In terms of who actually conducts the mandatory mediation session, R. 75.1.06 provides that the mediator can be a person chosen from the list for the county by agreement of the designated parties, a person assigned from the list by the mediation co-ordinator for the county (at the request of a designated party), or a person who is not named on the list, if the designated parties consent.
 

Most clients are vaguely familiar with the court process and think they know what to expect - they know it involves a judge, their lawyer, a trial, and a courtroom. Not many clients however know what to expect at mediation. As a result, it is important for counsel to take time to describe the process, answer any questions, and prepare their client for what they can expect to happen at mediation. By doing so, counsel can help reduce their client's anxiety about the attendance.
 

Estate mediations can be a very emotionally draining experience. Apart from any legal foundation to the dispute, many intangible factors tend to also be present in estate matters. Jealously, anger, and greed are difficult emotions to overcome and can be sever stumbling blocks in settlement. Sometimes, steering clients away from the emotional aspects and towards the financial implications of continued litigation assists them in moving past those types of difficulties.
 

Clients need to be assured that the mediation process is completely confidential and that anything that is said or admitted cannot be used against them at a later date. The fact that there will be no public record of the proceeding may provide some clients with the comfort to say things that might otherwise not be said. In addition, clients can be advised that any information they provide to the mediator to try to help him or her understand their position better can remain confidential, and that the mediator will not disclose any information unless expressly authorized by the client. Having the opportunity to participate in open and frank discussions may be the key to resolving outstanding issues, issues which might not otherwise be addressed in the litigation process.
 

In jurisdictions not governed by mandatory estate mediation, r. 75.06(2)(f.1) allows a judge hearing an Application or Motion for directions to direct that a mediation session be conducted nonetheless. Counsel may want to keep this provision in mind when otherwise seeking directions in respect of a matter which may, in whole or in part, benefit from a mediation session.
 

Ian Hull - Click here for more information on Ian Hull. 

The court has broad discretion to award costs under section 131 of the Courts of Justice Act. The factors the court considers in exercising that discretion are found in Rule 57.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure and include the result in the proceeding, any offer to settle made in writing, the principle of indemnity, the amount of costs that an unsuccessful party could reasonably expect to pay, the amount claimed and the amount recovered in the proceeding, the apportionment of liability, the complexity of the proceeding and the importance of the issues. 

Notably, the court will also consider, the conduct of any party that tended to shorten or to unnecessarily lengthen the proceeding, whether any step was improper, vexatious, unnecessary, taken through negligence, mistake or excessive caution, and a party's denial of or refusal to admit anything that should have been admitted.

Costs sanctions are just one of the many mechanisms built into the litigation process designed to encourage settlement. For example, matters commenced in the Toronto Estates Court are subject to mandatory mediation, which means that the parties must attend with counsel to enter into in good faith settlement negotiations assisted by a professional and neutral third party.

If mediation fails, a pre-trial provides the opportunity for court-assisted settlement whereby a judge will assist and encourage the parties to settle.

Certainly, it is always better to be a part of the resolution, which provides a measure of control over costs and other factors. A much more attractive option than the risk involved with having no control over the outcome. 

Food for thought for all the litigants out there.

Sharon Davis - Click here for more information on Sharon Davis. 

Listen to Will Challenge Litigation - Part 3

This week on Hull on Estate and Succession Planning, Ian and Suzana continue their discussion on the Will Challenge Process, step by step.

They discuss what happens during the Discovery process and explore what Mediation is and how it works. Will challenge proceedings can benefit greatly from facilitation during the litigation process.

To see the video version of this podcast, you can also download it from iTunes or watch it on YouTube on the Hull and Hull channel: http://www.youtube.com/HullandHullLLP

If you have any comments, send us an email at hullandhull@gmail.com or call us on the comment line at 206-457-1985 or leave a comment on our blog.

Mediation no doubt sounds very conciliatory and cooperative, and in an ideal world it might be.  However, estate litigation and the ideal world are not a commonly-encountered pair.  In the real world, mediation can be extremely stressful. It is not uncommon for mediations to drag on into the wee hours as the increasingly tired lawyers and parties draft away at minutes of settlement, always with the possibility that the deal may fall apart at anytime.

Some lawyers have begun to have lengthy pre-mediation meetings with clients to prepare them for mediation ahead of time so they are not taken by surprise by the stress and late nights that may occur. Even more intriguing is the possibility of mediating an estate matter before death - see our own website and a similar website in California.

However, no matter how stressful and difficult a mediation can be, it is still a far cry from the stress and ups and downs of trial – no doubt  a main reason so many mediations result in settlement.

Thanks for reading.

Sean Graham

Traditionally, the plenary session brought the parties and their counsel together at the outset of the mediation so that the mediator could review the ground rules or “rules of engagement”, discuss the benefits of reaching a mediated settlement, and touch upon role of the mediator during the process. Counsel were then invited to present their client’s case usually adopting an adversarial stance and focusing on a “rights-based” approach to the mediation.  Next up were clients who, understandably, often became angry or confrontational.  

However, plenary sessions have largely changed. It is now widely recognized that allowing counsel and parties to make opening statements only inflames the situation and places the focus on what divides the parties rather than what unites them. Consequently, the mediation is off to a poor start and the mediator spends considerable energy unwinding the newly minted ill-will. 

·          A brief discussion by the mediator of his/her role as well as the ground rules for the day;

·          An emphasis on why it is in the parties' interest to resolve the dispute at the mediation rather than later on within the court process;

·          An overview presented by the mediator of the outstanding issues and disputed facts; and

·          Constrained input from the parties.

In my experience, when a mediator takes the lead during the plenary session and canvases the legal and factual issues that divide the parties, while being sensitive to the emotional context in which the dispute is being waged, the parties are more likely to focus their energy on reaching a settlement. In the end, raw emotion does not simply trump common-sense.

Finally, it is worth noting that the vast majority of legal disputes settle before trial. Furthermore, statistics indicate that a settlement, or partial settlement, occurs more often than not at mediation. Viva la mediation.

Until tomorrow!

Justin

Comments? Send us an email at hull.lawyers@gmail.com, call us on the comment line at 206-350-6636, or leave us a comment on the Hull on Estate blog.

Posted on February 5^th, 2008 by Hull & Hull LLP

Natalia Angelini: Hello and welcome to Hull on Estates. You’re listening to Episode #96 on Tuesday, February 5^th, 2008.

Welcome to Hull on Estates, a series of podcasts for the Canadian legal community dealing with issues and insights surrounding estate planning in Canada.   Hosted by the lawyers of Hull & Hull, the podcast will touch on some key considerations when planning estates and Wills.  Now, here are today’s hosts.

Natalia Angelini: Hi and welcome to another episode on Hull on Estates. I’m Natalia Angelini.

Allan Socken: Hi and I’m Allan Socken.

Natalia Angelini: If you want to be heard on Hull on Estates, you can participate in our discussion by leaving a comment. Give us a call at 206-350-6636. The number is in the show notes along with our e-mail address: hull.lawyers@gmail.com or you can visit our blog at estatelaw.hullandhull.com.

So Allan, it’s great to be podcasting with you today. It’s our first time together.

Allan Socken: I’m very excited about it, Natalia.

Natalia Angelini: That’s good. We’re going to be talking about the family conference. So perhaps I’ll just set out what it is. The family conference is a professionally mediated conference and it essentially provides a forum whereby a testator can reveal his or her proposed estate plan to intended adult beneficiaries. And the objective is to obtain their approval of the plan. So it’s quite a unique animal, the family conference. It’s really the only formal mechanism in place in estate matters where someone can, you know, look their loved ones in the eyes and explain their plan to them, answer any questions about why they wish to have their plans set out in that manner. And ultimately in an ideal scenario, get agreement on it. So Allan, why don’t you tell our listeners what needs to happen in preparation for a conference.

Allan Socken: Well before the conference, I think probably the most important question to ask is who do you invite to the conference? And the simple answer is you invite all adults who are involved in the estate plan. At least, at a minimum, the people you invite would be the spouse of the person who made this estate plan as well as his children. And I think in inviting these people, it’s really important that you speak to them and have a candid conversation with them, obviously before the conference, explain the purpose of a conference, namely for all the people to appreciate what the person’s estate plan looks like and the reasons as to why they’re leaving certain gifts the way that they are.

Natalia Angelini: And who else can be invited?

Allan Socken: Really, any person who has an interest or involvement in the estate plan of the person.

Natalia Angelini: Right. And that would even include professionals, like the testator’s estate lawyer, their financial planner or accountant, because they certainly can have a critical role in explaining or answering questions dealing with the assets.

Allan Socken: For sure. And I think the other important thing to make mention of is there may be certain circumstances, probably quite frequently, where minor children have an interest in the estate plan. And it’s important to note that minor children should not be included in the family conference. In most jurisdictions, Ontario included, there’s an office known as the Office of the Children’s Lawyer, whose mandate is to protect the interests of minor children. And depending on what the estate plan looks like, it may be necessary to have discussions with them to see if it’s necessary for them to attend the conference as well.

Natalia Angelini: That’s a good point, Allan. So are there any other preparatory steps?

Allan Socken: The only other thing I’d like to make mention of is the question as to where to hold the family conference. Often people think that it may be prudent to hold it at a family member’s house.  But the reason why, I think, it’s not a good idea is, is often when you go to a person’s house, it may turn into a social function and it may lose the business touch that’s essential in planning for this conference. So I think probably the best place to hold a conference would be at the mediator’s office so people can really appreciate the business-like environment that they’re encountering and the importance placed on the family conference.

Natalia Angelini: In addition, it really is like a mediation and you want to be able to have individual caucuses as well as group caucuses. So you need several rooms and breakout rooms and privacy so you can really have it proceed in a meaningful way. So again, I think a mediator’s office or some other kind of office is ideal.

Allan Socken: I think moving along, Natalia, now we should address the agenda that’s put in place before the family conference. I think it’s important to stress to our listeners that an agenda is essential to have so that people are aware of what’s going to be taking place at the conference and so that divergence can be avoided as much as possible. So probably what’s important to include in the agenda is really the overview of the person’s estate plan which would include the proposed new Will, who the executor will be, funeral arrangements, debts of the person, taxation issues, guardianship of minor children, who may be the Power of Attorney and dealing with the distribution of specific assets for the estate.

Natalia Angelini: Right. I think it is critical to have an agenda and the family conference is chaired. And it’s usually chaired by either the testator or the mediator or someone else selected by the testator. So it’s great assistance to them to have an agenda to follow.

Now in respect of how the actual conference works over the course of a day or more than one day, it is much like a mediation.  And, you know, there is, I think, initially, commonly a group meeting where the chairperson goes through the rules of the day. There’s usually a family conference agreement signed which sets out that the mediator is neutral, that he or she is not offering legal advice, that all discussions are without prejudice, and of course, that the mediator is not liable for anything done or omitted at the family conference. So the usual sort of waivers. In addition, a document entitled Rules for Meeting is also signed. And Allan, why don’t you set out what is contained in that document?

Allan Socken: Typically for the Rules of the Meeting, it sets out that the parties understand who’s paying for the mediator’s time but not withstanding whoever is paying for the mediator’s time, the mediator still will be neutral throughout the process. As well, the parties agree that they’ll conduct themselves in a business and professional approach. And in that sense, there’ll be no harsh language spoken either at the other parties or the mediator. And believe me, I’m sure Natalia also can attest to the fact she’s seen certain times where discussions can get pretty heated.

Natalia Angelini: This is true. This is true. And I think in this kind of conference you really want to encourage views to be shared and grievances to be aired, but at the same time, in order for resolutions to come about, you want to make sure that everything is discussed in a cordial manner.

Allan Socken: And just the other thing to make mention of also is one of the rules should also include that all the parties are bound and acknowledge that they’re bound by the Family Conference Agreement. So they can leave whenever they feel like it if they feel progress is not being made. Certainly the mediator will try to keep them there and have the parties agree to at least spend a day there to try to sort things out. But even if the parties want to leave at the end of the day and no agreement can be reached, the parties still agree that all information and all people who were present can’t be subpoenaed in that respect. I think that’s important also to include in the agreement, Natalia.

Natalia Angelini: Good point, Allan. So again, it is a fluid process like any other type of mediation and it really can unfold in a different way depending on the parties and the circumstances.  And if an agreement is not ultimately reached at the end of the day, you can, you know, reconvene on another day if all or some of the people are willing to and you can get an agreement at a later time. What that looks like doesn’t necessarily have to be in accordance with the proposed estate plan. It’s not necessarily an imposition of that plan. The plan can be varied or amended pursuant to the comments and views of the beneficiaries and once an agreement is ultimately reached, it’s papered in a document that’s called The Family Constitution. And Allan, maybe you can expand a bit on that.

Allan Socken: Sure. Basically, you probably remember from law school, Natalia, that we always talk about the constitution as being a living tree.

Natalia Angelini: That’s right. Way back when I do remember.

Allan Socken: Well not surprisingly, The Family Constitution is also a living document that requires amendments from time to time. Because as people move on and age in years, no doubt their estate plan changes and when their estate plan changes, it’s really important that The Family Constitution is also updated. And I think as a preamble to The Family Constitution, it’s important to note that while family members may have different views and opinions, they unanimously - hopefully that’s the goal at the end of the day - that they unanimously decide to create this Family Constitution. And I mean, in certain circumstances, there may be family members who don’t want to agree to The Family Constitution or some people may not even want to have the meeting in the first place. So I think the role of the mediator shouldn’t necessarily be to prevent the family conference from going ahead, but perhaps to engage the people who are willing and interested at first to participate in the conference and hopefully, if success can be achieved there, people who didn’t want to participate in the first place may be inclined to give it another look and perhaps be willing to review the constitution that was agreed to. And even in certain circumstances, they may be willing to sign the agreement, albeit they may expect some changes to be made. But at the end of the day, some progress can happen even if not everyone in the family conference is willing at first to participate. And I think that’s important to keep in mind.

Natalia Angelini: Right, and one benefit to proceeding even if you don’t have everyone’s consensus is that the process can be of real value because it shows a testator’s clear intention as to how he or she wishes to divide his or her assets, which can really deflate any kind of brewing Will challenge at the end of the day. So litigation avoidance is one real positive potential outcome of the conference. And if you actually do get a Family Constitution signed, then it’s a great thing to have because it includes an agreement not to contest the Will. So that’s a great way to avoid litigation or ultimately if litigation is commenced, to use that document in defence of that.

Allan Socken: And just one final point for me to make Natalia, if that’s okay, is probably the most complicated aspect of this family conference is really the need for full disclosure. And for a lot of people, that’s really a difficult thing to do because there may be situations that people are embarrassed to admit or really don’t want to disclose.  For example, extra-marital affairs, not dividing your estate equally among your children.  But at the end of the day, if you want success to be reached with the family conference and you don’t want your Will to be contested or other legal remedies pursued when you die, I really think it’s important that you make mention of these difficult aspects so people can appreciate and they don’t feel as though you’re hiding anything. So while it’s difficult to disclose this information, I really think it’s important to get across that at the end, if you hide it, it will really do more harm than good at the end of the day.

Natalia Angelini: That’s right. I mean the fact is this is a delicate process and it’s not one that I think most people are willing to enter into because I think a lot of us would rather not deal with these delicate and difficult issues during our lifetime and we’ll just wait for everyone else to kind of deal with it after we’ve passed on. So I think people need to have, I think in a lot of cases, it helps to sort of have the courage to go ahead with the process and be open and ultimately, in an ideal scenario, get agreement on the issues or at least, you know, canvass them in an open and honest way.

So well, I think that brings us to the end of this week’s discussion.  Thanks for listening and thanks for joining me today, Allan.

Allan Socken: Thanks Natalia, I had a great time.

Natalia Angelini: That’s great. And we look forward to hearing from our listeners. You can send us an email at hull.lawyers@gmail.com or just pick up the phone and leave us a message on our comment line at 206-350-6636. And again, you can also visit our blogs at estatelaw.hullandhull.com, where you’ll even find more information and discussion on today’s practice of estate law. We hope you enjoyed the show. I’m Natalia.

Allan Socken: And I’m Allan.

Natalia Angelini: And until next time, so long.

This has been Hull on Estates with the lawyers of Hull & Hull.  The podcast you have been listening to has been provided as an information service.  It is a summary of current legal issues in estates and estate planning.  It is not legal advice and you are reminded to always talk with a legal professional regarding your specific circumstances.

To listen to other podcasts, or to leave a question or comment, please visit our website at www.hullandhull.com.

Our theme music is Upper Structure by DJ AKid  and is courtesy of the Podsafe Music Network.

/mem

• Knowledgeable (has to know the law)
• Experienced at mediating (too many “wannabes”)
• Litigation savvy (knows the true costs and challenges of litigation)
• Empathetic (a good, sympathetic listener is a must)
• Diligent (a mediator has to know the issues and subtleties)
• Firm (a mediator has to know when to read the “riot act”)
• Stamina (mediation is often a marathon)
• Adaptable (a mediator wears many hats)

If the other side suggests a mediator you’ve never heard of, ask around. What do your colleagues think and what is the mediator’s reputation like? To be honest, I’m never too quick to agree to a mediator suggested by opposing counsel if I don’t really know their style and reputation. Opposing counsel may have a comfort level with the mediator or know something you don’t that could work against your client. 

By keeping the above characteristics in mind and doing your homework, you and your client will likely have a better chance of satisfactorily settling the dispute.

For my part, I was scheduled to speak to a guardianship application, which was to be adjourned on terms. The problem I faced was securing a full day hearing date for the return of the application. My matter involves a widow, whose health is declining. She has been declared incapable of managing her property and making personal care decisions. The application was brought by the widow’s nieces (my clients) to be appointed co-guardians of property and personal care for their aunt. The application is hotly opposed by the attorney for property and personal care, who my clients believe was appointed under suspicious circumstances.

While the adjournment was granted, it was also crucial that I obtain a timely hearing date for the application. However, the presiding judge apologized and advised that the first available date was not until late September 2007. More than six months would pass before the application would be heard. Her Honour explained that the region was understaffed when it came to judicial resources and simply could not accommodate all matters despite their apparent urgency. Her Honour also indicated that criminal matters usually took precedence over civil matters, as the right of an accused to a fair hearing would be prejudiced by undue delay.

The bottom line is that parties intent on litigating, whether in the estate context or otherwise, should understand that institutional delay will often push their “day in court” well into the future. Justice delayed is justice denied. However, that is the reality that litigants face in today’s overburdened court system.

It is for this reason that many alternatives to litigation are frequently promoted. Mediation is a good example, as is binding arbitration in commercial litigation matters. A party should therefore carefully consider what options they have before necessarily assuming that a court hearing is their best course of action.

Enjoy!
Justin de Vries

Read the transcribed version of  "Tips for Directing and Controlling Estate Litigation

During Hull on Estates Episode #48, Craig Vander Zee and Bianca La Neve continue their discussion on tips for controlling and managing estate litigation, focusing on orders giving directions, oral discovery and mediation.

READ THE TRANSCRIBED PODCAST

During Hull on Estate and Succession Planning Episode 39, we continued our discussion on the Family Conference, focusing on the actions to be taken in regards to non-participating family members. We also discussed the importance of documentation and defined will challenges.

READ THE TRANSCRIBED PODCAST

During Hull on Estate and Succession Planning Episode 36, we discussed:

• dealing with different family issues in a global sense;
• the family cottage and/or "special properties";
• dealing with fairness issues;
• how to equalize the gifting of a cottage; and
• the grandchildren effect.

READ THE TRANSCRIBED PODCAST HERE

During Hull on Estates Episode 36, we discussed:

• mandatory mediation;
• the types of matters that have mandatory mediation;
• how mediation works in general;
• what the general timelines are for proceeding to mediation; and
• considerations for selecting a mediator.
  

For its part, the Estate submitted that a prenuptial agreement disentitled Mrs. Webster to request an equalization payment or alternatively, she and her son failed to safeguard her interest in a timely manner. Mr. & Mrs. Webster had signed a prenuptial agreement in Quebec in 1974. The agreement provided that Mrs. Webster and her husband would be separate as to property upon dissolution of the marriage by death. According to the court, the marriage contract did not bar the wife from an equalization claim because it did not expressly address election issues upon the death of one of the spouses.

As stated yesterday, Mrs. Webster and her son alleged that they were initially unaware of any right to make an election for equalization of the net family property. Six months after the expiration of the limitation period, the son learned otherwise, consulted a lawyer, and an application was brought a further six months later. No explanation was offered for the delay incurred after Mrs. Webster’s son became aware of the right to make an election for equalization. While the court recognized that Mrs. Webster might have been in a state of emotional upset and had much difficulty in dealing with Mr. Webster’s death, it noted that the majority of surviving spouses would be in a similar state of grief. Moreover, the court held that there was an opportunity for Mrs. Webster and her son to obtain legal advice upon the death of Mr. Webster, which they did not do.

Given the above, Mrs. Webster did not meet the criteria for an extension of the prescribed time because the delay in filing an election was not incurred in good faith. The failure by Mrs. Webster and her son to make inquiries amounted to wilful blindness. There was no justifiable reason for not making such inquiries.

The court also held that Mrs. Webster’s declining health during the delay substantially prejudiced the ability of the Estate to defend the motion. The court also held that this was not a case that warranted an exercise of judicial discretion in Mrs. Webster’s favour, due to the clear expression of Mr. Webster’s intention to redistribute his wealth to charity.

Finally, the courts held that the Family Law Act should not be used as a scheme to rewrite a Will and redistribute wealth contrary to the testator’s intension. The sad reality was that Mrs. Webster, in her failing health, was now a custodian of wealth to be redistributed to a subsequent generation. Mrs. Webster’s Will provided that her three sons were the sole beneficiaries of her estate. Accordingly, it would be seem as though it would be Mrs. Webster’s sons, as opposed to Mrs. Webster, who would benefit from an order granting the extension of time, while Mr. Webster’s children would be excluded altogether.

The court held that it was unjust and contrary to the objectives of the Family Law Act to use the extension provision to secure this result. Accordingly, the court declined to exercise its discretion and dismissed the motion.

Have a great day.

Justin de Vries.

The case of Webster v. Webster Estate , a recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, attracted notoriety in the media, as the Webster family is well known in Montreal and the world of philanthropy. The case is interesting to read given the amount of money at stake and the family dynamics. The case also deals with limitation periods in the estate context. Today, I will discuss the facts. Tomorrow, I will discuss the law and the court’s decision.

Mr. Webster’s estate was valued at around $24 million. Mrs. Webster was provided for under the terms of the Will, but the bulk of the Estate was left to the Eric T. Webster Foundation. Unfortunately, since the death of her husband, Mrs. Webster developed Alzheimer’s disease, which had progressed to the point where she was unable to testify as a witness in the proceeding.

The Will appointed four Estate Trustees of the Estate including Mrs. Webster and her son by her first marriage, who was also Mrs. Webster’s legal representative and the step-son of Mr. Webster.
In Ontario, when a spouse dies with a Will, the surviving spouse may elect to take the benefits bestowed under the Will, or seek the equalization of net family property from the estate as calculated under the provisions of the Family Law Act.

An application for an equalization payment must be brought within six months of the first spouse’s death, otherwise the surviving spouse is deemed to have chosen to take under the Will.

Mrs. Webster did not file an election within the prescribed six months. This meant that she could no longer elect to equalize their net family property. However, Mrs. Webster and her son both alleged that they were unaware of any right to elect to receive an equalization payment under the Family Law Act in the six months following Mr. Webster’s death. Mrs. Webster therefore sought an order extending the time within which she could file an election to make an equalization claim from the Estate of her deceased husband.

Unfortunately for Mrs. Webster, and her son who ultimately spearheaded the proceeding, they did not receive a sympathetic hearing from the court. Tomorrow I will consider the law and the court’s decision. Stay tuned.

Have a great day.

Justin de Vries

READ THE TRANSCRIBED PODCAST HERE

During Hull on Estate and Succession Planning Podcast #35, we discussed:

• Special needs beneficiaries;
• What the definition of a special needs beneficiary is;
• The use of trusts for special needs beneficiaries; and
• The proper planning for special needs beneficiaries and what happens to the assets and the trust when the special needs beneficiary dies.
  

READ THE TRANSCRIBED PODCAST

During Hull on Estates Podcast #35, we discussed the following:

• Competing beneficiaries who join forces to challenge a Will when they do not have identical interests;
• People that need to be served in a Will Challenge;
• How to decide if you need your own lawyer or if you should join forces with the same solicitor; and
• How to deal with the costs of the Will Challenge when dealing with several lawyers.
  

READ THE TRANSCRIBED PODCAST

During Hull on Estates Episode 32, we discussed the book by Jordan Atin, Barry Fish and Les Kotzer titled "The Family War: Winning the Inheritance Battle" including how to avoid inheritance battles, how to deal with them when they do occur and strategies to end them quickly and successfully.

READ THE TRANSCRIBED PODCAST

During Hull on Estate and Succession Planning Podcast #29 , we discussed the need for disclosure of all financial information during the family conference.