Mina Sirkin Estate Planning and Litigation Lawyer in Woodland Hills, California

Estate Litigation and Planning go together.   Any Woodland Hills estate planner at some point will be asked to litigate aspects of trusts and estates.   Sometimes the disputed estate issues revolve around timely distributions from estates.   Other times, the nature of the argument in the estate may be that someone believes he or she was treated unfairly.

Sources of animosities in estate and trust cases:

  1.  A beneficiary’s belief that the distribution should have been done sooner.
  2. A beneficiary’s vision of what fairness should look like.
  3. A sense of entitlement.
  4. A sense that mother or father liked me better, or that she/he did not like my sibling.
  5. A sense that the person who took more care of the parent, should be paid more.
  6. Long term disputes between two beneficiaries stemming from childhood.

If your case fits into any of the above estate issues, planning can proper estate planning can make some, if not, all of the potential disputes more manageable.   Call Mina Sirkin Estate Planning and Litigation Lawyer in Woodland Hills, California at 818-340-4479 or email us.

Los Angeles probate attorney advises about when co-executors have a dispute

When Co-Executors Fight…

When co-executors have been appointed to manage assets of the estate, it is very common that disputes arise which need to be handled.  Unfortunately, it frequently puts the Los Angeles probate attorney in a conflict, when a dispute arises and the lawyer represents both co-executors, it creates a conflict of interest for the lawyer and brings the estate to a halt. The lawyer is then forced to advise each of his/her co-executor clients to seek separate counsel.

This can happen when the co-executors are also beneficiaries.  It can also happen when the co-executors are just administering the estate.   Examples of disputes among co-executors are as follows:

  1.  Disputes about the sales price of the home.
  2.  Inventory disputes.
  3.  Rent collection disputes.
  4.  Reimbursement disputes.
  5.  Accounting Disputes.

What are some simple solutions to co-executor disputes?

Here are some of the things a co-executor can do to resolve the disputes with another co-executor:

  1.  Sit down and talk.
  2.  Go to mediation.
  3.  Have a neutral executor appointed, such as a professional fiduciary.
  4.  Agree to submit the matter for a Petition for Instructions to the court.
  5.  Agree to submit the disputed items to a probate arbitrator.

What really happens when co-executors fight?

When two co-executors fight, they cannot be represented by one lawyer.  Ultimately, each will have to seek separate probate lawyers which increases the inefficiency in managing the probate estate and the potential cost of litigation.    Selecting an informal tie-breaker before co-executors are appointed can help in managing and resolving potential disputes.  If you are a co-executor, we encourage you to sit together and come up with a plan on how to resolve any c-executor disputes.

If you are having trouble with another co-executor, call Mina Sirkin, probate attorney in Los Angeles who is a Board Certified Specialist helping people resolve probate disputes.  Call 818-340-4479 or Email.

Predatory Marriage? It can happen to you!

WHAT IS A PREDATORY MARRIAGE, AND HOW YOU CAN VOID IT?

The Star.com, a Canadian publisher reported on predatory marriage problems and how a Canadian judge voided the marriage leading the way to protect the fragile and elderly:

“Six years after the Muskoka man’s Blue Mountain marriage, an Ontario Superior Court justice has declared it void — a decision lawyers say will give fragile or elderly people increased protections from predatory marriage.

Before his “catastrophic” head injury from an ATV accident, Kim Kevin Hunt was a Muskoka landscaper and horse aficionado with boundless energy for hiking and fishing.

In October 2011, three days after leaving hospital with what doctors described as a wasted, shrunken brain, the 50-year-old was “spirited away” by a former girlfriend for a secret wedding, giving her legal rights to his future wealth, such as his growing landscape business and home value, as well as access to his expected $1-million personal injury settlement. Kathleen Anne Worrod (also known as Katheleena) could not be reached for comment.

Hunt never lived with Worrod after the marriage. Police found him near Blue Mountain in Collingwood, at a motel where the wedding had taken place only hours earlier. Hunt was immediately reunited with his two sons, living with them at his house in Novar, 10 minutes north of Huntsville.

Now, six years later, Ontario Superior Court Justice Edward J. Koke has declared the marriage void — a decision lawyers say will give fragile or elderly people increased protections from predatory marriage.

“This case is an example of predatory marriage where a vulnerable person is taken advantage of by an opportunist,” says Andrea McEwan, of Toronto’s Whaley Estate Litigation Partners, who was hired by Hunt’s family.

“Older people are often targeted, which makes this type of marriage an increasing problem in our society because of our aging population.”

In his written decision filed last month, Justice Koke rejected “in its entirety” testimony from Hunt’s former girlfriend, Worrod, and her relatives. Worrod had testified that Hunt was a healthy and willing groom, although her uncle had to be dispatched to bring him to the wedding.

Before the accident, Hunt had an on-again-off-again relationship with Worrod.

As laid out in the judgment, they met online in mid-2009 and Hunt later acted as a surety for her impaired-driving charges, although police reports noted that she violated the conditions on her court order by continuing to drink. Hunt and Worrod bought the Novar house together in April of 2010 but their relationship quickly deteriorated. Within eight months, in December 2010, they signed a “property settlement agreement” and Hunt paid Worrod for her share of the house, becoming the sole owner.

Worrod put her belongings in storage but stayed in the house, with Hunt as her surety, until June 4, 2011 — when she was arrested for breach of bail conditions related to drinking. Police reports said she had been living in a guest room, and after the arrest, she lived with her daughters in Barrie, according to her bail conditions.

The judge accepted that Hunt had bought her out of the house and officially ended the relationship before his June 18, 2011, accident.

“In my view,” Koke wrote, “the evidence overwhelmingly supports a finding that Mr. Hunt had not only made up his mind not to marry Ms. Worrod prior to the accident but also that he did not have the requisite mental capacity to marry Ms. Worrod following the accident.” (The italics are Koke’s.)

Hunt’s accident was brutal. He was turning a corner on an ATV, hit a ditch and flew through the air, smashing his head into a tree, his son Justin said. Hunt was airlifted to a Sudbury hospital and placed on life support.

Immediately after the accident, Hunt’s sons, Justin and Brad, rushed to the hospital (a three-hour drive) while Worrod and her daughter drove to Hunt’s house “when she knew Brad and Justin would not be present,” the judgment said. When Hunt’s sons returned, Worrod “refused to allow them entry and declared that the house belonged to her.”

“It took police involvement to remove her,” Koke noted.

After the crash, Hunt spent 18 days in a coma. He slowly emerged and four months later was released into the care of his sons, with the expectation of a $1-million personal injury settlement. His mobility and balance were so bad that Brad slept in his father’s bed to stop him from falling.

At the time of the wedding, three days after leaving the hospital, Hunt’s vulnerability was undisputed. Seven medical experts, plus hospital staff reports, all described him as intellectually devastated, with serious physical issues, according to the decision.

One psychiatrist said “much or most of Mr. Hunt’s brain had lost tissue and shrank.” The doctor also said Hunt was “increasingly malleable and easily influenced using cuing and emotional stimulation, including sexual relations.”

On Oct. 24, 2011, the day of the wedding, Hunt’s panicked sons couldn’t find their father but tracked him to the motel through charges to his credit card, the judgment said. The boys called police, who found him, but Hunt was already married. The ceremony had taken place just hours before, at the motel.

At the time of the wedding, a clinical psychologist testified, Hunt was “extremely vulnerable, especially to reinjuring the brain and putting himself in unsafe positions.”

The agreement of the medical experts made it clear that Hunt did not have the “capacity” to marry.

In his decision, Koke issued an order prohibiting contact between Worrod and Hunt. He cited constant telephone calls from Worrod to Hunt, including a 2015 call that Justin recorded. The judgment described the call, saying Worrod “repeatedly attempted to convince Mr. Hunt that his sons were simply motivated by self-interest, and were trying to take away his business and his house.” If they were her kids, she said, she would have “hog tied them and kicked their ass all the way down the f—ing street by now.”

The decision to void the marriage is notable because Ontario’s Marriage Act allows almost anyone who is not “under the influence of intoxicating liquor or drugs or any other reason” to marry. The rules are loose, leaving little to stop vulnerable people, often the elderly with dementia, from being pressured to marry.

McEwan, the Hunt family lawyer, says the decision to void the marriage shows that courts are recognizing the rights of a vulnerable person. Her law firm, founded by lawyer Kimberly Whaley, has long pushed for updates to estate and capacity-to-marry laws.

In his decision, Koke relied on a recent British Columbia judgment (another predatory marriage case) that concluded an individual must be able to control their personal care — and property — to have the “capacity” to marry. Previous case law only required an individual have control over their personal care.

“I think it certainly moves the law forward,” McEwan says. “It gives hope to lawyers and families alike that these marriages can be found to be void … which I think is excellent.”

Hunt’s case is unusual because most predatory brides and grooms target elderly people who are lonely or fragile because marriage immediately revokes an existing legal will. After death, the new bride or groom gets the first $200,000 and must split the rest with surviving children — although some burn through the money.

Ontario protections are lagging behind provinces like Alberta and British Columbia, which updated estate laws so that marriage doesn’t immediately revoke a will. Quebec doesn’t revoke wills nor do most American states.

It’s a caution for families, particularly when an estimated $1 trillion in inheritance is expected to be passed through generations over the next 20 years.

Graham Webb, a lawyer with the Advocacy Centre for the Elderly, says today’s aging society is sitting on huge wealth, mostly from real estate, so there’s “a lot of incentive for people to prey on cognitively impaired older adults.”

Hunt is now 56 and living with his son, Justin, 31, in the same home in the town of Novar. Brad, 27, lives nearby with his wife and baby daughter.

The brothers run Hunt’s company, Camel Lake Bobcat and Landscaping, while the insurance money pays for Hunt’s care, from physiotherapists to personal support workers.

The Hunt brothers managed to keep their father’s five horses, including two thoroughbreds, former racehorses from Toronto. One of Hunt’s favourite therapies is horseback riding, says Justin.

While Hunt testified in court, he doesn’t fully understand the outcome of the case. But his sons do.

“It’s a relief,” says Justin. ‘Nothing was worse than worrying about something for over six years, every day and night. It’s been nice not to have to worry about Dad losing his house, or not having a decent life.” ”

CAN A PREDATORY MARRIAGE END IN CALIFORNIA IN A CONSERVATORSHIP?

If you are worried about a predatory marriage of a loved one who is elderly or disabled in Los Angeles California, call Mina Sirkin, probate and conservatorship attorney who can assist you in protecting your elder loved ones. California law allows for invalidation of a predatory marriage of an elderly or disabled person in a conservatorship and family law proceeding.   There are steps you can take to protect your assets in the event of a predatory marital situation.  Call Mina Sirkin 818-340-4479 or email us.

Do these to curb Alzheimer’s Disease

Do these to curb Alzheimer’s Disease

Quoted from Ivanhoe Newswire

ORLANDO, Fla. – Caffeine consumed too late in the day may disturb your sleep which could ultimately lead to harming your brain. But your morning cup of coffee contains the chemical EHT, which has been shown to help protect against Alzheimer’s disease.

Eric McDade, DO, a Dementia Specialist and Assistant Professor, Department of Neurology, at Washington University at St. Louis School of Medicine said, “it would be a lot easier to stop the disease from progressing rather than trying to catch up and prevent all of these sorts of downstream effects that happen after the disease is really sort of set forth.”

So what can you do in addition to that morning cup of joe? Try drinking black and green tea, they are also rich in antioxidants that may fend off damage throughout the body, including your brain.

Take up dance. Dancing not only exercise’s social smarts, but learning new steps help brain fitness and the fun can help reduce stress.

You could also take up crafting. One mayo clinic study showed the likelihood of mild cognitive impairment was reduced by 55 percent in those who took up activities such as woodworking, pottery, ceramics, and quilting.

Another option: throw dinner parties. Doctor Kenneth S. Kosik, author of “Outsmarting Alzheimer’s” says deciding what and how much to serve, who to invite, and who is sitting where forces your brain to contemplate complex social decisions along with using math and strategic planning skills.

Did you know potatoes could be harmful to your brain health? They contain an amino acid that when exposed to high heat can change into the neurotoxin acrylamide. But the American Cancer Society says soaking your potatoes in water for 15 to 30 minutes before cooking can help prevent this change, protecting your mind.”

Sometimes helping family members with Alzheimer’s means giving them a tool to help themselves.   At Sirkin Law Group, we give family members the legal tools to help those affected by Alzheimer’s or dementia and to prepare by Alzheimer’s law and estate planning.

 

California Executor of Estate Mishaps To be Avoided

Good Rules for an Executor of Estate and Will

Many times when a person is nominated as an executor of an estate in a will, he or she does not know of the potential for mishaps.  Errors of executors of estate range from errors in judgment, namely negligence, to intentional acts which may damage the value of the estate and ultimately what the heirs would potentially inherit.

What is considered an error by an executor?

In summary, anytime an executor’s action leads to a loss in the estate, his action may be deemed an error.   In California, when an executor of a probate estate is not sure about his duty, he may petition the court for instruction to avoid such mishaps.

Losses can occur in an estate as follows:

  1. Mixing up the assets  of the estate with your personal assets.
  2. Staying in the property rent-free.
  3.  Letting someone else stay in the property rent-free.
  4.  Not investing estate assets in interest-bearing accounts.
  5.  Taking on risky investments in the estate.
  6.  Personally profit from an asset of the estate, or a transaction of the estate.
  7.  Having a side deal with an agent to receive a kick back.
  8.  Failing to inventory all assets of the estate.
  9.  Failing to adequately bond the estate, when there is no bond waiver.
  10.  Failing to put an asset in blocked accounts when the probate court requires it.
  11.  Not keeping records of the assets and expenses of the estate, or failing to keep the records in a way that can substantiate an accounting.

PETITION FOR INSTRUCTIONS IN PROBATE

When there are questions about duties of the executor of a will, the executor may submit a petition for instructions to the court asking the court to decide on the action before the executor makes a decision.   This prevents losses and later litigation over the action by the executor of the estate.  a Petition for Instructions is a fairly easy fix for many issues that arise from actions of executors.

If you are named as an executor of a will or estate, you should be careful not to make the above mistakes.   If you are unsure about an action, it is very simple to ask the court to instruct you.

Call Estate Attorney, Mina Sirkin, Specialist California Attorney for advice for a California executor of an estate.  818.340.4479 or Email.

 

 

CCP 664.6 Enforcement of Settlements New 2017 California Case

On November 29, 2017, California Court of Appeal published a new opinion regarding the requirements of the enforcement language in settlement agreements.

In SHAUNAK SAYTA, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. EDMUND CHU et al.,, the Court was asked to enforce a written settlement agreement.   The court refused to enforce the settlement agreement because the parties failed to request retention of jurisdiction at a hearing and in the settlement agreement, before the dismissal.  The court based its decision on the fact that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the motion because the language in the settlement was insufficient.

The Court concluded that the language of the settlement agreement musts state that the parties request that the court retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement.   The court stated that “By its very terms, section 664.6 is limited to settlements reached in pending litigation.” (Viejo Bancorp, Inc. v. Wood (1989) 217 Cal.App.3d 200, 206 (Viejo Bancorp).) . Therefore, if you dismiss the case before the request is made, then the court loses jurisdiction.

Here the court based its conclusion that, . . . the court lost subject matter jurisdiction when the parties filed a voluntary dismissal of the entire cause. Since subject matter jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent, waiver, or estoppel, the court cannot ‘retain’ jurisdiction it has lost.” (Viejo Bancorp, at pp. 206–207.)

The moral of the story is, that the Parties during some proceeding before a dismissal, must request that the court retain jurisdiction.   This case is important for all civil, probate and trust settlements, and for attorneys to review.   For probate and trusts attorneys, it appears that the court wants parties to appear, to ask the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce, and not to dismiss the case before the court makes an order retaining jurisdiction for enforcement purposes.

Call Mina Sirkin, probate attorney about probate and trust settlement requirements in Los Angeles California. Call 818.340.4479.

 

Conservatorship Waiver of Rights to a Jury Trial

Conservatorship of B.C. (2016) 6 CA5th 1028

In a probate conservatorship proceeding the court is not required to obtain a personal waiver of the proposed conservatee’s right to a jury trial. LPS Conservatorship in proceedings are distinguished.

Conservatorship Litigation can be difficult in Los Angeles.   Let us guide you in your conservatorship case.

Conservatorships for Disabled with Alcohol or Drug Use, or Developmental Disabilities

Conservatorships for Disabled with Alcohol or Drug Use, or Developmental Disabilities in California

Sirkin Law provides professional conservatorship services for families with incapacitated members or those suffering from alcoholism or drug use.

When a parent did not set up a trust or designate a conservator or a disabled child, the child’s medical care and financial decisions are left for others to decide.   This is often not consistent with the wishes of the parent who was the primary caregiver for the disabled child.

The selection or nomination of the  conservator of a disabled child can be made in a will, or in a separate document.  Picking a conservator requires the parent to think of many things, such as:

  1. Who will make the decision regarding where the disabled child will live.   Residence issues can get complicated when a disabled person is a consumer of the Regional Center, as different Regional Centers offer varying services.
  2. Who will make decisions for the health care and medical needs of the proposed conservatee is the conservator of the person.
  3. Who will make financial decisions for the proposed conservatee is the conservator of the estate.
  4. The conservator of the person does not have to be the same person as the conservator of the estate for the special needs person.
  5. In most cases, the SSI, Regional Center respite and IHSS benefits do not require a conservatorship of the estate, unless there is a dispute regarding the suitability of the representative payee.
  6. Social Security has forms for designation of the representative payee of SSI, which falls outside of conservatorships.
  7. A parent can set up forms to leave authority to another person make financial and medical decisions for not only himself or herself, but for a disabled child with developmental or other disability.
  8. Mina Sirkin is a conservatorship attorney with over 25 years of experience filing conservatorships petitions and nominations in the Los Angeles court.
  9. As a PVP attorney, Mina Sirkin is often appointed by the court to represent the proposed conservatee in his or her interest.
  10. When it comes to advice to the conservator, we counsel conservators about the duties of the conservator in California. Conservatorship estate management requires books and records to be set up from the start of the case to prepare the conservator for court required accountings.   The appointed conservator must account at the first year anniversary of the conservatorship, and every two years thereafter, unless the court requires a more frequent schedule.  This close review is the conservatorship process by which the court determines whether or not the conservator should continue to act.
  11. As one of the duties of the conservator, he or she must find, locate and marshal the asset of the conservatee. This is solely for the benefit of the conservatee and the conservator must not obtain any personal benefit from those assets. Where there are questions about assets, the conservator must file a petition for instructions to obtain the court’s approval of his or her actions.
  12. Conservatorships for alcoholic and drug disabled individuals can often result in clean up and rehabilitation of those with specific disabilities.
  13. Care management is a large part of the conservatorship disputes. When a conservator is both a conservator and a caregiver, the court should set an amount for caregiving as opposed to conservatorship tasks, so that there are no overlaps in what the conservator does, and the caregiving fees. Caregiving fees when ordered can be paid before the conservatorship fees are ordered, and are often the source of conflict in families.
  14. Conservatorship services and caregiver services are in fact two different things and there should be distinction between the types of services in the conservatorship order.

When initiating a conservatorship in Los Angeles, if you are someone other than the parent of the proposed conservatee, you must obtain a nomination from the parent, as the parent has priority in appointments in conservatorships.

Consult with Los Angeles attorney Mina Sirkin regarding the importance of conservatorship care management orders for protection of both the conservator and the conservatee, and to avoid unnecessary conservatorship litigation.   We have access to hundreds of professionals who serve the conservatorship area and will readily share that information with our clients.  Call 818.340.4479 or Email.

Call our conservatorship paralegal to set an appointment for you to discuss your conservatorship solutions with our specialist lawyer.    We serve all of Sourthern California, but specifically: Los Angeles, West Los Angeles, Glendale, San Fernando Valley and Conejo Valleys, as well as Orange and Ventura County.

How does forming a Special Needs Trust help?

How to save inheritances from Medi-Cal?

How does forming or creating a special needs trust help in Los Angeles?  There are several ways a special needs trust may be used to assist Los Angeles County residents who may be receiving government benefits.

A.  By creating a bucket or vehicle to manage a disabled person’s assets, a special needs person can receive his or her government benefits, while getting benefits of the trust, and all without losing his/her government aid.

B.  Leaving an inheritance to a special needs person in a special trust protects the needs of the person, and protects them from persons who may otherwise target them for financial abuse.

C.  As part of the tools to manage a special person with disability’s rights, this type of trust sets parameters around the actions of the trustee to insure that the government help continues to flow to our loved one.

D.  Protecting a person from himself is also a function of this trust, when the person is unable to manage his impulses in spending money.   An example of this type of person can be a person with alcoholism or a drug use history, or simply someone who cannot say no to his spend thrift habits.

Located in Los Angeles County, Sirkin Law Group Special Needs experts, attorneys and staff help residents, including those in the San Fernando Valley to create and protect the cognitively impaired or loved ones with a physical disability.  We also handle limited conservatorship cases for adults who have one or more developmental disability, or mental health issues.  Call us in Woodland Hills at 818.340.4479 or email: MinaSirkin@gmail.com for help.

 

Pensions and Legally Separated Spouses in California

Irvin v Contra Costa Employees’ Retirement Assn (2017) 13 CA5th 162. A legally

separated surviving spouse is a “surviving spouse” for purposes of receiving pension

continuation benefits under the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937.

Pension Litigation and Los Angeles Probate