An award from the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund was 100% payable to the surviving spouse as part of her intestate share of the estate in accordance with 20 Pa.C.S. § 2102(2) because it was payable under the Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act, as amended, but it was nevertheless subject to expenses of estate administration. Estate of Richard A. Chennisi, 2022 PA Super 31, ___ A.3d ___ (2/18/2022), reversing in part, affirming in part, and remanding, 11 Fid.Rep.3d 22 (Chester O.C. 2021).
The Internal Revenue Service has published new proposed regulations to address the changes to the required minimum distribution rules under the amendments to section 401(a)(9) made by sections 114 and 401 of the Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement Act of 2019 (SECURE Act). “Required Minimum Distributions,” REG-105954-20, 87 F.R. 10504 (2/24/2022).
The SECURE Act changes to section 401(a)(9) were summarized as “New (and Old) Minimum Required Distribution Rules Summarized” (1/28/2020), which will be updated as required by the new proposed regulations.
[3/25/2022 Update] See “Required Minimum Distributions: Correction,” 87 F.R. 15907 (3/21/2022), for some typographical corrections to the proposed regulations.
The most recent Pennsylvania Bulletin includes actual and proposed changes to CLE and annual registration procedures that may be of interest to Pennsylvania lawyers generally.
- The Rules for Continuing Legal Education have been amended to allow some CLE credits for some kinds of pro bono work. “Order Amending Rules 106 and 108 of the Pennsylvania Rules for Continuing Legal Education and Approving Amendments to Regulations §§ 1, 5 and 13 of the Continuing Legal Education Board Regulations; No. 905 Supreme Court Rules Docket” (1/31/2022), 52 Pa.B. 964 (2/12/2022).
- Changes are being proposed to the Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement, the focus of which is a rewrite of the rules for annual attorney registration to “improve readability, consistency, and flow of information” so that attorneys “can more easily understand and fulfill their annual license obligations.” “Proposed Amendments to the Pennsylvania Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement 102, 201, 204, 205, 208, 212, 216, 217, 218, 219, 221, 301, 321, 401, 402, 403, 502, 521, and 531 and Pennsylvania Rule of Professional Conduct 1.17,” 52 Pa.B. 942 (2/12/2022).
The distribution of real property to two of the decedent’s four children, with additional cash distributed to the other two children, was not subject to realty transfer tax under the principle of Baehr Bros. v. Com., 487 Pa. 233 (1979), because it could have been carried out as two exempt transactions: a distribution of the property to all four children followed by a sale by two of the children to the other two. Vaughan Estate, 12 Fid. Rep. 55 (Board of Finance and Revenue 2020).
For a series of cases in involving a series of car collisions, the cases in which a decedent’s estate is a party will not be consolidated with the other cases because of the possibility that the Dead Mans’ Act could be waived unintentionally, and because of the confusion or prejudice that could occur if testimony were admissible against some parties but not the estate. Marc Pitman v. Jason Piatt, 12 Fid.Rep.3d 51 (Franklin C.D. 2021).
Objectants to will failed to produce any evidence of lack of testamentary capacity when the will was signed, but produced evidence of a power of attorney establishing a confidential relationship, that the proponent of the will received a substantial benefit under the will through his role as trustee of a charitable trust, and that the decedent was showing noticeable symptoms of dementia and a weakened intellect, and so undue influence is presumed. However, the proponent produced clear and convincing evidence that the decedent had long intended to disinherit his family and that the will was not the product of undue influence. Rosemeier Estate, 12 Fid.Rep.3d 38 (Clinton O.C. 2021).
Decedent failed to maintain a life insurance policy required by an antenuptial agreement with his widow, but the amount paid by the estate for the benefit of the widow under a negotiated settlement agreement did not qualify for the 0% inheritance tax rate because the widow did not elect against the will within the time allowed by statute, and because there was no court-approved compromise under 72 P.S. § 9116(d) and the beneficiaries under the will did not file renunciations of any interests as required by 72 § 9116(c). Toland Estate, 12 Fid.Rep.3d 27 (Montgomery O.C. 2021), on appeal, 147 CD 2021 (Cmwlth. Ct.).
Objectants to the will failed to prove lack of testamentary capacity by clear, strong, and compelling evidence, and the court sustained the validity of the will despite the testimony of a subscribing witness that she believed that the decedent lacked testamentary capacity and despite the failure of any party to call the notary public as a witness. The objectants also failed to produce clear and convincing evidence that the son who received the residuary estate under the will, and who drafted the will, was in a confidential relationship with the decedent and so so exercised undue influence over his father. Similarly, the woman who arranged for the execution of the will and did cooking and cleaning for the decedent did not appear to be in a confidential relationship. D’Hue Estate, 12 Fid.Rep.3d 1 (Lycoming O.C. 2021).
The Supreme Court has adopted amendments to a number of Orphans’ Court rules to change references to “master” to “hearing officer.” The purpose of the amendments is to eliminate a term that has “a perjorative connotation” in “modern parlance outside of court,” and the proposed changes were published in August 2021. “Order Amending Rules 1,3, 2.11, 9.1, 9.2, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7 and 9.8 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Orphans’ Court Procedure; 898 Supreme Court Rules Docket” (1/6/2022), 52 Pa.B. 441 (1/22/2022).
Pa.R.O.C.P. 10.5 has been amended to require that a notice of estate administration be given upon the grant of letters and whenever there is a change in personal representatives, including changes due to the death or resignation of a personal representative. “In re: Order Amending Rule 10.5 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Orphans’ Court Procedure; No. 901 Supreme Court Rules Docket,” (1/12/2022), 52 Pa.B. 684 (1/29/2022).
[DBE Comment: The amended rule as adopted is different in several respects from the amendment as originally proposed, and some of the changes appear to be the result of comments that were submitted to the Procedural Rules Committee. See “Comments to Proposed Amendment to Pa.O.C. Rule 10.5(a).”]