Legal question

[SOONER STEAKER]

Who is a lawyer on here who can give me free advice?

[jk the sooner fan]

be careful what you pay for

[GKeeper316]

im not, but i can pass on your problem to my dad (practiced for 14 years before becoming a school teacher).

[sooner_born_1960]

Just ask your question. You'll get plenty of free advice. You can figure out later who the lawyers are.

[SOONER STEAKER]

Here's my problem. My brother, executor of my recently deceased mother, told me tonight that he will not give me my portion of my mother's estate unless he can control it. He will give my two sister there money but not me.
Give me some advice!!

[sooner_born_1960]

Not a lawyer, but I don't think he can do that. How old are you?

[hawaii 5-0]

Are you currently institutionalized?



5-0


Trump/ Randall 2012

[sooner_born_1960]

Of course it would also depend on the language in the will.

[SOONER STEAKER]

47. still living in mom's house after taking care of her 24/7 for many years

[GKeeper316]

if you are a minor, probably legal. if you aren't a minor, then probably not legal (just a guess not knowing local statutes) and you might look into representation to have your brother removed as executor.

[87sooner]

it's not up to your brother who gets what when...
a judge does that...
as the executor....your brother does what the judge tells him...

[XingTheRubicon]

have him put that in writing

[Frozen Sooner]

Nowhere near enough information.

I don't know what's in the will. The will may not give you anything directly and give your brother a power of appointment. The will may pour your share into a spendthrift trust, where your brother is the trustee. These are just two examples of how what your brother is doing might be absolutely legal.

The best thing to do is to get a copy of the will, which once admitted to probate is a public document. Then bring the will to an attorney who specializes in estate planning (if your share is worth anything, at least) and have him look at it.

[87sooner]

Nowhere near enough information.

I don't know what's in the will. The will may not give you anything directly and give your brother a power of appointment. The will may pour your share into a spendthrift trust, where your brother is the trustee. These are just two examples of how what your brother is doing might be absolutely legal.

The best thing to do is to get a copy of the will, which once admitted to probate is a public document. Then bring the will to an attorney who specializes in estate planning (if your share is worth anything, at least) and have him look at it.

the bottom line is ...the executor must follow the orders of the court...
the executor cannot do ANYTHING that is not in the will....
there is no point in spending money on an attorney at this time...

[Frozen Sooner]

the bottom line is ...the executor must follow the orders of the court...
the executor cannot do ANYTHING that is not in the will....
there is no point in spending money on an attorney at this time...

The bottom line is you don't know what's in the will, nor do I.

If he wants a legal opinion on what the will says and what power the brother has, whether as executor, a trustee of a potential trust, or as a holder of a power of appointment, then he needs to see an attorney.

You are basically correct that the executor needs to follow the instructions in the will. The probate court can rule on the proper construction of the will and whether the will was properly executed. At this point, it sounds like dude has a problem with how the executor is distributing the estate. Yes, that IS the kind of thing he wants a lawyer for, because he's going to need to challenge the executor's actions in the probate court.

[badger]

Did your bro say why he's doing this?

And as long as we're on the topic, what should older people do to ensure there are no family disputes about their estate after their death?

[C&CDean]

Methinks this is a family with issues.

Also, you said "lawyer" and "free" in the same sentence. Does not compute.

[olevetonahill]

Did your bro say why he's doing this?

And as long as we're on the topic, what should older people do to ensure there are no family disputes about their estate after their death?

Spend it all and dont leave the greedy bastards a thing



Methinks this is a family with issues.

Also, you said "lawyer" and "free" in the same sentence. Does not compute.

Heh

[sooner_born_1960]

Maybe if you explained to your bother what an executor does, and how limited his powers are, he'd give up this notion. Certainly worth a try, and might save you legal fees. Show him this thread if he won't take your word for it.

[Frozen Sooner]

Did your bro say why he's doing this?

And as long as we're on the topic, what should older people do to ensure there are no family disputes about their estate after their death?

Draft a clear will. The vast majority of estate disputes where a will is admitted to probate are due to bad drafting.

Good rule of thumb: if a person of normal intelligence can't read the will and understand what it purports to do, it should probably be redrafted.

For example, one that I just worked on had a clause that read:
"Upon my death, I devise Blackacre to Bob and his natural-born children, as long as they survive me. On the death of the last of Bob and his natural-born children, it is my desire that Blackacre is gifted over to the City of Codswallop."

Do Bob and his natural-born children take in equal shares? Is the gift to Codswallop mandatory or precatory? **** like this breeds litigation.

A better drafting would have been: "I devise Blackacre to Bob, for his enjoyment during life. Upon Bob's death, Blackacre passes to Bob's natural-born children during their lives. Upon the death of the last of Bob's natural-born children, Blackacre is gifted to the City of Codswallop." (And this isn't even the ideal drafting.)

[87sooner]

The bottom line is you don't know what's in the will, nor do I.


If he wants a legal opinion on what the will says and what power the brother has, whether as executor, a trustee of a potential trust, or as a holder of a power of appointment, then he needs to see an attorney.

You are basically correct that the executor needs to follow the instructions in the will. The probate court can rule on the proper construction of the will and whether the will was properly executed. At this point, it sounds like dude has a problem with how the executor is distributing the estate. Yes, that IS the kind of thing he wants a lawyer for, because he's going to need to challenge the executor's actions in the probate court.


i don't need to know what's in the will..
the will is a legal document...
the court must do what the will says...
and the executor must do what the court says...
his brother has NO power to do what HE wants to do...
if the judge orders the executor to write steaker a check and his brother doesn't do it....he's in big trouble....
hiring an attorney is a waste of money unless he feels his mother was not competent when the will was produced and was unfairly influenced by his siblings...

[87sooner]

Draft a clear will. The vast majority of estate disputes where a will is admitted to probate are due to bad drafting.

Good rule of thumb: if a person of normal intelligence can't read the will and understand what it purports to do, it should probably be redrafted.



steaker.....go to oscn.net
http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/casesearch.asp

type in your mother's name....the county in which she lived....
and see if the process of probate has started..
you can follow every step of the process and you will be able to read the will yourself...

or better yet...ask your brother for a copy of the will....

you should be able to figure out pretty easily if your brother is telling the truth..

[sooner_born_1960]

I thought steaker was in AZ.

[Frozen Sooner]

If you don't know what's in the will, how do you know what it tells the executor to do?

If the judge orders the executor to write a check and he doesn't, then yes, he's in contempt. Nothing in the facts presented show the judge has done so or that the will even requires him to do so.

Bottom line is you don't know what the **** you're talking about. At least I'm giving Steaker the courtesy of telling him I can't give him an answer without more information. Which is why he should get a copy of the will and show it to someone competent to give a legal opinion on what it means.

As for the issues of competency or undue influence, those don't have anything to do with the facts presented. There can still be issues with interpretation on a duly-executed will, though, and that's what we have here.

But hey, I'm just trying to give the guy good advice.

[badger]

Isn't there some no-contest clause out there that says if you even request to look at the will you might end up with nothing.

Although I guess if bro's withholding the estate anyway it's not like there's anything to lose. :confused:

At what age should people think about drawing up a will? And if you expect to receive an inheritance or be an executor of an estate, what questions should your family/relatives while they are still in good health (if anything at all?)

[87sooner]

If you don't know what's in the will, how do you know what it tells the executor to do?



i don't know what it tells the executor to do...
i don't have to know..
what i do know is the executor CANNOT DO ANYTHING THAT IS NOT IN THE WILL....

if the judge says "write steaker a check"...the executor cannot say "u know steaker...i'm gonna keep this money and control it and give you whatever i want whenever i want"....

[Frozen Sooner]

Isn't there some no-contest clause out there that says if you even request to look at the will you might end up with nothing.

Although I guess if bro's withholding the estate anyway it's not like there's anything to lose. :confused:

At what age should people think about drawing up a will? And if you expect to receive an inheritance or be an executor of an estate, what questions should your family/relatives while they are still in good health (if anything at all?)

1. Depending on the jurisdiction, in terroram clauses may or may not be effective. However, the will itself (once admitted to probate) is a public document and a clause like you describe would be ineffective in any circumstance.

2. Generally an issue with in terrorams is that if the amount left in the will is small enough, yeah, your expected value from the challenge is more than you'd lose. Why not?

3. Now. Discuss what their actual desires are. Some states (I think Wisconsin is one) allow probating a will before the testator's death so they can ensure things will go the way they want. Sometimes a family conference to discuss the contents of a will and the testamentary plan can be a good idea.

[87sooner]

Isn't there some no-contest clause out there that says if you even request to look at the will you might end up with nothing.

Although I guess if bro's withholding the estate anyway it's not like there's anything to lose. :confused:

At what age should people think about drawing up a will? And if you expect to receive an inheritance or be an executor of an estate, what questions should your family/relatives while they are still in good health (if anything at all?)

when the estate enters probate...the will is a public document..

[Frozen Sooner]

i don't know what it tells the executor to do...
i don't have to know..
what i do know is the executor CANNOT DO ANYTHING THAT IS NOT IN THE WILL....

if the judge says "write steaker a check"...the executor cannot say "u know steaker...i'm gonna keep this money and control it and give you whatever i want whenever i want"....

But you don't know the will says that. Jesus, how often do I have to repeat this?

It's entirely possible the will sets up one of any number of devices that grants his brother discretion in how Steaker gets the money.

[87sooner]

But you don't know the will says that. Jesus, how often do I have to repeat this?

It's entirely possible the will sets up one of any number of devices that grants his brother discretion in how Steaker gets the money.

i can tell you're one sharp lawyer...

how many times do i have to repeat this...
the executor cannot act on his own discretion...he/she MUST do what the will/court says...

[olevetonahill]

But you don't know the will says that. Jesus, how often do I have to repeat this?

It's entirely possible the will sets up one of any number of devices that grants his brother discretion in how Steaker gets the money.

Mike, Why must you argue with 87? Dont you understand that he is ALL knowing and is never wrong about anything? Why we should MAKE him run for Prez.:rolleyes:

[Frozen Sooner]

i can tell you're one sharp lawyer...

how many times do i have to repeat this...
the executor cannot act on his own discretion...he/she MUST do what the will/court says...

OK, super-genius, what happens if the will says:

"I grant Steaker Brother a power of appointment over my estate. SB may distribute my estate to SB, Steaker, and Steaker Sisters when, in his sole discretion, they can handle such responsibility."

SB also happens to be the executor of the estate. Does SB have discretion or not? Hint: the correct answer is discretion.

How about

"All personal property and intangibles pour over into the Steaker Mom Spendthrift Trust with Steaker, SB, and Steaker Sisters as beneficiaries."

The trust document (which, by the way, is NOT a public instrument) names SB as trustee with the power to draw against the trust corpus and distribute as he sees fit to maintain Steaker in the style to which he is accustomed.

Does SB have discretion? Hint: yes.

[Frozen Sooner]

Mike, Why must you argue with 87? Dont you understand that he is ALL knowing and is never wrong about anything? Why we should MAKE him run for Prez.:rolleyes:

Yeah, I guess the bottom line is Steaker can trust anonymous dildo on a message board with no legal training who's telling him he's entitled to something, or he can trust anonymous dildo on a message board with legal training who's telling him the factual record is incomplete and he should probably seek actual legal advice.

[olevetonahill]

Yeah, I guess the bottom line is Steaker can trust anonymous dildo on a message board with no legal training who's telling him he's entitled to something, or he can trust anonymous dildo on a message board with legal training who's telling him the factual record is incomplete and he should probably seek actual legal advice.

Sounds awful ****in complicated dont it.:D

[87sooner]

OK, super-genius, what happens if the will says:

"I grant Steaker Brother a power of appointment over my estate. SB may distribute my estate to SB, Steaker, and Steaker Sisters when, in his sole discretion, they can handle such responsibility."

SB also happens to be the executor of the estate. Does SB have discretion or not? Hint: the correct answer is discretion.

How about

"All personal property and intangibles pour over into the Steaker Mom Spendthrift Trust with Steaker, SB, and Steaker Sisters as beneficiaries."

The trust document (which, by the way, is NOT a public instrument) names SB as trustee with the power to draw against the trust corpus and distribute as he sees fit to maintain Steaker in the style to which he is accustomed.

Does SB have discretion? Hint: yes.

i've answered your question repeatedly....
the executor must do what the will/court says..
not sure why you don't understand that...

and if the will gives the executor sole discretion regarding the heir's "responsibility"....the executor still has to answer to the probate judge...and said discretion can't be arbitrary..

[87sooner]

Yeah, I guess the bottom line is Steaker can trust anonymous dildo on a message board with no legal training who's telling him he's entitled to something, or he can trust anonymous dildo on a message board with legal training who's telling him the factual record is incomplete and he should probably seek actual legal advice.

for a lawyer...you ought to be able to read/comprehend better..
i never said steaker was entitled to anything....but fairness from the court/executor..

[olevetonahill]

it's not up to your brother who gets what when...
a judge does that...
as the executor....your brother does what the judge tells him...


the bottom line is ...the executor must follow the orders of the court...
the executor cannot do ANYTHING that is not in the will....
there is no point in spending money on an attorney at this time...


for a lawyer...you ought to be able to read/comprehend better..
i never said steaker was entitled to anything....but fairness from the court/executor..

No you just said He dont need an attorney to look out for his interest:rolleyes:

But you may be right, after all He has you to give him FREE legal advice :pop:

[Midtowner]

for a lawyer...you ought to be able to read/comprehend better..
i never said steaker was entitled to anything....but fairness from the court/executor..

That'd be wrong.

The personal representative (which is what it's called in Oklahoma, we don't have executors) generally has a lot of discretion because most wills leave a lot to their discretion. E.g., the will says "my possessions are to be sold and the money is to be divided among my devisees in equal shares," the personal rep gets to decide how he's going to sell the possession, auction? To himself? Whatever. The court will have to approve the sale, but some people might think that what the personal rep did wasn't fair.

Also, the personal rep usually has sole control of the property at the exclusion of other devisees. That sometimes leaves a lot of room for fraud, stealing and selling of assets, etc., and it's tough to prove that sort of thing after the fact.

And as above, let's say there is a pour over will into a trust. You'd still need a lawyer to be able to tell you whether the trust is effective, does it, for example violate the rule against perpetuities, etc. A lot of estate plans are done very poorly by lawyers who shouldn't be doing estate plans. I've seen some atrocious stuff in handling probate litigation, which is often some of the nastiest sort of litigation out there, including divorce.

The only proper advice in this situation is exactly what Frozen gave--that he needs to seek professional legal advice, not that of some internet lawyer who probably was a party to his Auntie's probate case and thinks he's qualified to practice law now.

[Frozen Sooner]

So you don't think it'd be a good idea AT ALL to bring the will to an attorney to figure out whether the brother has the authority to withhold money from Steaker before commencing an adversarial proceeding in front of the probate judge?

You keep saying the executor has to do what the will says and the probate judge has to do what the will says (which isn't even entirely true, but close enough for our purposes). I keep saying yes, he does, but we don't know what the will says. Near as I can tell, the probate judge hasn't ordered the executor to do ****. Hell, we don't even know if the will's been admitted to probate yet (though I'm assuming it has been).

If the executor has letters testamentary, and he's executing the will in a way inconsistent with what Steaker thinks are the terms of the will, then he should bring the will to an attorney to ensure he does, in fact, have a reason to petition the probate court. He may. He may not. Either way, YOU don't know, nor do I. IF he has a reason, then the probate court MAY enter an order in Steaker's favor. That hasn't happened yet. Repeating ad nauseam "The executor has to do what the probate court says" doesn't have a goddamn thing to do with what we're talking about: we're discussing what the probate court WILL order the executor to do.

[87sooner]

That'd be wrong.

then feel free to quote me where i said otherwise...
you a lawyer too?

[olevetonahill]

Heh, Froz Just served :D

http://t2.ftcdn.net/jpg/00/19/56/61/400_F_19566135_iHnDWlfj4dBpzVglufJ9oDezTu5YQdDz.jp g

[Midtowner]

then feel free to quote me where i said otherwise...
you a lawyer too?

Yes and I handle contested probate matters. How about you?

[Frozen Sooner]

Just for clarity's sake, I am not actually a lawyer.

However, when someone repeatedly says "X has to do what the judge says" that implies the judge either has said something or is at the very least likely to say something. Otherwise, it's not even partly germane to the discussion of whether the brother has the right to withhold funds.

Anyhow, I'm done. Steaker, you may take my advice for what it's worth.

[badger]

Lawyers love a good legal fight, don't they? :D

[87sooner]

So you don't think it'd be a good idea AT ALL to bring the will to an attorney to figure out whether the brother has the authority to withhold money from Steaker before commencing an adversarial proceeding in front of the probate judge?

no i don't think it would be a good idea...
i think it would be juvenile and a waste of money...
read what steaker wrote (but then you wouldn't be able to comprehend it..)


he will not give me my portion of my mother's estate unless he can control it.


that sound remotely legal to you?
my hunch is his brother is a crooked lying pos...




You keep saying the executor has to do what the will says and the probate judge has to do what the will says (which isn't even entirely true, but close enough for our purposes). I keep saying yes, he does, but we don't know what the will says. Near as I can tell, the probate judge hasn't ordered the executor to do ****. Hell, we don't even know if the will's been admitted to probate yet (though I'm assuming it has been).


now you're finally talking sense...
you're right...we have no idea how far the process has gone...so why start hiring attorneys and throwing away money?
how bout he get a copy of the will and read it himself....
he doesn't need to hire an attorney to do that...




If the executor has letters testamentary, and he's executing the will in a way inconsistent with what Steaker thinks are the terms of the will, then he should bring the will to an attorney to ensure he does, in fact, have a reason to petition the probate court. He may. He may not. Either way, YOU don't know, nor do I. IF he has a reason, then the probate court MAY enter an order in Steaker's favor. That hasn't happened yet. Repeating ad nauseam "The executor has to do what the probate court says" doesn't have a goddamn thing to do with what we're talking about: we're discussing what the probate court WILL order the executor to do.


blather

[87sooner]

That'd be wrong.


i said i didn't say steaker was entitled to anything....and you said "that'd be wrong"...
again....quote where i said he was entitled to something...




The personal representative (which is what it's called in Oklahoma, we don't have executors) generally has a lot of discretion because most wills leave a lot to their discretion. E.g., the will says "my possessions are to be sold and the money is to be divided among my devisees in equal shares," the personal rep gets to decide how he's going to sell the possession, auction? To himself? Whatever. The court will have to approve the sale, but some people might think that what the personal rep did wasn't fair.

Also, the personal rep usually has sole control of the property at the exclusion of other devisees. That sometimes leaves a lot of room for fraud, stealing and selling of assets, etc., and it's tough to prove that sort of thing after the fact.

And as above, let's say there is a pour over will into a trust. You'd still need a lawyer to be able to tell you whether the trust is effective, does it, for example violate the rule against perpetuities, etc. A lot of estate plans are done very poorly by lawyers who shouldn't be doing estate plans. I've seen some atrocious stuff in handling probate litigation, which is often some of the nastiest sort of litigation out there, including divorce.

The only proper advice in this situation is exactly what Frozen gave--that he needs to seek professional legal advice, not that of some internet lawyer who probably was a party to his Auntie's probate case and thinks he's qualified to practice law now.

at this point in the process....nothing has happened to warrant steaker seek legal advise...


and in your example....wouldn't the probate judge be able to decide if the trust was "effective"/legal?

[olevetonahill]

Lawyers love a good legal fight, don't they? :D

Cept we got ONE Full Lawyer, ONE Almost Lawyer( whose Rents are Full Lawyers) and a farmer.

Guess who Id be listening to. :D

[87sooner]

Cept we got ONE Full Lawyer, ONE Almost Lawyer( whose Rents are Full Lawyers) and a farmer.

Guess who Id be listening to. :D

you listen to who you want...
however...some people have a brain and common sense...

[olevetonahill]

you listen to who you want...
however...some people have a brain and common sense...

Thanks for your permission, However on a message board a Person can never be to sure If the Person Giving the advice Or the Person RECEIVING Or Niether, Have a Brain or common sense.

Prolly why the Prudent advice was for him to get a Copy of said will and have an intial consult with an attorney ;)

[Midtowner]

now you're finally talking sense...
you're right...we have no idea how far the process has gone...so why start hiring attorneys and throwing away money?

Because in life, you rarely have the opportunity to come into as much money as you do through inheritance. Your experience with your family's whatever might have been just ducky. I'm here to tell you, that's not always the case.

Vet says you're a farmer. You clearly know as much about probate as I do about working cattle, crop rotation, or whatever the hell it is that you do. Probate is one of the most hyper-technical areas of the law, at least in Oklahoma. You clearly know ****-all about it.

When going into surgery, do you tell your surgeon what incision you want used? Do you advise them as to what implements they have to use during your surgery? Of course not. You'd be a giant ******canoe if you did that. And if the doctor actually followed your ignorant advice, he'd probably be committing malpractice. Think about how that compares to what you're doing here.


how bout he get a copy of the will and read it himself....
he doesn't need to hire an attorney to do that...

And how do you know that? Not all wills must be admitted to probate, and if the will never is admitted to probate, and instead is "lost," and he does nothing, what happens then? How's he going to solve that issue without some professional help? You don't know what's going on, nor do I, but there are some huge warning signs here that he needs legal help.

You ought to stick to telling people how to do a job that you actually know something about.

[saucysoonergal]

I thought you were a dog-bite lawyer? ;)


Probate and family law are the suck.

[Midtowner]

i said i didn't say steaker was entitled to anything....and you said "that'd be wrong"...
again....quote where i said he was entitled to something...

No, you said he was entitled to fairness from the court. That's a very naive thing to say. Fairness only exists in happy rainbow pony land. Down here on Earth, we have this thing called the law, and the law isn't always fair. Especially in probate.


at this point in the process....nothing has happened to warrant steaker seek legal advise...

His brother has refused to allow him to see a copy of the will and has told him that he's going to take care of everything. Again, you must be a nice fella, but you're extremely naive.


nd in your example....wouldn't the probate judge be able to decide if the trust was "effective"/legal?

If no one challenged it, then no. Judges don't typically invalidate trusts sua sponte, especially because there's a substantial likelihood that the Judge would never see the trust documents. And besides that, unless you're in Oklahoma or Tulsa Counties, your judge probably isn't an expert on probate law. He or she is going to rely heavily on advice of counsel, maybe briefs, etc., to figure things out if they get complicated.

There are rules in place to protect the OP, but if he's asking the questions he's asking, he needs professional help. End of story.

[sooner_born_1960]

Where did steaker say his brother wouldn't let him see the will?

[olevetonahill]

I thought you were a dog-bite lawyer? ;)


Probate and family law are the suck.

And he never did tell me, When is a dog Considered 'YOURS" .

All the dogs around the shack are strays, I feed em and take em to the vet and let em sleep inside, But they be strays none the less.:P

[Frozen Sooner]

Where did steaker say his brother wouldn't let him see the will?

I don't think he did. Midtowner may have inferred that from me telling Steaker that he could get a copy as a public record. I skipped the step of "try to get it from the brother," since it's just as easy to get it as a public record and it doesn't tip off that you may litigate soon.

I maintain my initial position. There are a few perfectly valid and legal reasons for this situation. No offense, Steaker, but how you phrased things is pretty common client-speak for "my brother is the trustee of a spendthrift trust where I'm the beneficiary."

[soonerbub]

Sorry about your Mother


If the estate has enough value and you want to secure it you really should throw down $500 and sort it out. Your brother escalated this first; I would have to respond if it was my bro.

[Midtowner]

I thought you were a dog-bite lawyer? ;)

Who wouldn't turn down free money? If you can prove ownership of the dog and that it was the dog that did the biting, you win your case.


Probate and family law are the suck.

And yet, that's mostly what I do. I'm just a private practice guy who takes what comes in the door up to a point. Some things I won't touch.

[OutlandTrophy]

Isn't Steaker the guy that was excited to not sign paperwork to sell his mom's house for $150,000 because he thought it was worth $200,000+ even though the other 3 siblings wanted to sell it for $150k but needed all 4 signatures to sell it?

[Midtowner]

All the dogs around the shack are strays, I feed em and take em to the vet and let em sleep inside, But they be strays none the less.:P

I think I said that you had a good argument that they weren't yours. It all comes down to the judge or jury though. Who do they believe?

[OUMallen]

no i don't think it would be a good idea...
i think it would be juvenile and a waste of money...
read what steaker wrote (but then you wouldn't be able to comprehend it..)




that sound remotely legal to you?
my hunch is his brother is a crooked lying pos...





now you're finally talking sense...
you're right...we have no idea how far the process has gone...so why start hiring attorneys and throwing away money?
how bout he get a copy of the will and read it himself....
he doesn't need to hire an attorney to do that...





blather



I hope you have money in your bank account, 87, because you'd be the PERFECT client. Stupid *AND* can pay legal fees

[olevetonahill]

I think I said that you had a good argument that they weren't yours. It all comes down to the judge or jury though. Who do they believe?

It dont matter, Id just tell Yall to KMA anyway.:D

[BU BEAR]

Anyone even know what state the will is being probated in? Whether the property in question is real or personal?

Lots of questions. The man needs a lawyer of the non-free and non-interwebz kind. Just my opinion; and with that and $20.00 you can get a Starbucks.

[Frozen Sooner]

Anyone even know what state the will is being probated in? Whether the property in question is real or personal?

Lots of questions. The man needs a lawyer of the non-free and non-interwebz kind. Just my opinion; and with that and $20.00 you can get a Starbucks.

No, man, he can just read the will himself and the judge will do what's right and fair.

[Midtowner]

It dont matter, Id just tell Yall to KMA anyway.:D

In S.E. OK, that's a valid legal argument.

In my father's early career, he was once told by a judge in Idabel "that may be the law in Oklahoma City, but that is not the law here in Eye-dee-bell."

I'm told that still rings true today.

[olevetonahill]

In S.E. OK, that's a valid legal argument.

In my father's early career, he was once told by a judge in Idabel "that may be the law in Oklahoma City, but that is not the law here in Eye-dee-bell."

I'm told that still rings true today.

:D :D :D :D :D

This really happened. An Idiot I know here had a Pit. The Pit Bit 2 little girls in the span of just a few days. The Rents Sued Won a 100K judgement each
The Pit owners Filed BK that afternoon.:pop:

[StoopTroup]

I got bit by this Dudes Bird one time.

I didn't sue.

True Story. :D

[XingTheRubicon]

:D :D :D :D :D

This really happened. An Idiot I know here had a Pit. The Pit Bit 2 little girls in the span of just a few days. The Rents Sued Won a 100K judgement each
The Pit owners Filed BK that afternoon.:pop:

Hopefully, they were murdered that evening.

[jkjsooner]

A better drafting would have been: "I devise Blackacre to Bob, for his enjoyment during life. Upon Bob's death, Blackacre passes to Bob's natural-born children during their lives. Upon the death of the last of Bob's natural-born children, Blackacre is gifted to the City of Codswallop." (And this isn't even the ideal drafting.)


Dumb question, can you control assets for that long after death. I thought there were limits on this. Doesn't there have to be some type of control so that people who lived 500 years ago wouldn't still control all of our assets (especially property)?

I don't know what Blackacre is but what if Bob sold it?

[Frozen Sooner]

Not a dumb question at all. A rather good one.

The common-law rule against perpetuities states that any gift which will not either vest or fail within 21 years of a life then in being is void ab initio. As of January 1, 2012, no state will follow the common law RAP. They all have some variation on it, though, other than Alaska which abolishes it completely.

That being said, the gift above would be fine under the RAP. Bob's children will take on Bob's death, Bob is the measuring life, it vests within 21 years. Although Bob's kids aren't a closed class, gifts to charity (which includes government) are not subject to the RAP as a general matter.

[OutlandTrophy]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/08/main20060958.shtml


AP) SAGINAW, Mich. — Ninety-two years after his death, Saginaw lumber baron Wellington R. Burt is finally parting with the fortune he withheld from his descendants until 21 years after the death of the last grandchild born in his lifetime.


The estate is now valued at $100 million to $110 million. It will be shared among 12 of his heirs later this month.


According to The Saginaw News, Burt once was among the eight wealthiest Americans. He made millions of dollars in the harvesting of the Saginaw Valley's timber and then another fortune in Minnesota's iron mines. He served as mayor of Saginaw and later as a Michigan state senator.


But when it came time to divide his fortune, he gave his children and grandchildren small allowances comparable to the one he gave his cook. He died March 2, 1919, and his remains rest in a 15-foot-tall white mausoleum in Forest Lawn Cemetery.


Under terms of Burt's will, the bulk of the estate was to be distributed 21 years after the death of his last surviving grandchild.


At 19 years old, Christina Cameron of Lexington, Ky., is the youngest of the 12 and is in line to receive $2.6 million to $2.9 million.


She said one thing is pretty clear: Her great-great-great grandfather didn't have much use for his relatives.


"I'm pretty sure he didn't like his family back then," Cameron said.


Cameron is the great-granddaughter of Marion Landsill. She was the last survivor among Burt's grandchildren who were born in his lifetime. She died Nov. 21, 1989.


Saginaw County Chief Probate Judge Patrick McGraw said the estate is "one of the most complicated research projects" he's faced in his 12-year career in Saginaw.


When McGraw arrived in 1999, the estate had long been a part of courthouse lore.


"It's a case everyone talked about," McGraw said. "It was definitely interesting. I didn't think in 1999 that, in 2011, I would be the one to distribute it."


Burt's six children, seven grandchildren, six great-grandchildren and 11 great-great grandchildren missed out on the inheritance, either because they weren't eligible for it or because they didn't live long enough.


Those who will inherit are three great-grandchildren, seven great-great grandchildren and two great-great-great grandchildren, among them Cameron and her 20-year-old sister. The heirs range in age from 19 to 94.


In April, about 20 attorneys representing the heirs met in Michigan State University's Kellogg Hotel and Conference Center and struck a deal on division of the estate. It gives larger amounts to those farther up in the family tree who have fewer siblings. The trust is scheduled to open by May 31.

[jkjsooner]

Not a dumb question at all. A rather good one.

The common-law rule against perpetuities states that any gift which will not either vest or fail within 21 years of a life then in being is void ab initio. As of January 1, 2012, no state will follow the common law RAP. They all have some variation on it, though, other than Alaska which abolishes it completely.

That being said, the gift above would be fine under the RAP. Bob's children will take on Bob's death, Bob is the measuring life, it vests within 21 years. Although Bob's kids aren't a closed class, gifts to charity (which includes government) are not subject to the RAP as a general matter.

Didn't fully understand that legal mumbo jumbo but got some of it. ;-) Let's say I created a trust for an engineering scholarship for OU students. Would that follow under the last sentence about charity/government? I'd hate for that trust to get dissolved 30 years down the line because the engineering dept decided they wanted to spend that money on a fishing trip.

[jkjsooner]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/08/main20060958.shtml

I saw that on the Today Show and I wondered the same question I asked Froze. It makes sense considering his answer.

The guy seems like a real tool, btw.

[OutlandTrophy]

he was a weird duck.

[TMcGee86]

Not a dumb question at all. A rather good one.

The common-law rule against perpetuities states that any gift which will not either vest or fail within 21 years of a life then in being is void ab initio. As of January 1, 2012, no state will follow the common law RAP. They all have some variation on it, though, other than Alaska which abolishes it completely.

That being said, the gift above would be fine under the RAP. Bob's children will take on Bob's death, Bob is the measuring life, it vests within 21 years. Although Bob's kids aren't a closed class, gifts to charity (which includes government) are not subject to the RAP as a general matter.

LOL. You've been dead on in this thread Froz, but I'm sorry you are the epitome of a law student. Using "blackacre" and Latin and the RAP. Brought back some terrible memories of law school. :shudder: ;)

However, like I said you are right, there are reasons why this might be valid. And any lawyer worth a crap wouldn't charge someone to come in and review the Will, assuming he can get a copy if it hasn't been filed yet.

[Frozen Sooner]

Didn't fully understand that legal mumbo jumbo but got some of it. ;-) Let's say I created a trust for an engineering scholarship for OU students. Would that follow under the last sentence about charity/government? I'd hate for that trust to get dissolved 30 years down the line because the engineering dept decided they wanted to spend that money on a fishing trip.

Ha. Sorry. Yeah, that'd likely be valid. You'd want someone versed in Oklahoma trust law to set it up, but under general principles you could do that. Education is generally considered a charitable purpose.


LOL. You've been dead on in this thread Froz, but I'm sorry you are the epitome of a law student. Using "blackacre" and Latin and the RAP. Brought back some terrible memories of law school. :shudder: ;)

However, like I said you are right, there are reasons why this might be valid. And any lawyer worth a crap wouldn't charge someone to come in and review the Will, assuming he can get a copy if it hasn't been filed yet.

Haha. Gearing up for class today. Thanks!

[soonerbrat]

I hate lawyers. except my mom, of course.

[StoopTroup]

I hate lawyers. except my mom, of course.

You better do some winkin' and *** shakin' at the Tailgates when you buy a ticket from Homey. :D ;)

[StoopTroup]

I saw that on the Today Show and I wondered the same question I asked Froze. It makes sense considering his answer.

The guy seems like a real tool, btw.

Pretty sad. They must have really pissed him off to even keep kids hands off of it. You think he might have made some Educational Allowances back then but of course we are talking 1919. It was probably just easier to make a clear keep your hands off my money statement like he did.

I wonder if they had these Inheritance Firms that will buy your Inheritance off as a reduced rate back then? Of course if you didn't have access to any of it those wouldn't do anything for you but to see 20 Lawyers meet at a Hotel nearly 100 years after he died to talk about a settlement....it makes you wonder how many other family fortunes are out there just sitting in some bank never being used that would help our economy if the Families were given access to it?

I bet there is a ****load...lol:pop:

[87sooner]

Because in life, you rarely have the opportunity to come into as much money as you do through inheritance. Your experience with your family's whatever might have been just ducky. I'm here to tell you, that's not always the case.

Vet says you're a farmer. You clearly know as much about probate as I do about working cattle, crop rotation, or whatever the hell it is that you do. Probate is one of the most hyper-technical areas of the law, at least in Oklahoma. You clearly know ****-all about it.

When going into surgery, do you tell your surgeon what incision you want used? Do you advise them as to what implements they have to use during your surgery? Of course not. You'd be a giant ******canoe if you did that. And if the doctor actually followed your ignorant advice, he'd probably be committing malpractice. Think about how that compares to what you're doing here.



And how do you know that? Not all wills must be admitted to probate, and if the will never is admitted to probate, and instead is "lost," and he does nothing, what happens then? How's he going to solve that issue without some professional help? You don't know what's going on, nor do I, but there are some huge warning signs here that he needs legal help.

You ought to stick to telling people how to do a job that you actually know something about.

most people have a little cash...a house...a car...not too complicated..
i'm sure you've encountered a few that are...
but i know how lawyers are......you like to intimidate people into thinking they need legal advice to pick their noses...

yeah...i'm a farmer..with a math/computer science degree...that knows how to do a hell of alot for myself...
and i've seen family/friends go thru estate situations where administrators get greedy and think they can intimidate heirs and they find out quickly the judge is really in control and it doesn't take much bluff calling to put them in their places...

it takes zero knowledge of probate law to read most wills and determine what's what...

and yeah..if i go to a doctor and he gives me *****y advice...i don't have to be a doctor to recognize it's ****ty advice....it's called common sense...

i know...you're one of those people on the football board that tells people they can't criticize stoops or venables coaching aren't you? cuz you know...you're not a coach...

[87sooner]

Where did steaker say his brother wouldn't let him see the will?

lawyers wouldn't make up things would they?

[87sooner]

Dumb question, can you control assets for that long after death. I thought there were limits on this. Doesn't there have to be some type of control so that people who lived 500 years ago wouldn't still control all of our assets (especially property)?

I don't know what Blackacre is but what if Bob sold it?

it's called a life estate...
when my dad wills his land....his heirs will not be able to sell it as long as they live..
we can't mortgage it.....sell it ....give it away....transfer it in any way....as long as we live...

[87sooner]

I don't think he did. Midtowner may have inferred that from me telling Steaker that he could get a copy as a public record. I skipped the step of "try to get it from the brother," since it's just as easy to get it as a public record and it doesn't tip off that you may litigate soon.

I maintain my initial position. There are a few perfectly valid and legal reasons for this situation. No offense, Steaker, but how you phrased things is pretty common client-speak for "my brother is the trustee of a spendthrift trust where I'm the beneficiary."

he phrased it in a very common sibling-speak for i'm in control and i will do things the way i want and not the way my mother wanted them done....since i'm the administrator i can do whatever i want .....

ask to see a copy of the will and you will see how fast they get defensive....

[87sooner]

I hope you have money in your bank account, 87, because you'd be the PERFECT client. Stupid *AND* can pay legal fees

i have plenty of money....and i didn't get it by being stupid...or paying legal fees..

[StoopTroup]

it's called a life estate...
when my dad wills his land....his heirs will not be able to sell it as long as they live..
we can't mortgage it.....sell it ....give it away....transfer it in any way....as long as we live...

Can you live on it or lease it out to Hunters or make dough off it for Mineral or Oil or sell the timber? Can you bale hay?

Not that it makes any difference but it's cool to see some folks realize that keeping certain lands in the family for generations helps keep the land in our State from maybe becoming a EPA Supersite because they allowed certain uses to occur.

Sometimes as I travel around our State you can sing a bit of our State Song and see the land that they talk about in the song. We still have a lot of beautiful Scenery here. I love our State.

[OutlandTrophy]

Can you live on it or lease it out to Hunters or make dough off it for Mineral or Oil or sell the timber? Can you bale hay?

Not that it makes any difference but it's cool to see some folks realize that keeping certain lands in the family for generations helps keep the land in our State from maybe becoming a EPA Supersite because they allowed certain uses to occur.

Sometimes as I travel around our State you can sing a bit of our State Song and see the land that they talk about in the song. We still have a lot of beautiful Scenery here. I love our State.

it wouldn't matter what the will or life estate said, if someone wanted to put a rig on that land(assuming land is in Oklahoma) to drill a well, there is nothing they could do to stop the rig from moving in.

[87sooner]

Can you live on it or lease it out to Hunters or make dough off it for Mineral or Oil or sell the timber? Can you bale hay?

Not that it makes any difference but it's cool to see some folks realize that keeping certain lands in the family for generations helps keep the land in our State from maybe becoming a EPA Supersite because they allowed certain uses to occur.

Sometimes as I travel around our State you can sing a bit of our State Song and see the land that they talk about in the song. We still have a lot of beautiful Scenery here. I love our State.

yes...i'm pretty sure you can do all those things...
you just can't transfer ownership...
my dad bought a farm a few years ago that was in a life trust...
if i remember correctly...the owner had terminal cancer and if he died....ownership was going to transfer to his brother or someithing like that...
so the two brothers agreed to sell the farm so the terminal brother could pay some bills and give some to his wife.....
my dad paid cash for the farm but he didn't get a deed for about 6 months ....after the owner died.....it was an interesting deal...

[Frozen Sooner]

it's called a life estate...
when my dad wills his land....his heirs will not be able to sell it as long as they live..
we can't mortgage it.....sell it ....give it away....transfer it in any way....as long as we live...

It was actually a life estate with a remainder in life estate with a gift over. And life estates are still subject to the rule against perpetuities.

But you knew that already.

[87sooner]

It was actually a life estate with a remainder in life estate with a gift over. And life estates are still subject to the rule against perpetuities.

But you knew that already.

do you charge by the word?

[Frozen Sooner]

do you charge by the word?

Do you charge by the idiocy?

[87sooner]

Do you charge by the idiocy?

your clients deserve someone with more restraint/control...and better judgement.

oh...and someone a bit more clever

[Frozen Sooner]

I could say the same for your chickens.

[saucysoonergal]

I like it when non-legal types spell "Judgment"

[Midtowner]

It was actually a life estate with a remainder in life estate with a gift over. And life estates are still subject to the rule against perpetuities.

But you knew that already.

Of course he did, and the judge wouldn't have let it happen unless it was fair.

[BU BEAR]

i have plenty of money....and i didn't get it by being stupid...or paying legal fees..

If you have money, then dont take the legal advice gleaned from the interwebz. Go retain the services of a competent and respected attorney--one you can speak to face to face.

[Frozen Sooner]

Oh, he's not taking any legal advice. He's just giving it. Without knowing the facts or actually having studied law or anything.

However, he won't be doing it for at least a few days. At least not here.

[olevetonahill]

Oh, he's not taking any legal advice. He's just giving it. Without knowing the facts or actually having studied law or anything.

However, he won't be doing it for at least a few days. At least not here.

Bout time, Dude was gettin annoying. Made me think of a yellow dog Democrat. Or a Far right Loon ;)

[47straight]

A big difference between being a law student and a grown-up lawyer is recognizing when to make your case and let the chips fall where they may.

[soonerbrat]

You better do some winkin' and *** shakin' at the Tailgates when you buy a ticket from Homey. :D ;)

it's never worked before.

[Midtowner]

most people have a little cash...a house...a car...not too complicated..
i'm sure you've encountered a few that are...
but i know how lawyers are......you like to intimidate people into thinking they need legal advice to pick their noses...

Okay genius, pop quiz. You have a will, first off, how do you know whether it needs to be admitted to probate at all, and if it does, what's the process?

Let's say your wife dies and in her will, she disinherits you and gives everything to her sister.

Or let's say your mother dies and your brother is appointed as personal representative and you think he's disposing of assets for his own benefit without reporting them as assets of the estate, what do you do?

Go to the judge at some random hearing and ask him to be fair?


yeah...i'm a farmer..with a math/computer science degree...that knows how to do a hell of alot for myself...

Practicing law isn't one of those things.


and i've seen family/friends go thru estate situations where administrators get greedy and think they can intimidate heirs and they find out quickly the judge is really in control and it doesn't take much bluff calling to put them in their places...

Ah yes. And I'm sure you provided quality representation in each of those matters?


it takes zero knowledge of probate law to read most wills and determine what's what...

Good luck with that.


and yeah..if i go to a doctor and he gives me *****y advice...i don't have to be a doctor to recognize it's ****ty advice....it's called common sense...

Sure.. why have medical school when we have common sense?


i know...you're one of those people on the football board that tells people they can't criticize stoops or venables coaching aren't you? cuz you know...you're not a coach...

I generally try to avoid getting in arguments over football.

It usually ends up in someone's testicles being ripped off.

But come to think of it, I think I'll trust that Venables or Stoops are going to be better football coaches than farmers with math degrees or lawyers [absent Mike Leach] or Frito-Lay delivery drivers.

[OutlandTrophy]

look at everyone piling on... once he has been banned.

That's poor form.

[badger]

Oh, he's not taking any legal advice. He's just giving it. Without knowing the facts or actually having studied law or anything.

However, he won't be doing it for at least a few days. At least not here.

You didn't seriously ban him did you? Your legal argument was quite the read.

[pphilfran]

Damn, me and 87 is buds and go way back to a mountain lion thread...what fun!

[SOONER STEAKER]

Yhanks or all the advise. Had a good conversation with my brother, told him what I was gonna do with the money, he's happy with my plan, should be getting all the cash at the end of next month.

Love you guys who shared the great advice.

[jkjsooner]

You'd want someone versed in Oklahoma trust law to set it up, but under general principles you could do that. Education is generally considered a charitable purpose.

No need to talk to someone versed in Oklahoma trust law. That was just a hypothetical - unless I happen to win the lottery someday. My engineering training tells me that isn't happening.

[GKeeper316]

No need to talk to someone versed in Oklahoma trust law. That was just a hypothetical - unless I happen to win the lottery someday. My engineering training tells me that isn't happening.

heh my old boss calls lottery tickets a "tax on people that can't do math". i still spend a couple bucks a week on powerball tickets tho. you have no chance at all without a ticket.

[jkjsooner]

But come to think of it, I think I'll trust that Venables or Stoops are going to be better football coaches than farmers with math degrees or lawyers [absent Mike Leach] or Frito-Lay delivery drivers.

Why the "absent Mike Leach" disclaimer? I like Leach and all but he's no Stoops.

Just kidding.

[jkjsooner]

heh my old boss calls lottery tickets a "tax on people that can't do math". i still spend a couple bucks a week on powerball tickets tho. you have no chance at all without a ticket.

I've heard that before too. If you look at it like you're spending a buck to two to buy a fantasy then it's harmless.

But even a dollar on the lottery here and there can be troublesome if you start to develop a sense that winning the lottery is your destiny. That can lead to unwise financial choices even if you a strict about how much you can spend on the lottery itself.

[Midtowner]

Why the "absent Mike Leach" disclaimer? I like Leach and all but he's no Stoops.

Just kidding.

Mike Leach is a lawyer.