $53 million. However, the estate may grow if the executor is successful in getting back more than $44 million in gifts that were allegedly given to Clark's nurses, doctors, and the hospital where she lived in the last years of her life.

Huguette wrote two wills at age 98, several years before her passing. The first will left a few million dollars to her private nurse with the remaining going to the relatives from her father's first marriage. Six weeks later, however, the second will was signed. This will claims that no money was left to family, instead most the inheritance was to be used for a museum or art foundation at her California estate. The second will also left funds to Huguette's attorney, nurse, doctor, accountant, and others. An investigation was launched regarding the handling of Clark's affairs and potential elder abuse in 2010 over suspicions of illegal conduct by her advisors, but no criminal charges were ever filed.

All the parties in the case are now prepping for trial which is slated to take place before the end of the year. However, if delays arise, which they often do in these cases, the matter might not be settled until next year.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Huguette Clarke's Only Friend Has Her Own New York Estate Plan Settled

New Twist in Huguette Clark Estate Plan Controversy