Although father testified that home he purchased for his own use was titled in joint names with his son for “estate planning purposes,” proceeds of sale were shown to have been paid to father and son equally, and deposit of those proceeds into a joint account resulted in equal ownership of the account. Bollard & Associates, Inc. v. H&R Industries, Inc. et al., 2017 PA Super 122 (4/24/2017).
An agent with the power to receive the income or corpus of a trust, as provided in 20 Pa.C.S. § 5602(a)(7), cannot revoke the principal’s revocable trust by withdrawing all of the income and principal; an agent’s power over a revocable trust is subject to the provisions of the trust. Estate of: Bernice M. Kane, Power of Attorney, No. 2158 EDA 2016 (Pa. Super. 4/24/2017) (non-precedential), appeal den., 363 MAL 2017 (10/10/2017).
[Comment: We do not often cite non-precedential opinions because of their limited value, but this case involved some important issues about the relationship between the agent under a durable power of attorney and the trustees of the principal’s revocable trust and the powers of an agent over the revocable trust. Unfortunately, the agent-appellant failed to provide adequate arguments or authorities, and so was deemed to have waived many issues. Still, the principles and reasoning of the court may be useful or instructive.]
A same-sex couple could enter into a valid common law marriage before 2005, and the evidence supported the existence of the marriage. In re: Estate of Stephen Carter, 159 A.3d 970, 2017 PA Super 104 (2017).
Objections to executor commission and legal fees denied when executor-lawyer who was one of three executors claimed commission of $70,000 and legal fees of $90,000 out of estate of almost $10 million. Keller Estate, 7 Fid.Rep.3d 90 (O.C. Montgomery Co. 2016).
Agent under power of attorney who was appointed “to serve jointly” with co-agent, but who acted alone, is surcharged for unexplained or unaccounted for expenditures, for changing an IRA beneficiary to herself, which was inconsistent with the principal’s intent as expressed in her will, and for unauthorized purchases on the principal’s credit card, all of which were the result of self-dealing and failure to exercise common prudence in the exercise of her fiduciary duties. Nixon Power of Attorney, 7 Fid.Rep.3d 81 (O.C. Philadelphia Co. 2016).
Surviving “life partner” is not entitled to 0% spousal inheritance tax rate, despite years of continuous cohabitation, when there was no evidence that the parties had ever contracted to marry by exchanging verba in praesenti. Gessner Estate, 7 Fid.Rep.3d 72 (O.C. Chester Co. 2016).
Court does not have jurisdiction to enforce a family settlement agreement that settled an estate within the jurisdiction of a different county. Robinson v. Robinson, 7 Fid.Rep.3d 69 (O.C. Cumberland Co. 2016).
An irrevocable trust created by a husband and wife will be voided for fraud upon the petition of the wife when the wife was not involved in the planning of the trust or the selection of marital assets to be placed in the trust and the husband had purchased other properties with marital assets that were not known to the wife and omitted those properties from the assets included in the trust, while wife believed that the trust was intended to hold all of their marital assets. Passarelli Family Trust, 7 Fid.Rep.3d 63 (O.C. Chester Co. 2016), rev’d, Passarelli Family Trust, 2019 PA Super 95 (3/28/2019) (en banc), aff’d ___ A.3d ___, 71 MAP 2019 (Pa. 12/22/2020). (A previous decision of a three-judge Superior Court panel, 2017 PA Super 366 (11/16/2017), was withdrawn and en banc rearg. granted, 3150 EDA 2016 (1/12/18).)
The court lacks jurisdiction to determine incapacity when Pennsylvania is not the “home state” of the incapacitated person under the Uniform Adult Guardian and Protective Proceedings Jurisdictional Act (20 Pa.C.S. 5901 et seq.) and an agent under a power of attorney has objected to the court’s jurisdiction, because the agent is a person entitled to notice of the proceeding. Greco Estate, 7 Fid.Rep.3d 50 (O.C. Montgomery Co. 2016).
A change to an incapacitated person’s will was approved, the court exercising its power of substituted judgment, when the incapacitated person and her husband both had children from prior marriages, each had executed reciprocal wills each leaving their estates to the other with their estates divided in equal shares among the children of both spouses upon the death of the survivor, but the husband had changed his will after his wife had become incapacitated and his estate went only to his children when he predeceased his incapacitated wife, the court agreeing that the incapacitated wife would have wanted to disinherit her husband’s children. Navarra Estate, 7 Fid.Rep.3d 39 (O.C. Lawrence Co. 2016), aff’d, 2018 PA Super 84 (4/11/2018) (but vacated and remanded as to a deceased child for whom a personal representative was not substituted).
(For the earlier decision in which the court held that it had the power to substitute its judgment, see 6 Fid.Rep.3d 368.)