King & Wood, P.A.

Is an Estate Plan Battle Looming?

“If you own any property at all, you probably know about estate planning. You can decide what happens to your assets after you die, of course.”

Some people don’t create an estate plan before they die. Or, if they do, they failed to have an estate plan created with an experienced estate planning attorney and their will is unclear, or even invalid. They might die with debts conflicting with their wishes. These and other situations can lead to a long and expensive probate period, as described in the article “In-fighting Families, Wills, Laws & Other Things That Could Hold Up Probate” from yahoo!.

How long does it take for an estate to move through the probate process? It depends upon the complexity of the estate and how well—or poorly—the estate plan was created.

What is probate? Probate is the process where the court oversees the settlement of an estate after the owner dies. If there is a will, the court authenticates the will and accepts or denies the executor named in the will to carry out its instructions. The executor is usually the decedent’s spouse or closest living relative.

How does probate work? Probate is governed by state law, so different states have slightly different processes. The first thing is authenticating the will and appointing an executor. The court then locates and accesses all of the property owned by the decedent. If there are any debts, the estate must first pay off the debts. When the debts have been paid, the court can distribute the remaining assets in the estate to heirs.

If there is no will, the person is said to have died intestate. The court may then appoint an administrator to carry out the necessary tasks of paying debts and distributing assets. The administrator is paid from the estate.

How long does it take? It depends. If the decedent had placed most of their assets in trust, those assets are not subject to probate and are distributed according to the terms of the trust. If there are multiple properties in multiple states, probate has to be conducted in all states where property is owned. In other words, probate could be six months or three years.

Estate size matters. Certain states use the total value of the estate to determine its size, rather than examine individual properties. Possessions subject to probate usually include personal property, cash and cash accounts, transferable accounts with no named beneficiaries, assets with shared ownership or tenancy in common and real estate.

Possessions not typically subject to probate include insurance proceeds, accounts owned as Joint Tenant with Rights of Survivorship, accounts with a beneficiary designation and assets owned in trusts.

Probate varies from state to state. Probate is not nationally regulated, and state-level laws vary. An estate could be swiftly completed in one state and take a few months in another. Some states have adopted the Uniform Probate Code (UPC), designed to streamline the probate process by creating standardized laws. However, only 18 states have adopted this code to date.

Fighting among heirs makes probate take longer. Even small disputes can extend the probate process. If there are estranged family members, or someone feels they deserve a larger share of the estate, conflicts can lead to probate coming to a full stop.

An experienced estate planning attorney can help structure an estate plan to minimize the amount of assets passing through probate, while ensuring that your wishes are followed and loved ones are protected.

Reference: yahoo! (Nov. 21, 2022) “In-fighting Families, Wills, Laws & Other Things That Could Hold Up Probate”

Can You Prevent Will from Being Contested?

“From contentious relatives to scam artists, wills are not immune to the threat of a contest. If you have an inkling such a fight could be in your estate’s future, here are some ways to limit the risk.”

The best planning doesn’t preclude disappointed family members and hangers-on from trying to get what they consider their “fair share” of an estate.

There are some steps you can take to avoid this happening to your estate, says a recent article, “Counterattack: Tips for Thwarting a Will Contest,” from Kiplinger.

Traditionally, an in terrorem provision is added, known as a “no-contest” clause to a will or a revocable trust to discourage attacks. If triggered, it can cause an heir to lose their entire inheritance if the person is excluded from a will or trust, or if the person challenges the appointment of the personal representative or trustee or claims to be a creditor when the probate court has denied this status.

However, the no-contest provision isn’t always permitted. They are unenforceable in Florida and Indiana. In some courts, states may refuse to enforce them under certain fact scenarios. There are other ways to achieve the goal of excluding an heir or maintaining a firm grip on the estate.

Authorize personal representative or trustee to pay the cost of a potential contest. In some states, personal representatives and trustees are authorized to litigate on behalf of an estate or trust or retain attorneys to do so. Even when a potential heir is omitted from a will or trust, knowing the assets of the estate will be used for litigation expenses and will shrink the size of the estate is enough to deter some litigious people.

Require mediation for any disputes. Some states allow the use of mediation, arbitration, or alternative dispute resolutions to resolve issues. A will could require a potential challenger to use an alternative to litigation and provide guidelines for dispute mediation, from determining how mediators will be selected, whether the process should be adjudicatory or collaborative and the scope, timing and nature of mediation.

Establish a “litigation holdback fund.” Instead of forfeiting the entire interest in the estate by filing a lawsuit, the beneficiary’s interest in the estate could be escrowed, with access restricted during a will contest. When eventually paid to the beneficiary, the interest would be reduced by the cost of litigation.

Create a separate trust for a contentious beneficiary. The law requires beneficiaries the right to request a complete copy of the trust agreement created for their benefit. By creating revocable trusts for each beneficiary, the beneficiary named in one trust will not see the contents of the trust for other beneficiaries. This could prevent a disgruntled person from comparing their trust to another, but there is a risk of a beneficiary alleging a fraudulent transfer in creating separate trusts.

What else can you do to prevent a will contest?

• Have the testator/settlor undergo an examination by two physicians to eliminate any charges of incapacity and provide the physician’s signed statements as scheduled to the will or trust.
• Include a statement of intent from the testator/settlor about the estate plan to demonstrate their intentions.
• Video the execution of the will or trust. Explain the dispositive scheme and inclusion of beneficiaries and obtain a signed statement from each witness and notary. Have a third party certify the video’s authenticity.

If you are concerned about protecting your estate plan, it’s best to meet with an experienced estate planning attorney to review your estate plan for any potential vulnerabilities. A plan in advance could save all concerned from the headache and expense of an estate battle.

Reference: Kiplinger (Nov. 10, 2022) “Counterattack: Tips for Thwarting a Will Contest”

How Not to Build a Family Football Dynasty

“A decade before his death, the billionaire owner of the Denver Broncos consulted with attorneys about the orderly handover of the team after his death. He crafted a carefully delineated trust that his hand-picked trustees would oversee.”

Pat Bowlen did everything right when planning for his NFL team to be transferred to new owners. He created a succession plan and filed it with the NFL, as required by the organization’s bylaws. He notified heirs of developments as they occurred. Despite this, for years before and after Bowlen died in 2019, the battle over his estate and ownership of the team was fiercer than any on the playing field, according to a recent article from Variety, “Broncos’ Fumbled Handoff Reveals Perils of NFL Estate Planning.”

With an average age of 72, National Football League owners are facing inheritance and estate planning challenges familiar to any family embarked upon planning for distribution of their possessions. However, it is on a gigantic scale. The average NFL franchise is worth around $4.14 billion, and ownership transfers must address not only taxes and estate law, but rules and restrictions of the NFL.

Trust and estate attorneys believe the NFL teams are ripe for succession problems. The value of the team, plus the scarcity—there are a limited number of teams, after all—is expected to lead to property disputes that can’t be easily resolved simply by selling the property and splitting the proceeds.

This past spring, a group led by Rob Walton, 77-year-old steward of the Walmart fortune and father of three, purchased the Broncos for $4.65 billion. The deal marked the conclusion of several years of high- profile legal battles where Bowlen family members went at it in court and in the media and underscores the unpredictable nature of succession planning.

What happened to the Bowlen family?

As Bowlen started to experience Alzheimer’s disease in the late 2000s, he started planning. In 2009, he revoked one trust to create a new one to be overseen by three trustees, who were each either a team executive or attorneys he’d known for many years. None was a member of the family.

The trust was created to manage a complex structure of the team’s ownership. The team was owned by PDB Sports, a limited partnership owned itself by Bowlen Sports Inc., which was owned by Patrick Bowlen and his brother John Bowlen. The trust would also operate other family-owned team properties, including Stadium Management Company, which operated Denver’s famous Mile High Stadium.

If the structure of the business wasn’t complex enough, the family’s internal relations were equally complicated. Seven children from two marriages, along with three siblings had been co-owners at various points in time and all had children of their own. No one agreed about the future of the team. They also disagreed about the competency and objectivity of the trustees.

Bowlen was the scion of a wealthy Canadian oil man. He and two brothers and one sister bought most of the Broncos in 1984 and the remainder of the team two years later. Each sibling owned about 25% of the team in 1986. The set up wasn’t sustainable because the NFL requires each team to identify one controlling owner. Over time, Pat Bowlen purchased equity from his siblings and gained control of the franchise. At the time of his death, he owned 76% of the team, and his brother John owned the other 24%.

Bowlen wanted the family to own the team just like the Rooney family, owners of the Pittsburgh Steelers. Selling the team was never part of his plan. However, his wishes were not expressed in his estate planning documents or trusts. The trustees declined a different succession plan from two daughters from his first marriage. When his second wife learned one of the daughters from the first marriage had attended an owner’s meeting in 2021, things got hotter. The second wife threatened to fire a trustee if the daughter from the first marriage began ascending as a controlling owner and the battles continued. The following years were filled with lawsuits and accusations.

There were many factors in this epic estate battle. However, it’s pretty likely having so many families embroiled in a high stakes battle would have undone any estate plan. A complex ownership structure, multiple families and a big price tag all contributed to the sale of the team, undermining Bowlen’s wishes to create a football family dynasty.

For most families, the stakes are not as high. However, the emotions can be just as intense. An estate plan created by an experienced estate planning attorney plus a plan for communication between all family members more often than not will achieve the desired goals.

Reference: Variety (Sep. 10, 2022) “Broncos’ Fumbled Handoff Reveals Perils of NFL Estate Planning”

James Brown Estate Battle Resolved … Almost, but Not Quite

James Brown Estate Battle Resolved … Almost, but Not Quite

“For more than a decade, Brown’s heirs and estate administrators, including Mr. Bauknight and Adele Pope, a former executor, have battled in court over the value of his estate.”

A company specializing in buying and marketing estates and song catalogs has bought the assets of James Brown’s estate, including music rights, real estate and control over Brown’s name and likeness. It is hoped that the sale, worth an estimated $90 million, will finally achieve Brown’s wishes to finance scholarships for needy children, according to a recent article from The New York Times titled “After 15 Years of Infighting, James Brown’s Estate is Sold.”

The money will be used to endow the Brown scholarship trust in perpetuity, said the accountant who has served as the Brown estate’s executor since 2009. The deal includes a provision for the buyer, Primary Wave, to also contribute a percentage of future earnings to the scholarships, intended for children in South Carolina, where Brown was born, and Georgia, where he grew up.

This is a step forward in one of the longest and most contentious estate conflicts in the high-profile world of celebrity estates. Multiple lawsuits in state and federal courts have cost millions in legal fees and left behind what one official described as “As big a tangle as you’ve ever seen.”

Part of the mess centered around Ms. Tommie Rae Hynie, a singer who married James Brown in 2001. It was later learned she was already married to another man. With her spousal status unclear, Ms. Hynie and five of Brown’s children battled over the estate. Their goal was to set aside his will and negotiate a settlement of their own to receive big chunks of the estate.

They found a willing listener in a state attorney general and a state judge who approved their agreement in 2009. However, four years later, the South Carolina Supreme Court struck down their settlement, calling it “a dismemberment of Brown’s carefully crafted estate plan.” It also ruled unanimously that Ms. Hynie was not Mr. Brown’s legal spouse.

Brown’s heirs and several executors have also fought over the estate’s value. One estimated it as $5 million, while another put it at $84 million. The discrepancy was claimed to be a result of savvy management of the estate after Brown’s death.

Negotiations for the sale were handled by John Branca, who was Michael Jackson’s longtime attorney and one of the executors of Jackson’s estate.

However, it’s not over yet. For one thing, the longstanding battle between two executors, Mr. Bauknight and Ms. Pope, removed as executor in 2009, isn’t over. She is suing the estate; he and others have filed suit against her. These cases are under appeal and until they are settled, or a court decision is made, no distributions can be made and no scholarships can be paid.

Reference: The New York Times (Dec. 13, 2021) “After 15 Years of Infighting, James Brown’s Estate is Sold.”

Prince Philip’s Will: Are Royals Different than Regular People?

“Should the Royal family be an exception to the normal laws governing probate?”

There’s a royal battle brewing over Prince Philip’s will, but it’s not what you might expect. The lawsuit isn’t being brought by a creditor or even a potential beneficiary of the estate, A major United Kingdom newspaper, The Guardian, has instead announced that it’s taking legal action. This is according to a recent article titled “The Legal Battle Over Prince Philip’s Will” from Wealth Management.

The newspaper is arguing that the press should be allowed to attend the hearing for the will and claims that doing so constitutes a serious interference with principle of open justice. In other words, the Royal Family is a public family, funded by the public and the public is entitled to know what’s in the will.

A hearing was held in September concerning keeping the will sealed for 90 years, and the press was neither notified nor invited. The only people in attendance were Prince Philip’s estate attorney and an Attorney General. The court’s position is that the presence of the Attorney General represented the people.

British law is similar to American law, when it comes to making wills public. Once the will goes into probate, following the death of the person, it’s a public document. This is why estate planning attorneys recommend using trusts, which remain private and allow assets to pass outside of the probate process. It’s also why certain information should never be in a will, like financial account titles and numbers.

The idea of sealing a will is an exception under rare circumstances, and in England this has to date only been done for the royal family. The president of the family division of the high court ruled that these exceptions are necessary to enhance the protection of the royal’s private lives and the dignity of the sovereign and other close family members.

There have been many attempts to challenge the privacy of royal wills. So far, none has been successful.

The question posed by this lawsuit concerning the public’s right to know is not a new one. However, it will be interesting to watch in a day and age when royalty and the role of the royal family is under severe scrutiny.

The royal family is funded by taxpayers, who routinely question how much privacy should be permitted when the money comes from their pockets. Whether such special rules are really needed to protect the “integrity” of the royals has been an on-going debate in the U.K.

In the United States, high-net worth and high-visibility individuals and families use trusts and other methods to maximize their privacy. Even “regular” indivuduals use trusts to convey assets to their heirs.

Reference: Wealth Management (Dec. 1, 2021) “The Legal Battle Over Prince Philip’s Will”

Singer’s 15-Year Estate Battle Is Wrapping Up

“The family of entertainer James Brown has reached a settlement ending a 15-year battle over the late singer’s estate, an attorney involved in the mediation said Friday.”

The fighting over Brown’s estate has been going on since he died 15 years ago on Christmas Day at age 73. A series of bizarre events followed, says the Associated Press in the article “Family of James Brown settles 15-year battle over his estate.” They included photos of a woman who claimed to have been married to Brown being locked out of his home, sobbing and rattling the iron gates to his estate.

James Brown was known for his flashy performances and iconic chart-topping hits, like “I Feel Good,” “A Man’s World,” “Pappas Got a Brand-New Bag,” and many more. Unfortunately, he was plagued by drug problems and mismanaged finances, which shrank his estate.

More than twelve lawsuits were filed by people trying to establish claims to his assets. Courts estimates of his net worth range from $5 million to more than $100 million.

The battle was gruesome from the start, since it wasn’t just about money. Brown’s family fought over what was to happen with his body. His remains, inside a gold casket, were in a funeral home in cold storage for more than two months, until this issue was resolved.

Brown was eventually interred in Beech Island, South Carolina, at the home of one of his daughters. The family had plans to create a shrine to him, using Elvis Presley’s Graceland as a model, but the idea never became reality.

In 2020, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled that Tommie Rae Hynie, the woman who claimed to be his wife, had never been legally married to Brown and had no claim on his estate. Justices also ordered a circuit court to proceed with probating Brown’s estate, following the directions of his estate plan.

Brown’s estate plan outlined plans for a trust to be created to use his music royalties to fund educational expenses for children in South Carolina and Georgia.

There had been a 2009 settlement plan that would have given almost half of his estate to a charitable organization, a quarter of his estate to Hynie and the rest to be divided among his adult children. That settlement was overturned in 2013, with a judge saying the settlement did not follow Brown’s wishes for most of his money to go to charity.

A professional manager had been brought in to take control of Brown’s assets from the estate’s trustees to settle his debts.

Reference: Associated Press (July 23, 2021) “Family of James Brown settles 15-year battle over his estate”

Celebrity Estate Planning Mistakes

“If you do not learn from your mistakes, you are doomed to repeat them. In Estate Planning, if you do not learn from other’s mistakes, you are likely to repeat them.”

The size and scope of the mistakes made by celebrities may be enormous, but many of the mistakes are common for, well, us common people. Learning estate planning lessons from the mistakes made by celebrities and very wealthy people is a good way to prevent yourself from making those same mistakes, says the recent article “Lessons to be Learned From Failed Celebrity Estates” from Forbes.

Let’s start with James Gandolfini, famed for his role in The Sopranos and many movies and television shows. Strangely, he left only 20% of his estate to his wife. Had he left the entire estate to his wife, the family would not have gotten stuck with a huge tax bill. Instead, 55% of his total estate, including a significant art collection, had to be sold to pay estate taxes.

James Brown, the godfather of soul, left copyrights to his music to an educational foundation, tangible assets to his children and $2 million for his children’s education. That sounds like smart thinking, but his estate planning documents contained a great deal of ambiguous language. His girlfriend and her children challenged the estate. Six years and millions in estate taxes later, his estate was settled.

Michael Jackson’s estate fail is a classic error. He had a trust created but failed to fund it. The battle in the California Probate Court over control of his sizable estate could have been avoided.

Howard Hughes, famed entrepreneur, aviator and engineer wanted his $2.5 billion fortune to go towards medical research, but no valid will was found. Instead, his assets were divided among 22 cousins. Before he died, he did take the step of gifting Hughes Aircraft Co. to the Hughes Medical Institute. The company was not included in his estate, but everything else was.

Author Michael Crichton was survived by his pregnant fifth wife, and a son was born after his death. Crichton failed to update his will to include the future offspring. His daughter from a previous marriage fought to exclude his son from the estate. His will included language that specifically overrode a California statute that would have included his son in the estate. All heirs not otherwise mentioned in his will were to be excluded.

Doris Duke inherited a tobacco fortune. When she died, she left a $1.2 billion estate to her foundation, with her butler in charge of the foundation. The result was a series of lawsuits claiming that the foundation was being mismanaged, and cost millions in legal fees. Foundations of that size need a strong management team to avoid legal challenges.

Few estate failures are as graphic as that of Casey Kasem. The famed radio personality’s estate battle after his death included kidnapping and the theft of his corpse. His wife and children from a prior marriage fought over his care, his end-of-life care and the disposition of his remains.

Iconic artist Prince died without a will. The Queen of Soul, Aretha Franklin, died without a will, then handwritten wills were found in her home weeks after she died. For both families, lawsuits, court proceedings and huge estate tax bills could have been avoided.

If you don’t have an estate plan, get it started. If you haven’t looked at your estate plan in a while, have it reviewed. Make provisions for your family, take a close look at potential tax liabilities and if you have been married more than once, make sure to have a rock-solid estate plan that will withstand challenges.

Reference: Forbes (June 18, 2021) “Lessons to be Learned From Failed Celebrity Estates”

Is an Irrevocable Trust a Good Idea?

“Like a lot of estate planning vehicles, irrevocable trusts work very well for some purposes—particularly for tax avoidance and asset protection—and not so well for other purposes.”

An irrevocable trust is mainly used for tax planning, says a recent article from Think Advisor titled “10 Facts to Know About Irrevocable Trusts.” Its key purpose is to take assets out of an estate, reducing the chances of having to pay estate taxes. For estate planning purposes, placing assets inside the irrevocable trust is the same as giving it to an heir. If the estate exceeds the current limit of $11.7 million, then an irrevocable trust would be a smart move. Remember the $11.7 million includes life insurance policy proceeds. Many states with estate taxes also have far lower exemptions than the federal estate tax, so high income families still have to be concerned with paying estate taxes.

However, let’s not forget that beneficiaries must pay taxes on the income they receive from an irrevocable trust, usually at ordinary income tax rates. On the plus side, trusts are not subject to gift tax, so the trust can pay out more than the current gift tax limit of $15,000 every year.

If the trust itself generates income that remains inside the trust, then the trust will have to pay income taxes on the income.

Asset protection is another benefit from an irrevocable trust. If you are sued, any assets in the irrevocable trust are beyond the reach of a legal judgment, a worthwhile strategy for people who have a greater likelihood of being sued because of their profession. However, the irrevocable trust must be created long before lawsuits are filed.

A physician who transfers a million-dollar home into the trust on the eve of a malpractice lawsuit, for instance, may be challenged with having made a fraudulent transfer to the trust.

There is a cost to an irrevocable trust’s protection. You have to give up control of the assets and have no control over the trust. Legally you could be a trustee, but that means you have control over the trust, which means you will lose all tax benefits and asset protections.

Most people name a trusted family member or business associate to serve as the trustee. Consider naming a successor trustee, in case the original trustee is unable to fulfill their duties.

If you don’t want to give someone else control of your assets, you may wish to use a revocable trust and give up some of the protections of an irrevocable trust.

Despite the name, changes can be made to an irrevocable trust by the trustee. Trust documents can designate a “trust protector,” who is empowered to make certain changes to the trust. Many states have regulations concerning changes to the administrative aspects of a trust, and a court has the power to make changes to a trust.

An irrevocable trust can buy and sell property. If a house is placed into the irrevocable trust, the house can be sold, as long as the proceeds go into the trust. The trust is responsible for paying taxes on any profits from the sale. However, you can request that the trustee use the proceeds from selling a house to buy a different house. Be sure the new house is titled correctly: owned by the trust, and not you.

Asset swaps may be used to change irrevocable trusts. Let’s say you want to buy back an asset from the trust, but don’t want that asset to go back into your estate when you die. There are tax advantages for doing this. If the trust holds an asset that has become highly appreciated, swap cash for the asset and the basis on which the asset’s capital gains is calculated gets reset to its fair value, eliminating any capital gains on a later sale of the asset.

Loss of control is part of the irrevocable trust downside. Make sure that you have enough assets to live on before putting everything into the trust. You can’t sell assets in the trust to produce personal income.

Transferring assets to an irrevocable trust helps maintain eligibility for means-tested government programs, like Medicaid and Supplemental Security Income. Assets and income sheltered within an irrevocable trust are not counted as personal assets for these kinds of program limits. However, Medicaid has a look-back period of five years, so the transfer of a substantial asset to an irrevocable trust must have taken place five years before applying for Medicaid.

Talk with your estate planning attorney first. Not every irrevocable trust satisfies each of these goals. It is also possible that an irrevocable trust may not fit your needs. An experienced estate planning attorney will be able to create a plan that suits your needs best for tax planning, asset protection and legacy building.

Reference: Think Advisor (Dec. 16, 2020) “10 Facts to Know About Irrevocable Trusts”

Baseball Champion Sues Daughter-In-Law, denies having Dementia

 

“Orlando Cepeda wants to know where his money went. He also wants to learn what happened to all of his baseball memorabilia, including his 1967 National League Most Valuable Player Award, and wants to be made whole.”

Eighty-two-year-old Giants great Orlando Cepeda filed a lawsuit against his daughter-in-law Camille Cepeda alleging elder financial abuse, fraud and infliction of emotional distress, as reported in the article “Giants great Orlando Cepeda denies having dementia, sues daughter-in-law for fraud” from the San Francisco Chronicle. He also accused her of negligence in handling his finances, after giving her power of attorney in 2018.

Cepeda accuses Camille of spending his money on personal expenses, including lease payments on a $62,000 Lexus, a Louis Vuitton handbag, expensive wine and taking out at least $24,000 in cash from his accounts. It also claims that she has placed all of his baseball memorabilia in a storage locker and will not give him the key or the location of the locker. That includes his National League Most Valuable Player trophy, which he wants back.

This is the latest news from a dispute that began after the Hall of Famer married his second wife, Nydia. They had two of Cepeda’s four sons, including Ali Cepeda, who is married to Camille. The parents are now not speaking to their son, and some of the brothers, four in total, have taken sides and are not speaking to each other.

Cepeda granted his daughter-in-law power of attorney in April 2018, two months after he suffered a heart attack and irreversible brain damage caused by oxygen deprivation. She was to have access to his accounts and pay his bills. Before the heart attack, she had handled his financial and business affairs.

On May 29, Camille filed a petition with the court seeking conservatorship of Cepeda, stating that he has dementia and cannot make his own financial decisions. Two of Cepeda’s sons, including Camille’s husband Ali, filed papers supporting her petition.

In Cepeda’s response, he cited two neuropsychological reports, including one done in May, that declared that he was fit to make his own medical decisions and understands all but the most complex financial issues. Cepeda says that his daughter-in-law filed for conservatorship to cover up the fraud that he is alleging in the lawsuit. He says that he does not need a conservator, and if anyone should have that role, it would be his wife Nydia.

The lawsuit filed by Cepeda offers a glimpse into why he believes she wants conservatorship, saying he doesn’t have the capacity to understand the nature and consequences of his remarriage, nor his decision to remove Camille as power of attorney and grant it to Nydia.

The suit alleges that Camille was opposed to the marriage from the start and even suggested they stage a fake ceremony that would not be legally sanctioned.

Cepeda’s lawsuit seeks damages, legal fees and demands that Camille return his memorabilia and all financial records she has allegedly refused to provide to account for how she handed his money. The suit also cites a $62,000 withdrawal to pay Cepeda’s tax bill, which was not actually paid. The filing says she was negotiating with the IRS, but she will not provide the documentation that he needs to settle with the government. Nor did she pay a medical bill for $6,800, although she did cash a check from the insurance company that was sent to pay for it.

Cepeda remains hopeful that the entire matter may be settled, before the case returns to court.

“It’s very painful,” Cepeda told a reporter. “I love my family. I love my kids. But this is life. You have to do what you have to do.”

Reference: San Francisco Chronicle (June 26, 2020) “Giants great Orlando Cepeda denies having dementia, sues daughter-in-law for fraud”

 

Elder Financial Abuse Fraud Occurs, When No One’s Watching

“Take, for example, the sad and sordid tax case of Mary Ellen Cranmer Nice vs. United States of America, which would not have existed if an attentive financial advisor hadn't noticed the large IRA distributions that were allegedly stolen right from under a matriarch’s nose.”

The case of Nice vs. U.S. is a dramatic example of what can happen when there are no professionals involved in an elderly person’s finances and one person has the power to make transactions without supervision. In the article “Tax case reveals possible intrafamily fraud” from Financial Planning, a trusted son allegedly decimated his mother’s IRA and left her estate with $500,000 tax bill.

Mrs. Nice and her husband had been married for more than 60 years. Before he died in 2002, her husband arranged to leave significant assets for his wife’s care. Their son Chip was named executor of the husband’s estate and moved in with his mother. In 2007, she was diagnosed with dementia. As her condition deteriorated, Chip allegedly began fraudulent activities. He gained access to her IRAs, causing distributions to be made from the IRAs and then allegedly taking the funds for his own use.

Chip also filed federal income tax returns for his mother, causing her to execute a fraudulent power of attorney. The federal tax returns treated the IRA distributions as taxable income to Mrs. Nice. She not only lost the money in her IRA but got hit with a whopping tax bill.

In 2014, Mrs. Nice’s daughter Julianne applied for and received a temporary injunction against Chip, removing him from her mother’s home and taking away control of her finances. Chip died in 2015. A court found that Mrs. Nice was not able to manage her own affairs and Mary Ellen was appointed as a guardian. Julianne filed amended tax returns on behalf of her mother, claiming a refund for tax years 2006-07 and 2009-13. The IRS accepted the claim for 2009 but denied the claims for 2006 and 2010-2013. The appeal for 2009 was accepted, but the IRS never responded to the claim for 2007. Julianne appealed the denials, but each appeal was denied.

By then, Mrs. Nice had died. Julianne brought a lawsuit against the IRS seeking a refund of $519,502 in federal income taxes plus interest and penalties. The suit contended that because of her brother’s alleged fraudulent acts, Mrs. Nice never received the IRA distributions. Her tax returns for 2011-2014 overstated her actual income, the suit maintained, and she was owed a refund for overpayment. The court did not agree, stating that Julianne failed to show that her mother did not receive the IRA funds and denied the claim.

There are a number of harsh lessons to be learned from this family’s unhappy saga.

When IRA funds are mishandled or misappropriated, it may be possible for the amounts taken to be rolled over to an IRA, if a lawsuit to recover the losses occurs in a timely manner. In 2004, the IRS issued 11 private-letter rulings that allow lawsuit settlements to be rolled over to IRAs. The IRS allowed the rollovers and gave owners 60 days from the receipt of settlement money to complete the rollover.

Leaving one family member in charge of family wealth with no oversight from anyone else—a trustee, an estate planning attorney, or a financial planner—is a recipe for elder financial abuse. Even if the funds had remained in the IRA, a fiduciary would have kept an eye on the funds and any distributions that seemed out of order.

One of the goals of an estate plan is to protect the family’s assets, even from members of their own family. An estate plan can be devised to arrange for the care of a loved one, at the same time it protects their financial interests.

Reference: Financial Planning (March 6, 2020) “Tax case reveals possible intrafamily fraud”