Executor’s account should state assets as of date of death, and include receipts and disbursements beginning with date of death, and not from date of executor’s appointment. Executor also has duty to investigate the amounts and distributions of assets passing outside of the estate, for both accounting and inheritance tax purposes, and to account for what inheritance tax was paid on what transfers. Other objections to the account were dismissed, except for property expenses which the will directed should be paid by beneficiaries. Klingel Estate, 7 Fid.Rep.3d 157 (Monroe Co. O.C. 2017).
Father’s attempt to revoke his consent to the adoption of his child, made orally at a hearing more than 30 days after the execution of the consent, was not timely under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2711(c) and was ineffective. In re: R.L., 2017 PA Super 333 (10/20/2017).
Judgment will not be entered against surviving spouse for “necessaries” when the creditor did not bring suit against the contracting spouse, did not attempt to obtain letters of administration for the estate of the deceased contracting spouse and did file any claim against the estate, and so cannot show that the estate is insolvent, as required by 23 Pa.C.S. § 4102. Ridge MD Leasing Co. LLC v. Whittington, 7 Fid.Rep.3d 151 (Franklin Co. C.P. 2017).
Action against lawyer to decedent and charitable beneficiary of estate was dismissed because lawyer did not have conflict of interest merely because the lawyer’s partner has represented the charity in other matters and charity was not unjustly enriched. Estate of Kasych v. Butz, 7 Fid.Rep.3d 139 (Lehigh Co. C.P. 2017).
Administrator C.T.A. surcharged for disbursements from estate funds for expenses that appear to be for her own personal use, and for amounts paid to the estate of the decedent’s brother and his widow, but not for amounts paid for repairs to be made to a property co-owned with the decedent’s brother, even though the repairs were apparently never made and the administrator was the victim of a scam, or for amounts paid to a possible contestant to the will. Commissions paid to the administrator of approximately 6% of the gross estate were reduced by one half. Hunsicker Estate, 7 Fid.Rep.3d 130 (Monroe Co. O.C. 2017).
Lease agreement with option to purchase, that did not specify a purchase price but instead stated that the purchase price would be based on an appraisal to be obtained, did not violate the statute of frauds and the lessee-purchaser was entitled to specific performance. Horack Estate, 7 Fid.Rep.3d 125 (Monroe Co. O.C. 2016).
Northampton County has adopted new local Orphans’ Court rules, to be effective November 13, 2017. “Administrative Order Orphans’ Court Rules; OC Admin Order No. 2017-002” (10/2/2017), 47 Pa.B. 6478 (10/21/2017).
The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts has held that the federal Stored Communications Act (18 U.S.C. §§ 2701 et. seq.) does not prohibit Internet service providers from providing access to the digital assets of a decedent to the personal representatives of the decedent’s estate. Ajemian v. YAHOO!, 478 Mass. 169 (2017), No. SJC-12237 (Mass. 10/16/2017).
Note: This appears to be the first case to address this issue, and hopefully other courts will follow suit. The decision does not mean that personal representatives are entitled to access to the decedent’s digital assets, but only that federal law does not prohibit access. It therefore removes the primary obstacle to the implementation of the Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act, which has been enacted in a number of states and is currently pending in the Pennsylvania legislature as S.B. 827.
A son’s petition to have his 91 year old mother declared incapacitated was denied when the son had a power of attorney for his mother and controlled her finances, so that it was unlikely that his mother would become the victim of designing persons, and there was insufficient evidence that his mother was unable to care for herself, or that there were medical conditions requiring frequent monitoring by a physician. In re D.G., Alleged Incapacitated Person, 7 Fid.Rep.3d 116 (O.C. Berks Co. 2016).
A claim to unclaimed property held by the Pennsylvania Treasury was properly denied when the property was a joint account in the names of the claimant’s mother and half-sister, the mother predeceased the half-sister so that the account became the sole property of the half-sister, and the claimant was not an heir to the half-sister because she was survived by her father. Morris v. Pa. Treasury Dept., Bureau of Unclaimed Property, 152 A.3d 1083, 7 Fid.Rep.3d 112, 668 C.D. 2016 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2016).