10:32 AM: WESA changes: wills not automatically revoked by testator marriage. Spouse definition now includes common law. If that means someone has multiple spouses, those spouses can agree on split (how likely is that?) or they can take it to court.
10:22 AM: Reisman said ex husband entered estate freeze to intentionally reduce net family property in event of marriage breakdown. Court denied that application. The Reismans were happily married in 1998 when freeze occurred and parties’ separation not foreseeable. #STEP
10:19 AM: Stop using “per stirpes” when talking about children. When gift made to a single generation, there is a contradiction in terms #STEP
10:18 AM: Per stirpes (equal distribution) clauses are still sources of error and estate litigation. Estate planners should know better #STEP
10:17 AM: Safeguards put in Family Law Act with regard to matrimonial home can be frustrated if the home if put in a trust. #STEP
10:13 AM: No medical definition of “artificial and heroic measures” so clients should define along with estate planners in PoA personal care. #STEP
10:12 AM: Think about revisiting PoA personal care. Could simply give broad powers to attorneys. Side doc could name the testator’s wishes but not be legally binding. There may be alternatives to this approach.
10:11 AM: Lessons: review boilerplate language with clients and revise or remove imprecise words like “heroic and artificial measures.” #STEP
10:10 AM: Example of Friedberg: she was Orthodox Jew and the end of life clause was inconsistent with her religious beliefs.
10:09 AM: PoA for personal care: clients don’t always understand “artificial and heroic measures” even though they sign off. #STEP
10:06 AM: Mrs. Carrigan denied because separate and apart. Quinn denied because can’t have two spouses. Spousal entitlement fell away. #STEP
10:05 AM: Carrigan v Carrigan: pension benefits go to spouse on death. Carrgians married but living separate and apart when he died. He lived w Quinn.