Public Access Local Rule Updates

Counties have begun updating their local rules to conform to the amendments of Pa.R.O.C.P 1.99 and the Case Records Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania to require the use of the confidential information form and eliminate the option of filing redacted copies of pleadings. The following are the first three to have published changes to their local rules affecting the Orphans’ Court.

“Rule of Judicial Administration of the Court of Common Pleas; No. AD-2021-255-PJ,” (Allegheny C.P. 12/14/2021), 52 Pa.B. 13 (1/1/2022).

“Rescission of Local Rule of Orphans’ Court 1.99A. Confidential Information and Confidential Documents. Certification.; No. [sic],” (Montgomery O.C. 12/14/2021), 25 Pa.B. 15 (1/1/2022).

“Public Access to Case Records in the Court of Common Pleas; No. 2021-1,” (Washington C.P. 12/14/2021), 52 Pa.B. 16 (1/1/2022).

Decedent Intended to Change Domicile

Evidence that the decedent wanted to live nearer to her son in North Carolina, and the testimony of disinterested witnesses that the decedent did not intend to return to Pennsylvania, was sufficient to overcome the presumption of continued domicile in Pennsylvania, depriving the court of jurisdiction over the probate of the decedent’s will. Vaccarello Estate, 11 Fid.Rep.3d 320 (Montgomery O.C. 2021).

In Terrorem Clause and Reasonable Basis for Objections

A beneficiary of an inter vivos trust had a reasonable basis for her objections to the account of the trustee, and so the in terrorem clause did not apply to forfeit her of her beneficial interests in the trust. Kammer Family Trust, 11 Fid.Rep.3d 315 (Montgomery O.C. 2020).

[DBE Comment: “Reasonable basis” or “probable cause” for the objections should not have even been an issue, because the objections to the trustee’s account alleged breaches of trust, so the objectant was not contesting the trust or attempting to “set aside, nullify, or void” the trust, but was attempting to enforce it. The duty of a trustee to account is a fundamental duty, and the duty to account would be meaningless if the beneficiaries could not object to items in the account which were contrary to the terms of the trust or violated fiduciary duties.]

Applicable Federal Rates for 2021

← Previous Year | Current Year | Following Year →

HTML Version Copyright 2018-2025 Daniel B. Evans. All rights reserved.

— Short Term Rates for 2021 —

MonthAnnualSemiann.QuarterlyMonthly
Jan.0.14%0.14%0.14%0.14%
Feb.0.12%0.12%0.12%0.12%
March0.11%0.11%0.11%0.11%
April0.12%0.12%0.12%0.12%
May0.13%0.13%0.13%0.13%
June0.13%0.13%0.13%0.13%
July0.12%0.12%0.12%0.12%
Aug.0.19%0.19%0.19%0.19%
Sept.0.17%0.17%0.17%0.17%
Oct.0.18%0.18%0.18%0.18%
Nov.0.22%0.22%0.22%0.22%
Dec.0.33%0.33%0.33%0.33%

— Mid Term Rates for 2021 —

MonthAnnualSemiann.QuarterlyMonthly
Jan.0.52%0.52%0.52%0.52%
Feb.0.56%0.56%0.56%0.56%
March0.62%0.62%0.62%0.62%
April0.89%0.89%0.89%0.89%
May1.07%1.07%1.07%1.07%
June1.02%1.02%1.02%1.02%
July1.00%1.00%1.00%1.00%
Aug.1.00%1.00%1.00%1.00%
Sept.0.86%0.86%0.86%0.86%
Oct.0.91%0.91%0.91%0.91%
Nov.1.08%1.08%1.08%1.08%
Dec.1.26%1.26%1.26%1.26%

 — Long Term Rates for 2021 —

MonthAnnualSemiann.QuarterlyMonthly
Jan.1.35%1.35%1.35%1.35%
Feb.1.46%1.45%1.45%1.45%
March1.62%1.61%1.61%1.60%
April1.98%1.97%1.97%1.96%
May2.16%2.15%2.14%2.14%
June2.08%2.07%2.06%2.06%
July2.07%2.06%2.05%2.05%
Aug.1.89%1.88%1.88%1.87%
Sept.1.73%1.72%1.72%1.71%
Oct.1.74%1.73%1.73%1.72%
Nov.1.86%1.85%1.85%1.84%
Dec.1.90%1.89%1.89%1.88%

Will with Larger Gift to Companion Upheld

The decedent’s attorney testified that he had administered a “Mini-Mental Status Exam” to the decedent and that the decedent was “sharp” and “understood what he was doing” when he signed his fourth will providing increasing gifts to his long-time companion, and the objectors to the will failed to provide clear and convincing evidence of a lack of testamentary capacity or of weakened intellect. Frederick Estate, 11 Fid.Rep.3d 286 (Bucks O.C. 2021).

Distribution of Personal Property

When the will directed that personal property should be distributed among the beneficiaries as they may agree, or shall be converted to cash if they are unable to agree, and the beneficiaries are unable to agree, the court ordered the disposition of items for which there was agreement, the distribution of other items among the beneficiaries by a lottery, a private auction among the beneficiaries of another item, and a public auction of the remaining items. Selig, Sr. Estate, 11 Fid.Rep.3d 275 (Monroe O.C. 2021).

Deposition of Objector Denied

Motion for protective order was granted, and the deposition of the objector was denied, in order to avoid unnecessary delays and protect the beneficiary of the estate from additional attorney fees and litigation costs. Logue Estate, 11 Fid.Rep.3d 273 (Lycoming O.C. 2021).

Amended O.C. Rule Requiring Confidential Information Form

The Supreme Court has amended Pa.R.O.C.P. 1.99 to require the use of “confidential information forms” (and not the filing of redacted documents) to comply with the public access policy in the Orphans’ Court. As explained in the adoption report of the Orphans’ Court Procedural Rules Committee, this order conforms the O.C. rules with the change in the public access policy that was made in October. The amendment is effective on January 1, 2022. “Order Amending Rule 1.99 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Orphans’ Court Procedure,” No. 892 S.C. Rules Doc. (12/1/2021), 51 Pa.B. 7261 (12/11/2021).

Public Access Policy Amendments

The Supreme Court has approved a number of clarifying amendments to the Electronic Case Record Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania, some of which will explicitly bring the clerk of the Orphans’ Court and the Guardianship Tracking System within the scope of the policy. These changes take effect January 1, 2022. ” Electronic Case Record Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania,” 51 Pa.B. 7411 (12/4/2021).