Leslie-Spring 2002 Trusts and Estates

Leslie-Spring 2002 Trusts and Estates - 1 INTRODUCTION 2...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
1 1. INTRODUCTION 2. INTESTATE SUCCESSION 3. SIMULTANEOUS DEATH, DISCLAIMER, ADVANCEMENTS 4. WILL EXECUTION 5. CAPACITY 6. UNDUE INFLUENCE 7. PLANNING FOR WILL CONTESTS 8. WHAT CONSTITUTES A WILL 9. ABATEMENT AND ADEMPTION 10. LAPSE 11. MISTAKE, REVOCATION 12. DRR; JOINT WILLS AND LIMITATIONS ON POWER TO REVOKE 13. INTRODUCTION TO TRUSTS 14. TRUST REQUISITES/IS THE TRUST TESTAMENTARY 15. DISCRETIONARY TRUSTS 16. SHIELDING TRUST ASSETS FROM CREDITORS 17. TRUST MODIFICATION AND TERMINATION 18. INTRODUCTION TO POWERS OF APPOINTMENT
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
2 19. POWERS OF APPOINTMENT 20. FAMILY PROTECTION 21. INTRODUCTION TO ESTATE TAX 22. TAX PLANNING 23. CONSTRUCTION OF FUTURE INTERESTS 24. CLASS GIFTS 25. THE RAP 26. THE RULE, CLASS GIFTS, & POWERS OF APPOINTMENT
Background image of page 2
1. INTRODUCTION 16-27, 43-60 FORD v. FORD (1986) Court of Appeals of MD, p. 16 FACTS: Pearl Ford murdered her mother. She seeks now to obtain the money left to her under the will. Her son asserts that she forfeited the entitlement. He claims the title as an alternate beneficiary. Trial court for George, The Circuit Court reverses for Pearl. REASONING: MD does not have a Slayer’s statute. Common law rule in the state is that the courts have created the doctrine of the slayer’s rule. There are two lines of thought-one is that no one should profit from his wrongs. Other courts do not let the crime affect the inheritance. The BASIC RULE OF THE STATE IS THAT A MURDERER, OR HIS HEIRS OR REPRESENTATIVES TAKING THROUGH HIM, ORINDARLIY MAY NOT PROFIT BY TAKING ANY PORTIION OF A MURDERED PERSON’S ESTATE. The PRICE decision, which is the key precedent, would apply to like insurance and wills. In Maryland, if the death is a homicide felonious and intentional, you cannot take, but if it is the result of gross negligence you can, even if it would be involuntary manslaughter. It cannot be intentional, it must be unintentional. Disposition of criminal case is not dispositive of the character of the homicide in civil case. In short, the lack of a criminal conviction, or proceeding, does not make the issue res judiciata in a subsequent civil action. In this case, SHE IS NOT CRIMINALLY RESPONSBILE BY REASON OF INSANITY. She is guilty but insane. In this state, the killing must be FELONIOUS AND INTENTIONAL. Manslaughter, voluntary or involuntary, is a felony. But it must be voluntary to be within the ambit of the slayer’s rule. THE SLAYER’S RULE IS SIMPLY NOT APPLICABLE WHEN THE KILLER WAS NOT CRIMINALLY RESPONSIBLE AT THE TIME HE COMMITTED THE HOMICIDE. There is no deterrent effect if someone is insane. This type of person does not act with an unfettered will. For it to be a felonious homicide, the killer must be criminally responsible. If the killer is insane, it is not felonious in the MD rule. DISSENT:
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 72

Leslie-Spring 2002 Trusts and Estates - 1 INTRODUCTION 2...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online