Staying A Head

Tuesday, 15 September 2015 21:08
Written by
0 Comments

immortality-photos-slide-Q7WJ-superJumboIn a slow week in celebrity estate news, the only newsworthy item is an NYT article about cryonics and a young woman who had her brain preserved upon her death from cancer 2 years ago.  To raise the $80K needed to pay for the freezing of her brain until her brain can be brought back to life in the future, she and her boyfriend posted a plea on Reddit.   A post-death brain scan has shown that the chemo-preservatives needed to protect her brain from ice damage only reached the outer level of her brain.

Several points, mostly dorm room existential:

1.  If you could be brought back to life, but everyone you knew had died, would you still want to be brought back?

2.  If you are the boyfriend and your long dead girlfriend was brought back to life, would you leave your current spouse and family to be with her?

3.  If 80% of your dead girlfriend’s brain is damaged by the freezing, would she still be the person you would want to be with?

4.  Would Bill Clinton preserve Hillary’s brain?  Or vice versa?  I think we all know this answer.

5.  If the young woman ever wanted Ted Williams’ autograph, or to meet Walt Disney, cryopreservation was her only hope.

 

 

Cuckoo Estate Planning

Monday, 07 September 2015 20:34
Written by
0 Comments

birdswill (1)A Manhattan millionaire left $100K to a pet trust for her 32 cockatiels.  She requested that the birds continue to live in the aviary in her $4 million East Hampton property; that they be fed Avi-Cakes (which cost $115 for a 20 lb bag), carrots, water, and popcorn; and that the building be cleaned each Monday and Thursday.  She was far less meticulous with the rest of $5.3 million estate which she initially left to her step-son in a 2006 will.  She later tried to revise that will by crossing out his name and writing in the name of her sister who is now claiming the remaining $5.2 million.  

Several points, some of them previously made:

1.  Certainly this woman missed the forest for the trees – she focused on a picayune aspect of her estate while ignoring the proper disposition of the bulk of her estate.

2.  Handwritten changes on a validly executed will are ineffective and will likely lead to her step-son inheriting the $5.2 million (at least under Ohio law)

3.  As mentioned previously, I retain the original documents for my clients to preempt this type of attempted change/spoliation of wills.

4.  This type of myopic focus on pets while ignoring one’s relatives is more commonly seen in cat owners rather than bird owners.   

 

 

TML – Football Is Back

Friday, 04 September 2015 10:41
Written by
0 Comments

NFL (2)Paul Daugherty of the Cincinnati Enquirer allowed me to write his The Morning Line Blog again today.

 

Limited Inheritance

Wednesday, 02 September 2015 19:45
Written by
0 Comments

vs_logo_sA Columbus widow is suing L Brands, the parent company of Victoria’s Secret and Bath and Body Works (and originally known as The Limited, Inc.), claiming that she inherited $1.5 million of stock that L Brands refuses to acknowledge.  Her late husband,a bricklayer, allegedly purchased 50 shares of The Limited Stores in 1976 after receiving a stock tip from a client.  His widow claims his stock certificate for 50 shares is an original certificate and is now worth $1.5 million after 7 stock splits and 40 years of unpaid dividends.  The company has not yet responded in court.

Several practical points:

1. I detest stock certificates – they are easily lost during the client’s life and difficult to transfer after the client’s death. I always advise my clients to own stock in a brokerage account rather than in certificated form.

2.  I also always advise my clients to list all of their financial accounts/assets and place the list with their estate planning documents.  This assists their children with settling their estates by providing them knowledge of which assets they own and must locate.

3.  If the stock market continues on its current trajectory, this battle might be moot because the shares will be worthless.

 

 

 

DIY = Disaster Is Yours

Monday, 31 August 2015 20:35
Written by
0 Comments

A Minnesota woman signed a will in 2006 naming her grandson and a former employee as equal beneficiaries of her estate.   She tried to revoke the will in 2008 and leave her entire estate to her grandson by writing and initialing several changes on a photocopy of the will.  In 2010, she downloaded a DIY will from a website and hand wrote her intent to leave her entire estate to her grandson, but she did not have it properly witnessed.  She died in 2013 and all 3 wills were presented for probate.  The local probate court held that the 2006 will was still in effect because the 2008 notes on a photocopy did not validly revoke the prior will and that the 2010 downloaded form was not validly executed.

Several quick points:

1.  In Ohio, a will can be revoked with a statement of revocation or physical destruction (i.e. shredding or tearing) of the prior will.

2.  I generally retain the original wills of my clients to prevent them from trying to alter their wills by writing on them.

3.  I will once again quote the mechanic from the ’70’s Fram oil filter commercial (because I am from Greenville, Ohio and we had  a Fram oil filter plant in my long ago youth):  “You can pay me now or pay me later.”  I would have billed her $600 to implement her wishes. Instead, her estate spent thousands and her wishes were not followed because she did not follow the simple formalities for signing a will.  The now long ago former employee is forever grateful for her short sighted thriftiness.

256px-dc8e5Ekce