Dealing with Estate Issues That Arise Immediately Upon Death - Hull on Estates #135

Listen to  Dealing with Estate Issues That Arise Immediately Upon Death

This week on Hull on Estates, David Smith and Natalia Angelini talk about the duties an estate trustee he or she is charged with from the moment of a testator's passing. Duties include locating the will, making funeral arrangements and being responsible to see the intentions of the testator preserved.

Feel free to send us an email at hull.lawyers@gmail.com or leave us a comment on the Hull on Estates blog.

Dealing with Estate Issues That Arise Immediately Upon Death - Hull on Estates Podcast #135

Posted on November 4th, 2008 by Hull & Hull LLP

Natalia Angelini: Hello and welcome to Hull on Estates. You’re listening to Episode #135 on Tuesday, November 4th, 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.

 

David Smith: Hi and welcome to another episode of Hull on Estates. I’m David Smith.

Natalia Angelini: And I’m Natalia Angelini.

David Smith: If you want to be heard on Hull on Estates, you can participate by leaving us a comment. E-mail us at hull.lawyers@gmail.com or you can visit our blog at estatelaw.hullandhull.com. Hello, Natalia.

Natalia Angelini: Hi David. How are you?

David Smith: You know I’m okay. I’ve got a bit of a cold so my voice is about an octave lower than usual, but we’ll do our best today. So today, Natalia, we thought we were going to talk about the issue of what duties an estate trustee is charged with from the minute the deceased passes away.

Natalia Angelini: Right. It’s a really interesting topic because it’s a time when I think the estate trustee has to act fairly quickly to do a number of things, and I think the first of those is locating a Will.

David Smith: That’s right and I suppose at the outset too, we should give a little plug to Paul Trudelle of our office who has given a paper.  And there’s a webcast available on the website dealing with this issue as well. We’re, in our podcast, going to try and explore in a little more detail some of the issues that Paul touched on in his discussion.  So we commend that webcast to you. So I guess, what’s the first issue that usually arises for the estate trustee?

Natalia Angelini: I think the first can definitely be finding the Will of the deceased, because the first thing the estate trustee wants to ascertain is what the deceased’s testamentary wishes were.  And so that’s definitely an important thing to look for.

David Smith: That’s right and of course, you know everybody keeps their stuff somewhere different. In some cases, it’s a safety deposit box. In other cases, it’s a filing cabinet, under the mattress. It will depend on the person.  So if the executor is charged with the responsibility to look for the Will, they’re going to look in the obvious locations, and hopefully be able to find the Will.  And of course, the lawyer plays a role, because if the lawyer is known, he or she might have a copy of the Will.

Natalia Angelini: Right, exactly, so it’s a good idea to make inquiries with the lawyer of the deceased if you know who that lawyer is, or perhaps looking through the deceased’s personal papers, you can determine who the lawyer is and contact him or her that way.

David Smith: Right and you know, if you get into a situation where there’s just no luck finding a Will, you can advertise in the Ontario Reports.  That happens on occasion, we all see lawyers do that on the odd occasion.

Natalia Angelini: Right.

David Smith: When someone says, yeah, I knew so and so had a Will but I didn’t know who drew it.

Natalia Angelini:  Um hm. So I think aside from finding the Will, and probably one of the next things that the estate trustee is going to definitely be thinking about is making funeral arrangements.

 

David Smith: That’s right. And in the cases of an unexpected death, obviously that’s going to probably be a situation where the executor’s got to take some action of their own accord. Of course, with older people and people who are contemplating their own death through illness or what-have-you, or some other really sad situation, we’re seeing more and more that people will prepay their funeral or have them organized ahead of time.  But in most instances, the estate trustee is going to have to deal with this, you know, obviously rather unpleasant task, and certainly it’s the foremost concern.

Natalia Angelini: Absolutely.  And with respect to payment of the funeral, I think it’s helpful to note that those costs are of priority payment and come out of the assets of the estate.  So if it’s not prepaid then at least the estate trustee hopefully has assets available to make that payment.

David Smith: Well that’s right and it’s probably worth just making the point at this stage too, that the government provides a death benefit of $2,500.  And really that’s there primarily to fund the cost of the funeral or to contribute towards the cost of the funeral.

Natalia Angelini: Right, that’s a good point. In dealing with the funeral, I think this is a real interesting one, especially if you’ve maybe got a dispute between family members as to how it should happen, and potentially that may even differ with what the deceased has set out in his or her Will, and you’ve got a really interesting situation about how this deceased person is going to be put to rest.

 

David Smith: Well you’re right Natalia and we’ve seen situations where it’s potentially very emotionally volatile. You can have a situation where you have religion sometimes clash with the intentions of the testator. There’s one case where, the name escapes me, but Rick Bickhram of our office recently, I think a couple of weeks ago, blogged on a case where a deceased person named her boyfriend as executor. He was charged with acting as executor and intended to cremate her remains. The family, for religious reasons, opposed that and this matter ultimately went to Court and the Court decided that it was in the authority of the executor to make that decision.

Natalia Angelini: Right, and during Paul’s talk, he went through a few cases dealing with this issue and it seems to be that the consensus of the Court is that the duty of an estate trustee includes that duty to dispose of the body and that the estate trustee really has final say.

 

David Smith: Right, and you know that really seems to be a very settled law. Unfortunately, I think you’re still going to see cases go to litigation on this in the odd instance, not because the outcome is ever really going to be in question because the law seems so settled that the estate trustee can do what he or she wants.  But I suppose if I’m a bit cynical, for settlement purposes, someone might start that litigation in the hopes of arriving at some kind of compromise. So you know, certainly that’s an issue which regrettably can result in litigation on the odd situation.   But, you know, we keep repeating the same refrain which is that the executor has that responsibility.  And it’s worth also mentioning I think, Natalia, that you can say whatever you want in your Will about how you would like your remains to be disposed of; the reality is that the executor does not have to follow those, does he or she?

Natalia Angelini: Absolutely.  He or she does not, but interestingly though, his or her duty is to dispose of the body in a manner suitable with the estate of the deceased.  So even though the estate trustee may seem to be able to do whatever he or she wants, there’s definitely going to be criticism of a trustee who just, you know, goes ahead and, for instance, has an elaborate $50,000 funeral where the deceased has a fairly modest estate.

David Smith: Right. I think generally it’s expected that the funeral will be commensurate with the size of the estate, so I think that’s a really good point.  And also, there’s just a moral duty, I think, in this situation, where you’d expect the executor to do what the testator wanted.

Natalia Angelini: Right.

David Smith: It’s probably worth doing a little segway here, while we’re on this topic. I mean, this has to do now with the issue of donation of body parts.  And, of course, there’s legislation in Ontario that deals with that, right Natalia?

Natalia Angelini: There is. It’s the Trillium Gift of Life Network Act and it’s an interesting piece of legislation that allows a person to consent to the donation of their own body, or body parts, upon death.

David Smith: That’s right. So we’ve all sort of seen the situation where the consent card is kept quite often with someone’s driver’s license and this is an important priority.  And, of course, it plays an important role in given the success of transplant surgeries and what have you, that this is obviously an important legislative prerogative that this kind of intention can be preserved, even if it’s not contained in the Will.

Natalia Angelini: Right. And a spouse or other family members can also give their consent, even if the deceased hasn’t done so during his or her lifetime. So the difference here, I think, with the ability to dispose of the body, is that the family members seem to get priority over the wishes of the estate trustee.

David Smith: Right and it’s obviously a specific situation but it’s important to know because it’s the one significant departure from the common law rule that the executor’s decisions are paramount. 

Natalia Angelini: And frankly, it makes sense to me anyway.

David Smith: Oh, absolutely. I don’t see how we can quarrel with that. So you know, harking back to our topic for the day which is the executor’s duties, again it all boils down to fiduciary duty, doesn’t it Natalia? I mean really the executor’s got to make sure that he or she does what is necessary to see the intentions of the testator preserved.

Natalia Angelini: That’s right and I think it’s important to note particularly with this issue of disposing of the body, the estate trustee has to do so in a dignified way.  And so I think that’s in keeping with fulfilling his or her fiduciary duty. 

David Smith: Good point. Okay, so I guess we should move on to a couple of more issues, just given our limited amount of time that’s left.  And we were going to touch on children and pets, in that order. So let’s talk about children briefly speaking. It’s possible in your Will, isn’t it, to speak to guardianship?

Natalia Angelini: That’s right. Under the Children’s Law Reform Act, you can appoint someone to have custody of your child upon your death, and I think sometimes people do this, and they put this provision in their Will and I’m not sure that they’re always aware that this has some limited value.

David Smith: That’s right. The appointment is valid for 90 days but, of course, it’s important to note that if anybody else is entitled to custody and is not named in the Will, that that person obviously has a right to exercise custody and it might be pointed out that an application for custody can be commenced within that 90 day period.  And so, to some extent the wishes of the guardian, with respect to their children in their Will is somewhat precatory, isn’t it, in that it’s subject to other considerations.

Natalia Angelini: That’s right, but I think it may give some assistance to the family and to the children, really, so they know I guess who they’re going to be spending time with, at least in the short-term.

David Smith: True. And I guess the important point too is, in all likelihood, the custodial parent in their Will will say that if they die, in all likelihood, they’re going to appoint the other parent as the guardian of the children. I suppose you could have a situation where there are two parents, where one parent dies and provides in his or her Will that the guardian for the children is someone other than the other parent.  And obviously in that situation, the other parent is going to have something to say about that. 

Natalia Angelini: Absolutely, I’ve seen that type of case and I think, unsurprisingly, the other parent proceeded with an application in the Family Court for custody and that issue was resolved that way.

David Smith: Now the last point is in keeping with our concern about issues arising immediately upon death, of course, lots of people have pets.  And lots of Wills provide for pets as beneficiaries.  And pets need to be fed and watered, so obviously the executor’s got to look after that.

Natalia Angelini: That’s right and like you said, that’s definitely got to happen at the get go because we don’t want pets to be neglected.  And they’re usually, especially if they’re in a Will, very near and dear to the deceased’s heart.  So it’s important to make those arrangements.

David Smith: Right. And that’s going to also require the executor to act quickly as you pointed out. So good point as well, and Paul, in his paper, talks about crops and perishables. If you’ve got a business that’s running fresh produce for instance, and the business owner dies, any other perishable products, obviously it’s important to keep the electricity on, to keep things refrigerated and all of those sort of important things that have to do with ensuring that any inventory of the estate does not go to waste, because ultimately, the executor is going to be accountable to the beneficiaries, right, for what happens.

Natalia Angelini: Exactly. And I think, I guess the one thing to remember is, it’s so important for the estate trustee, I suppose to know, as far in advance as possible, whether he or she is a trustee and what the assets of the estate are and what the circumstances are so they can do their best to act as quickly as possible.

David Smith: Absolutely. That’s the biggest part of good estate planning, isn’t it? And it makes the job so much easier. And we should point out, too, that if it’s just an insurmountable job for the executor to take on, maybe you renounce.

Natalia Angelini: Right, or get a, if the estate assets can justify it, get a trust company in place or instead.

David Smith: Especially if there’s a business there, yeah, so I think that’s an important point to leave our listeners with is, you know, if you’re named as executor, you’re not duty bound to take on the job at all costs. If it’s not a realistic possibility for you to carry on the task, consider renouncing.

Natalia Angelini: Absolutely. Good point, David. So, I think that brings us to the end of this week’s discussion. Thanks for listening and thanks for joining me today, David.

David Smith: It was a pleasure, Natalia. I really look forward to podcasting with you again soon.

Natalia Angelini: And we look forward to hearing from our listeners. You can send us an e-mail at hull.lawyers@gmail.com. Be sure to visit our blog at estatelaw.hullandhull.com. where you’ll find even more information and discussion on today’s practice of estate law. We hope that you enjoyed the show. I’m Natalia Angelini.

David Smith: I’m David Smith. Until next week, 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

Planners for Pets

I recall a good deal of discussion when Leona Helmsley left millions to be held in trust in her Will last year, some of it on the Hull & Hull blogs and podcasts.

Well, the website for Estate Planning for Pets provides some interesting reading in this vein, although the kind of trust established by Ms. Helmsley is obviously rare.  My own eye was drawn to the “for skeptics” section, which admonished professionals to put their clients’ wishes first, not their own priorities.

The point seems to be that rather than focus on one’s own, subjective opinion that money to pets could be used for other purposes, it is more appropriate to consider what happens to the pet if the testator makes no provision.  Absent provision, the pet could end up abused, ignored or euthanized.  Anyone who has lost a beloved pet can probably understand why testators want to soften the blow to a pet who loses them.  

Thanks for reading.

Sean Graham

Pet Trust Funds - Hull on Estates Podcast #76

Listen to "Pet Trust Funds"
Read the transcribed version of "Pet Trust Funds"

In this episode of Hull on Estates, Ian and Suzana talk about a few case studies, the topic of substantial gifts to animals, and the community of podcasting.

Click "Continue Reading" for the transcribed version of the podcast. Transcription

Pet Trust Funds - Hull on Estates Podcast #76

Posted on September 11th, 2007 by Hull & Hull LLP

Suzana Popovic-Montag: Hi, and welcome to Hull on Estates. You’re listening to Episode #76 of our podcast on Tuesday, September 11th, 2007.

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.

Ian Hull: Hello Suzana.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: Hi there, Ian. How are you?

Ian Hull: Just great.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: That’s good.

Ian Hull: Great to be on Hull on Estates. One of the things I tried to do this summer was catch up on the podcasts over the year that I had missed. And enjoyed listening to a bunch of the Hull on Estates earlier ones to catch up a little bit on my continuing legal education. So that was kind of fun.

But today we want to sort of turn our focus on a couple of things which we find in our other podcast, Hull on Estates and Succession Planning, we do much more of. And that is sort of look at some real world and what’s the real world doing in estates. And we are always struck by the fact that the practice of law in the area of estates, whether it’s contentious or non-contentious, touches the different parts of our lives in so many ways. And I had the privilege of being interviewed by the Globe & Mail last week…not last week, I guess it was a couple of weeks ago now. In August 30th, there was an article about what I thought was sort of a fun topic and that was the gifting of substantial gifts to animals. So why don’t we spend a couple of minutes just talking about that, ‘cause that was kind of a neat twist on estate planning that came out of New York City.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: It is an interesting twist, as you say Ian, and it’s one that we’re seeing more and more of, surprisingly. These pet trust funds and a very interesting concept. And, you know, in today’s day and age, I think we’ll see even more of it.

Ian Hull: Well, the article that we’re talking about is an article about the late Leona Helmsley who was a very wealthy woman and managed to accumulate a lot of money over her days and she left $12,000,000 in a trust for her dog. I was asked by the Globe & Mail what my impression of that was and I bluntly said that’s a lot of dough for a dog. But more importantly…

Suzana Popovic-Montag: You got quoted on that exact comment.

Ian Hull: …I did get quoted on that, that’s right. I did get that quoted. But more importantly, I just think it was an interesting dialogue that we had. There was a couple of other…Michael Sullivan, who’s the President of the…essentially the overriding…it’s not the Humane Society, but I’ll check his exact title here, but it’s…and McCray, a great lawyer from out in Vancouver, was also…Bill MacRae was also interviewed. But, you know, the twist was this. I thought it was interesting is that this brings a unique situation obviously, but it brings the issue of estates alive and in person, so to speak, and brings it to the front of what every day-to-day people see and think about and it goes to the glamorous side of estates. 

But Michael Sullivan is the head of the SPCA in Canada, had a great sort of view on it and admitted…and the article talks about the fact that people are using pet trusts more and more. And so the idea of a pet trust is, this is sort of an extreme example putting $12,000,000 in, but the idea of a pet trust is something that we can add to our arsenal of options we want to put to our clients. Because as was noted in the article, an elderly person who may have got real fond affection for their animal, a dog or a cat, may be one of the main things in their lives because they may be a bit lonely or people aren’t around as much to spend time socially with. The succession of the animal itself can be a really, really important factor in the estate plan.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: No, I think it’s really a product of our day, our generation, and I’m not surprised that it has come to that level. And I think we’ll see, as I said earlier, a lot more of these kinds of trusts and these kinds of plans being put into people’s estates.

Ian Hull: So we want to just add that to our checklist and make sure that we’ve canvassed it with our clients. Not all of them will have $12,000,000 bucks to throw around but nonetheless.

We’ve got a couple of cases we just want to make a comment on as well today, on this podcast. But before we go to that, one of the sort of underlying themes of Hull & Hull in the past year or so has been to develop and work with this whole new social media world. And in so doing, we’ve experimented with podcasting, we’ve experimented with blogging, but we’ve also had the chance to meet really great people in the new social media environment. And one of those great people is Joseph Thornley. And Joe is President of Thornley Fallis, a Public Relations firm that operates out of Toronto and Ottawa. And Suzana and I were privileged enough to be interviewed for an article that was published in the Ottawa Business Journal last…I guess it was published on August 31. It’s available on-line. But it was a fascinating sort of discussion that we had about where social media is going and what our firm has been doing with it and other firms like ours to enhance our market position, but also to spread the message of the importance of social media.

Joe really prodded us and, you know, forced us to consider what is it that, as a boutique estate litigation firm, that made the social media, the blogging and podcasting, something that we would want to sort of step into and pour our time and resources into.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: And one of the neat comments that you made in that article was the fact that we’re…and Joe picked up on this as well…that, you know, suddenly businesses are using social media in a different way, in a social environment, in a non-traditional fashion. And I think it’s been really interesting to see. Certainly our experience has seen us use it in a different fashion than we would have ever expected and yet it seems to be working.

Ian Hull: And we, you know, sort of just to give people an understanding. I mean this is, it is working. We’ve been out doing this for about a year now. Our stats are, what we consider to be, just terrific. We get literally thousands of hits on our blogs in a month, we get hundreds and hundreds of downloads of the podcasts.  And we think that it’s being downloaded and blogs are being read by people who are specifically interested in what we do. And so that’s very rewarding as well.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: And that was a neat comment that Joe himself made in the article, the fact that, you know, it’s a very narrow focused marketing. And it’s a little bit different from the traditional way where you just sort of advertise and hope that it’ll hit or stick on someone. Whereas here we’re just picking a niche and we’re really focusing on that and hopefully it’s doing a general service to everyone.

Ian Hull: So, just to wrap up.  One of the things we, you and I Suzana, get to have the privilege of doing next week or is it the week after, I forget now. But coming up soon, we’ve got a couple of interesting events that we’re going to be participating in. One is we are speaking at the Windsor Estate Planning Council about succession planning issues and estate planning and trying to factor in more than just the conventional thinking inside the box. Think outside the box a little bit, like we talked about a pet trust. Think about, you know, involving the family. Think about other unique twists and turns on making an estate plan work. And so we’re really looking forward to going down to Windsor and speaking to that group. And then Suzana, I know you’re speaking to the Ontario Bar Association a week or so later, to talk about just this point of niche marketing and niche positioning yourself in ways, of using creative ways and creative tools, with the Ontario Bar Association.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: I’m definitely looking forward to that one.

Ian Hull: So just as a sort of added little academic wing to the discussion today, I just wanted to talk about two cases briefly. Both recently decided. One is the Mernick and Mernick decision. And it came out in 2007. It’s actually just been published in the ETRs in the August edition of the Estates and Trusts Reports, at Volume 32. And the Mernick decision itself is at page 288. It’s an interesting case and really what I wanted to comment on was more about the process as opposed to the decision itself. What happened in Mernick and Mernick is, is that there was an interesting dovetailing between the Ontario Superior Court’s jurisdiction and a religious court Order.   And how that religious court Order was to be applied and how it impacted on us, on the parties outside of the religious sphere. It was a Rabbinical Court and they…without getting too much into the details, the family, two brothers, were disputing over an estate. They went outside of the Court system, so to speak, went into the religious court to resolve the problem. They resolved it and then for enforcement purposes, they had to eventually come into the Superior Court. And why I think it’s an important case is….well there’s lots of interesting cases. They talk about how the summary judgment was effected in this case and so on. But what I thought was interesting to me was how again the different worlds in a sense collide and how they work together. And more and more often, we’re seeing the role of a religious court in resolving disputes in estates is happening. I’ve participated in some of these hearings and these types of scenarios myself and I just think this Mernick and Mernick decision is a helpful decision. And take a quick look at it if you’re interested in seeing how this twist of the two jurisdictions work themselves through.

The other decision I just thought I’d point out was, and I don’t want to harp on the whole question of joint accounts endlessly. But the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, in the Comeau decision, reported again in the same ETRs at page 216, came out with a great summary of a joint account dispute between parent and child. The deceased died intestate, survived by 10 kids and the whole question was, was the joint account for the kids surviving or was it for the 10 kids, ‘cause it was an intestacy? And what I liked about this case was it went to the Court of Appeal. Two things that I thought were helpful, because these cases are popping up so often in our practices. Number one is that it carefully reviewed the whole trial court decision process and how a court will analyze this question of joint accounts. So that if you have to roll your sleeves up and get into a fight over a joint account, you look at this decision and it talks about what were the bullet points, what were the important steps in the game to…that the court thought were important at the trial level. And so that’s good to know because again, we’re always trying to either propound or to dispute the joint ownership issue, and it depends on what side you’re on. But the second part I thought was helpful about this decision was that it then took us to that next analysis. And that was, what is an Appeal Court going to do with a carefully reasoned, properly analyzed joint account case? And in this case, they held that there was no grounds for appeal and the appeal was dismissed. But the way that the Court does it…is again, it’s one of these cases that it’s not a seminal case. It doesn’t say things that we haven’t heard before. But too often we read these cases looking for the newest word on something. But this case shows us how to, from a practical standpoint, work through and build a case on a joint account facts. And then how to deal with it at the appeal level, on both sides. So it didn’t matter whose side you were on in this one. You can learn what the Courts were looking for, the kinds of trends they’re looking for and the kinds of approaches that worked in this case. Because the facts again tie into the simple, you know, who owns on the account on death question. 

But those are just two decisions I thought were kind of fun and worth looking at from an academic standpoint. And also from a practical standpoint.

Suzana Popovic-Montag:  Well, that’s great Ian. Thank you very much for that. And we’ll speak soon.

Ian Hull: Great, thanks a lot Suzana.

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.