Source: https://marylandestatelitigation.com/
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 04:17:03+00:00

Document:
The decision to disinherit a child is generally not made lightly and neither should be the approach to planning. Careful consideration as to why a parent wishes to exclude a child from her estate planning is necessary prior to preparing the documents. There may be ways to arrive at alternative solutions that achieve many of the client’s goals without risk of litigation that disinheriting can bring (which I will cover in part 2 of disinheriting a child).
Whatever the reason or reasons for choosing to disinherit, a diligent approach to the estate planning and the documentation of the estate planning is necessary. It is relatively easy to challenge a will. In Maryland, a Petition to Caveat a Will (a will contest) is a notice pleading. The Petition needs to contain “an allegation that the instrument challenged is not a valid will . . . and the grounds for challenging its validity.” In simpler terms, one challenging a will (the “Caveator”) needs to say that the will is not valid and offer a laundry of reasons that it may not be valid. The list of reasons does not need to be supported by facts. Many practitioners describe the grounds for challenging a will as including the “kitchen sink” because due to the six-month statute of limitations it is necessary to plead every single possible cause of action or it will be barred despite further evidence that may be generated.
“For reasons which are known to them” is a common refrain in estate plans that disinherit. This language, however, does no favors for litigation counsel who ultimately defend the will against a disgruntled heir. The disgruntled heir inevitably has nary a clue as to what the cryptic language is referring to; indeed, they will describe their relationship with the disinheriting parent in glowing terms.
Litigation counsel will then turn to the drafting attorney’s file and look for clues as to the testator/testatrix’s intent for disinheriting a child or grandchild. In a will contest, the drafting attorney’s file is no longer privileged upon the death of the testator. Experience has shown that drafting attorneys do not always have the best habits of taking notes when meeting with their estate planning clients. Even when they did take copious notes, the estate planning file has a tendency to winnow down through the years where the only remaining documents are usually only the final draft or executed version of a will. The attrition of an estate planning file can seem suspicious to an outsider, but it also makes sense from a logical perspective. Successful attorneys have thousands of clients that they represent over the course of a career, which generates reams of paper. As the files build up, a game of survivor begins to take place. Documents may be destroyed in accordance with a firm’s file retention policy or those documents may be returned to the client upon the conclusion of the representation or the drafting attorney’s retirement from practice. Absent explanation in the drafting attorney’s notes, litigation counsel is forced to rely on other contemporaneous documents and the testimony of those that knew the testator/testatrix – namely their children or grandchildren – those who stand to lose out on a portion of their inheritance.
The attorney representing the Caveator can attack the lack of evidence and cryptic words of the testator/testatrix in an attempt to extract a settlement from the estate. Many times a settlement will make sense because of the risk involved in litigating any case and also the attorney’s fees that will be expended by the estate in defending against the caveat. A little additional care by the planning attorney in maintaining their file or documenting the reasons for the caveat in the first place can go a long way in protecting the client’s ultimate wishes for the disposition of their assets.
We will discuss some other approaches to estate planning where the client wishes to disinherit a child in our next blog in this series. Should you wish to discuss your estate plan with an attorney who has not only drafted, but also litigated a will or trust, then do not hesitate to call.
David A. (Andy) Hall, Esq.
 See Benzinger v. Hemler, 134 Md. 581, 107 A. 355 (1919).
Clients often talk to us about whether someone is competent to execute legal documents such as a will or a power of attorney (POA). Talk of competency is generally putting the cart before the horse. Competency is a legal term, but it has to do with whether a person lacks legal competence, e.g., they are a minor, or they have been adjudicated incompetent.
From an estate planning perspective particularly where the goal is avoid a guardianship, the question is whether someone has capacity to make decisions or execute planning documents.  The capacity required to execute a will is the ability of the testator/testatrix to understand the nature of their assets and the objects of their bounty. Put more simply, does a person know who their children and/or grandchildren are, and do they know what “stuff” they own. In order to devise property to a relative, a testator/testatrix needs to know the property they have and who they are giving the property. It makes sense from an intrinsic level that you need to know these two points in order to give something away otherwise someone could give away things that are not theirs to people they do not know, which is generally not how people approach estate planning. All in all, the capacity needed to execute a will is pretty low. A will, however, will not obviate the need for a guardianship. Additional incapacity planning is required.
The capacity required to execute a trust is the same as that required to execute a contract, which requires that the party must understand the nature of the business conducted. For contracts, the more complicated the contract, then the higher the level of understanding required to be able to execute the contract. This holds true for advance medical directives (AMD) and POAs. Overall, the capacity to execute a will is less than the capacity required to execute a trust or other incapacity planning documents (AMDs and POAs).
Incapacity planning documents are important in the realm of avoiding guardianships. Most of these documents have explicit nominations for persons to serve as guardian should the need arise, but they also serve the role of allowing an agent to make or communicate decisions for a principal during a period of incapacity. Without these documents, it may become necessary for a relative to file for guardian of the person and/or property.
Grounds. – A guardian of the person shall be appointed if the court determines from clear and convincing evidence that a person lacks sufficient understanding or capacity to make or communicate responsible decisions concerning his person, including provisions for health care, food, clothing, or shelter, because of any mental disability, disease, habitual drunkenness, or addiction to drugs, and that no less restrictive form of intervention is available which is consistent with the person’s welfare and safety.
Estate & Trusts § 13-705(b). There are three operative components of the grounds for filing a guardianship of the person. First, the alleged disabled lacks “sufficient understanding or capacity to make or communicate responsible decisions concerning his person.” Id. Second, this is due to “mental disability, disease, habitual drunkenness, or addiction to drugs.” Id. Third, there is “no less restrictive form of intervention.” Id.
Focusing on the first basis, because of the person’s mental disability or other cognitive impairment, the person lacks capacity to make or communicate decisions. This covers someone in a temporary or medically induced coma to someone who’s dementia has progressed to a point where they can no longer interact with others in any normal sense of the expression. It can also cover someone who is habitually drunk or addicted to drugs. A guardianship of the person is necessary because the alleged disabled did not have proper incapacity planning documents in place and are unable to sign documents appointing a healthcare agent to make decisions on their behalf. Physically a person may still be able to sign and there are many cases brought where someone has been unduly influenced to sign particular estate planning or ancillary documents, but that does not mean that they possess the contractual capacity in order to execute an AMD or POA.
If after a court finds the alleged disabled is unable to make or communicate decisions due to mental disability or other cognitive impairment and there is no less restrictive alternative, then the court will appoint and guardian of the person. After the appointment of a guardian, then a person has been legally adjudicated incompetent to make legal decisions. Thus, it is after a long process that the conversation about whether someone is competent is appropriate from a legal perspective.
Filing for guardianship may be a difficult process with unique challenges for those who do not handle these on a regular basis. If you believe that you need to file for guardianship, then call for a free consultation.
 In criminal law, competency is the ability of the accused to stand trial and participate in one’s defense.
 Note that this distinction is muddled by the Maryland Code, specifically, Estates & Trusts Art. § 4-101 states “Any person may make a will if he is 18 years of age or older, and legally competent to make a will.” (emphasis added).
 Sellers v. Qualls, 206 Md. 58, 66, 110 A.2d 73 (1954).
 Give away pursuant to a will. See Black’s Law Dictionary [Third Pocket Edition] p. 207 (2006).
 A person executing a will.
 “To be clear and convincing, evidence should be ‘clear’ in the sense that it is certain, plain to the understanding, and unambiguous and ‘convincing’ in the sense that it is so reasonable and persuasive as to cause you to believe it.” Maryland Civil Pattern Jury Instructions § 1:13 (2013).
 Note the language used in the code, it is not referring to someone that has a drinking problem or casually uses drugs. Also, the use of the intoxicants must prevent them from making or communicating decisions, not necessarily making poor decisions.
As a high school student in Sussex County, Delaware, I remember career day where an attorney came in to my classroom and explained what he did for a living. I was 14, maybe 15, and had no idea what a Last Will, an estate, or probate was, not to mention a revocable living trust. As a means of engaging the class, the lawyer gave us all a copy of the New Castle County, Delaware Robert Nesta Marley Probate Petition. I knew that name!
This particular decedent happened to be Bob Marley, known universally as the face of reggae music. It turns out that Bob Marley owned real estate in Wilmington, Delaware just outside of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. It also happens that he spent about a year of his life in Wilmington in the mid 1960s, working at a Chrysler plant, the inspiration for his song “Night Shift“, but that is another story for another site to discuss.
I did not realize that day that I would grow up to become an estate and trust litigation attorney, but I was certainly a fan of Bob’s music and could not believe that he had such ties to the small state of Delaware, especially considering he was Jamaican and, on top of that, incredibly famous.
It took me years to realize that the only reason Bob Marley’s heirs had to administer a probate estate in Delaware was because he owned property in Wilmington – specifically located at 2311 Tatnall Street, a residential row home across from a basketball court, and 2320 Market Street, which he owned with his mother, Cedella Booker, as a “tenant in common,” which means that she owned half but Bob’s half would pass to his heirs according either to his Last Will & Testament or the law of intestacy.
Had the reggae legend utilized a revocable living trust and titled his property appropriately, I would have never received this artifact some years after he died of cancer and his convoluted family tree became part of the public record of Delaware’s probate courts. By using a revocable trust, one can avoid probate and title real property in jurisdictions outside your domicile in the trust and thus avoid probate and the expense of retaining local attorneys to handle a portion of your estate. Especially, in the instant case, where you have not had substantial ties to a certain state in almost twenty years before dying (Bob Marley died of cancer, in Miami, in 1981).
It is seemingly epidemic of celebrities to fail to plan their estates. In Marley’s case he died young, in his thirties, but he had many children. Based on this small piece of his estate’s puzzle, there is no way to confirm that he lacked a will or trust, but it can be confirmed that his mother did not automatically inherit the property she shared ownership of with Bob. His surviving kin, a wife and ten children, would take partial ownership of the property on Market Street with his mother, who was also residing in Miami (and was at his bedside) at the time of his death.
Clients are well advised to consider all of their property, wherever it may be located, and to talk to an attorney about their specific intentions for certain assets. Did Bob Marley intend for his mother to end up owning half of the property on Market Street in Wilmington with ten other people? Not very likely.
What about Prince? Did he wish for his siblings to take fragmented ownership and control of his tightly protected – during his lifetime – intellectual property? Is Paisley Park to become a museum because he wanted it, or because estranged family need to drum up cash to settle the expensive confusion of administering his under-planned estate? Celebrities are frequent casualties of failing to plan their estates. Take the time to meet with an attorney that you trust to plan properly.
I may be the only lawyer in the world who listens to “I Shot The Sheriff” and worries about the victim’s legal documents, but the importance of proper planning still matters, lest you “Stir It Up” with a mess that gets left behind for your loved ones to handle.
For any who are interested, the properties mentioned in this article are today nondescript and unmarked, having fallen into history’s selective memory.
Here in the Information Age we have all the information in the world at our fingertips. You can go on WebMD to search symptoms of an illness before talking to a doctor, Zillow to shop houses before you talk to a Realtor, and to a host of legal form and information sites to look at documents and articles before you talk to a lawyer. Much, however, like WebMD cannot write you a prescription for your ailment and Zillow is not able to settle on your new home for you, those legal sites are unable to appear in court on your behalf to tell your story and make sure you have your day in court.
Where technology was supposed to make our lives easier, simpler, and more convenient, it has often done the opposite. So much of the legal, medical, business and technical worlds have become highly specialized that few professionals can ‘do it all.’ Some lawyers only represent clients in traffic or criminal matters, others handle nothing but Wills and Trusts for their clients.
When it comes to writing your estate plan, the attorneys at King Hall LLC encourage you to find a lawyer that practices only in estate and trust planning. Such an attorney will know the nuances of the estate and tax laws that may affect your family. Yet, sometimes, even that attorney fails to predict the circumstances that lead to your family having to seek counsel to resolve confusion or tension in your estate after you die.
That’s right, not even dying is simple anymore: there are death certificates, estates to be opened, insurance policies and retirement accounts to be claimed by your loved ones, and typographical errors in your carefully drafted Will or Trust that no one saw and no one expected to require a judge to decipher or resolve.
Naturally, the family will go to the attorney who wrote your legal documents to see if she or he can help them. If the attorney wrote it and made the error, then the attorney can fix it, right? Not always.
Take a look at one of the best kept secrets, Maryland Judiciary Case Search, and see if your lawyer has ever been in court. Better yet, see if your lawyer has been in court for anything that did not name him as a party. Was the court appearance for more than a routine motion, where everyone agreed but just needed the formality of a court order? Did the parties engage in discovery (depositions, interrogatories, document production)? Has the lawyer ever tried a case to a verdict before a jury of your peers? Most transactional attorneys excel at technical thinking and careful, patient drafting but are not the greatest oral advocates in a courtroom. As such, they avoid the courtroom and (should) stick to the conference room. The rigors of contested, complex litigation have harsh and demanding deadlines that detract from the transactional attorney’s ability to counsel and guide clients who are trying to avoid litigation in the first place.
At King Hall LLC, our attorneys have spent years drafting wills, trusts, powers of attorney and advance directives. At the same time, we have years of experience appearing in court on behalf of clients to prosecute or defend estates, trusts and guardianships in cases where the documents were drafted ineffectively by other lawyers or where the documents simply did not envision an unfortunate disagreement amongst heirs.
King Hall LLC attorneys are unique in their experience and ability to both write the estate plan and to appear in court on behalf of Personal Representatives, Trustees, Guardians, Attorneys-in-Fact, healthcare agents, and other fiduciaries as well as beneficiaries, legatees, and the victims of fraud, undue influence, or scrivener’s error. When choosing an attorney to appear in court, look first to King Hall. When looking for an attorney to write your documents, make the same decision.
A trust is, “[a]n equitable or beneficial right or title to land or other property, held for the beneficiary by another person, in whom resides the legal title or ownership, recognized and enforced by courts of chancery.” It is worth noting that Maryland does not have courts of chancery and the Circuit Court where venue is appropriate would enforce a trust. More generally, a trusts is an important estate planning vehicle, but can also serve a vital role in the protection of assets prior to the Grantor’s death. They can serve as a desirable alternative to a will and allow the grantor’s family to avoid probate to a large extent and provide for greater control over the decedent’s assets after death.
Trusts are broadly split into two categories: living or testamentary. The living trust, or inter vivos, is a trust created while the Grantor is alive. A testamentary trust is a trust created in a Last Will and Testament. Trusts can also be split in two other categories: revocable or irrevocable. A revocable trust can be terminated by the Grantor during her lifetime. An irrevocable trust cannot. Finally, there are charitable trusts and non-charitable trusts.
There are five key goals to trust planning. 1. Avoid Probate; 2. Protect the Grantor/Beneficiary’s Privacy; 3. Plan for Incapacity; 4. Tax Minimization; and 5. Creditor Protection. By avoiding probate, grantors and their trustees can avoid cumbersome estate administration especially in estates with real property in other jurisdictions. There is no immediate jurisdiction of the court for the administration of a trust. The well drafted trust will contain a mechanism for succession should grantor/trustee become incapacitated. Trusts, particularly those with charitable components can be an useful tool in the minimization of taxes. Finally, trusts can help protect young or unsophisticated beneficiaries from their own poor choices and shelter assets in the event of a divorce.
Trusts provide for flexible management. They allow an orderly means for the transfer of authority in the event of a trustee’s resignation, incapacity, or death. Trusts can also reduce the expenses of administration as compared to probate. Trust planning is effective to protect the Grantor’s estate planning objectives by allowing her to shield beneficiaries’ from themselves and by exercising control for multiple generations. Trusts can also serve as mechanism to manage litigation. Litigation in trust cases is often more expensive and complex, which can deter a would be challenger. And unlike a will, the filing of litigation does not strip the trustee of power to continue to act without seeking the order of the Court. In many instances, there will be no need to file for guardianship for an incapacitated or underage beneficiary.
(2) In a capacity other than that of a trustee, holds a power of appointment over trust property.
Grantor – a person, including a testator, that creates or contributes property to a trust.
HEMS – Health, Education, Maintenance and Support – This is the most common discretionary standard.
Independent Trustee – A non-interested trustee who is granted additional powers under the Internal Revenue Code.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, a related or subordinate party. In simpler terms, someone working for or a first degree relative of the Grantor.
Power of Appointment – authority to designate the recipient or recipients of beneficial interests in property.
Property – anything that may be the subject of ownership, whether real or personal, legal or equitable, or an interest in the thing.
Situs – The location of the trust for legal purposes. Maryland law provides that the situs of the trust is any county where the trustee may be sued.
Trustee – One who, having legal title to property, holds it in trust for the benefit of another and owes a fiduciary duty to that beneficiary.
There are three key roles in a trust, but there are also additional roles to consider as well. First and foremost is the Grantor. The Grantor grants or gives property to be included in the trust. The property is held by the Trustee for the benefit of the Beneficiary. The Trustee is guided by the rules within the trust document and pursuant to state statute and case law regarding the management of the trust including, but not limited to, distributions to the Beneficiary. The Trustee has a duty of loyalty to the beneficiaries. A beneficiary may be either a current income beneficiary or contingent beneficiary entitled to receive funds at some future date under certain specified conditions.
A role player not often contemplated, but which may be forced to decide on matters related to the trust, is the court. The Court can modify the terms where appropriate or where all trustees and beneficiaries agree as long as it is not inconsistent with the grantor’s intent. It can modify if unanticipated circumstances arise. It can also remove a bad actor trustee.
A Trust Protector serves an oversight role of the trustee and the operation of the trust. A trust protector can step in, and depending on their powers, remove the trustee, or amend the trust as necessary to keep it current with the intent of the grantor, or in line with changing laws. A Trust Company can serve the same role as the trustee, but may have different members of the organization serving various roles. A Grantor may appoint a Financial Advisor to serve as the investment manager. Many times a trust instrument will provide that the Grantor or a Trustee can be considered incapacitated for the purposes of the Trust if two doctors certify that person lacks capacity. In practical instances, it can be extremely difficult to get a reluctant Grantor to two different doctors. In addition, long-time family physicians are going to be extremely hesitant to certify that her patient no longer has capacity. Appointing a third party mental health professional, or a trusted person, to decide whether the Grantor has the capacity to continue managing assets is an option to remedy doctor shopping.
Care should be exercised before nominating any party for a particular role. They should be consulted with prior to their inclusion in the document. Trustees should affirmatively sign that they have accepted the position.
The most critical law for Maryland attorneys regarding the creation and administration of trusts is The Maryland Trust Act. It was adopted along with approximately 30 other states as a variation of the Uniform Trust Code. It was not adopted to revise Maryland law on trusts, but to fill in gaps and codify much of the common law. It applies, prospectively and retroactively, to all trusts created before, on or after January 1, 2015. It is not applicable, however, to constructive or resulting trusts.
A couple of key provisions to note, it allows a trustee to terminate the trust if the fair market value is under $100,000. In addition, it codifies that the capacity to create, amend, revoke or add property to a revocable trust is the same as that to create a will, that is, the Grantor must know the nature and objects of her bounty.
The ability of a trust to be revoked allows the Grantor to retain control over the trust property. This gives the Grantor/Trustee considerable power to amend the terms of the trust, change beneficiaries, change or remove trustees, but with this power comes certain drawbacks. The Trust property will still be considered an asset of the Grantor in most instances. This can have important ramifications for tax or Medical Assistance planning. In addition, a self-settled trust will likely not be afforded as much creditor or bankruptcy protection as an irrevocable trust.
Too many attorneys draft great documents, but the plans they have drafted ultimately fail because of a lack of emphasis on funding the trust. Clients do not understand that a trust is incomplete until it is actually funded with assets. A trust is an empty vessel without property to fund the trust. It is often left to the client to figure out the funding of the trust on their own with a few notable exceptions. Many attorneys are familiar with the pour-over will and a deed titling real property in the name of the trust, but some may be less familiar with the assignment of personal property or dealing with retirement assets. Finally, it is helpful for assets that are not titled to have the clients prepare an asset schedule to be included in the trust.
 Also known as a Trustor or Settlor.
(1) “Support provision” means a mandatory distribution provision in a trust that provides that the trustee shall distribute income or principal or both for the health, education, support, or maintenance of a beneficiary, or language of similar import. (2) “Support provision” does not include a provision in a trust that provides that a trustee has discretion whether to distribute income or principal or both for the purposes under paragraph (1) of this subsection or to select from among a class of beneficiaries to receive distributions in accordance with the trust provision.
 See generally Id. § 14.5-101 et seq.
 Id. § 14.5-601. It is silent as to irrevocable trusts.
Throughout the years, we are constantly taught, admonished, reminded that we must invest. We must invest in our education by focusing on our studies or by taking student loans to complete our degree so that we can increase our earning potential and job satisfaction. We are taught that we must invest in our retirement by saving a portion of our earnings in an IRA or 401(k). We eventually, for those of us who have them, invest in our children by saving for their own education and by making sure to catch their baseball or field hockey games even if it means going back to the job or office and pulling a late night as soon as the game ends.
Looking back, as teenagers we start our flight from the nest and comforting wing of our parents or guardians with our desire to establish independence. An important part of our passage into adulthood is separating ourselves from those who invested in us so that we can invest in ourselves. And, before we know it, our parents have aged into retirement. To your eyes, are they enjoying themselves? Do they travel? Do they engage in hobbies? Are they experiencing what you grew up hearing them say they would hope to experience in retirement? Do they get to spend time with you or with the grandchildren? Are they getting to relish in the satisfaction of seeing you thrive on their investment and sacrifice in you?
Eventually, the caregiver becomes the cared for. It is worth talking to your parent or guardian about long term care insurance or whether they saved enough for retirement to self-insure for anticipated lifetime medical and long term care expenses. It can affect your ability to invest in your own children or in your own retirement if you have to take time away from work or your young family to become a caregiver or untangle a legal morass where your parents did not properly plan.
Help your parents plan for themselves. You are a major part of your parents’ life story and their future. We spend such a large part of our lives doing the things we do not want to do – chores, commuting, planning, even sleeping – that we should truly enjoy the small moments. And one way to ensure you and those who invested in you will get to do just that is to talk about estate planning and investing for the years to come.
From one broad perspective, a person can be understood to have control over two sets of decisions in their lives: decisions affecting their person and decisions affecting their property. These are commonly reduced to healthcare and personal decisions (e.g., what medical treatment I receive or where I live), or financial decisions (e.g., what bank holds my money). For a person who lacks capacity to make these decisions, there is a need to have the proper incapacity planning in place.
For financial decisions to be made by another person, there needs to be a financial power of attorney (“POA”) in place. These POAs can come in many varieties. Most financial institutions will have their own forms. The Maryland Legislature and the Attorney General for the State of Maryland have created a specific form, which must be accepted by banks and financial institutions in the State of Maryland – with some limited exceptions. Many attorneys will also have their clients sign a separate durable power of attorney which is tailored to their clients’ wishes. When a person becomes incapacitated and does not have the planning in place, then their loved ones may be left with little alternative to filing for guardianship of the property.
An incapacitated person may not need a guardian of the person if there is an advance medical directive in place, or their loved one is experiencing little issue serving as a health care surrogate. The management of their property may pose a more difficult challenge. Banks are reticent to deal with someone who is not named in a POA. Legal advisors will not release documents. Simply getting information about assets is difficult without a POA.
The Petition for Appointment of a Guardian of the Property must be filed where the “alleged disabled person resides, even if the person is temporarily absent.” Md. Rule 10-301(c); Estates & Trusts § 13-202. (Note that temporarily absent is not defined in the statute, but an often seen context is where a person is incapacitated by an injury and is receiving medical treatment in a different county.) The rule is somewhat different for someone who is not a resident of the State of Maryland. The practitioner should look at the situs (location) of any property or file where a guardianship of the person would be properly filed.
The Petition for Appointment of a Guardian of the Property must also include two certificates signed by medical doctors (or one can be signed be a licensed psychologist or licensed clinical social worker) attesting to the alleged disabled person’s need for a guardianship. The rules are different for somone who is a beneficiary of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (the “VA”). The VA can supply a certificate in lieu of the two certificates previously noted though for practical purposes it may be easier to get the two physicians’ certificates.
Has or may be entitled to property or benefits which require proper management.
Estates & Trusts § 13-201(c). After a bench trial and a finding of the need for a guardian of the property by a preponderance of the evidence (which means that it is substantially more likely than not that it is true, and is a less rigorous standard than clear and convincing evidence standard necessary for guardian of the person), the judge will appoint a guardian of the property. There is no right to a jury trial for a guardianship of the property.
Many times clients will come for an appointment with an elder law attorney because their spouse or parent is no longer able to communicate decisions about their health or person. This can be the result of a progressive condition such as Alzheimer’s disease, or from a sudden onset, such as a fall resulting in a traumatic brain injury (“TBI”). The consequence can be the same if the alleged disabled person (“ADP”) does not have a healthcare power of attorney (“POA”) or advance medical directive (“AMD”) in place. Many Americans do not have incapacity planning documents.
A healthcare POA or AMD allows the person nominated to serve as the agent for the ADP. This means that the agent can make healthcare and other personal decisions for the person that is no longer able to communicate those decisions. The most common context is making decisions about healthcare matters, i.e., whether to select a certain course or treatment, or whether to decline treatment because the ADP has made their wishes known regarding when they no longer want treatment.
Id. While this statutory recognition is great for ad hoc or crisis situations, it may not be a viable long term solution for clients. Sometimes the ADP’s illness will drive them to fight against decisions which are objectively being made in their best interests. Then the loved one in that situation will want the imprimatur of a court order.
The Circuit Court in the Maryland County where the ADP resides or is admitted to receive medical treatment is the proper venue for filing for a guardianship and it has the authority to appoint a guardian. Md. Rule 10-201; Estates & Trusts § 13-704(a)(2). The Petition is the document whereby a client (through her attorney) requests that the court appoint someone as guardian. Among other basic informational items, the Petition will need to include: a description of less restrictive alternatives to guardianship that have been attempted and failed; facts as to the need for a guardianship; and two certificates signed by medical doctors (or one can be signed be an licensed psychologist or licensed clinical social worker) attesting to the ADP’s need for a guardianship. The timing of the certificates is important as one needs to be completed within 21 days of filing the petition. A seasoned guardianship attorney will give you a checklist of the required documents and information in order for the Petition to be accepted by the Court.
Estates & Trusts § 13-705.
The Court will appoint an attorney for the ADP, and it is very likely that the court appointed attorney will be paid out of the ADP’s assets. For a married couple, this can mean that the two parties will be paying for both sets of attorney’s fees. It can seem counter-intuitive to have to pay for an attorney to fight against you, but a guardianship seeks to take away the inalienable right of self-determination regarding one’s person. A court will not do so lightly.
Potential clients will often come into our office because their loved one is no longer able to manage their financial affairs or health care decisions due to a disabling event or disease. One study suggests that nearly two-thirds of Americans do not have incapacity planning documents. When the disabled person does not have the proper planning documents in place (at minimum, an advance medical directive and financial power of attorney), then their loved ones are unable to make the necessary medical and financial decisions on their behalf. Often the next step for those clients is to file for guardianship of their loved one.
Many clients are often dismayed that guardianship is not a simple process. A husband will often believe that they will naturally be appointed as guardianship for his disabled wife without much fuss, but the process may be much more complicated. First, the court will appoint an attorney for the “alleged disabled person”. That term of art is important because it underlines why the courts are very particular in how guardianships proceed. It is up to the “Petitioner”, the one seeking guardianship, to prove that the alleged disabled person (“ADP”) lacks the capacity to make decisions for him or herself. The court wants to make sure that the ADP indeed lacks the capacity prior to taking away that person’s rights.
The court appointed attorney will meet with her client and ask if they want to contest the guardianship. The ADP’s answer is critical to how the case unfolds. Sometimes this answer is driven by the ADP’s underlying medical condition and sometimes they refuse to believe that they cannot handle the decisions for themselves as they have always done. If they want to contest the guardianship, then it will proceed like a normal civil case where both parties engage in discovery and the process culminates in a trial. The ADP has a right to a trial by jury or can elect a bench trial (where the judge makes the final decision).
The process may become more complicated if someone else seeks to be appointed guardian as well. This often arises where two siblings battle over who best would care for mom or dad when they are disabled. It is possible for the litigation to be fought between three or more litigants with all sides fighting hard.
Having the right guardianship attorney on your side will help you navigate this complex area of law. It can be maddening to have to fight so hard just to help your loved one, but it’s the unfortunate side of when the proper planning documents are not in place prior to the disabling event or disease.
Sometimes an estate client will anticipate that there will be a challenge to her estate after she dies – and frankly if there is a house, then in this area its generally worth at least a couple hundred thousand dollars, thus, it’s worth fighting over. Perhaps her children do not get along. Or there is a family business in which one relative has spent many years alongside to build and grow, and the client wishes to leave that relative a larger share of the business. In an effort to prevent challenges to her will, a client may ask her estate planning attorney to utilize an in terrorem clause. These can also be known as “no-contest” clauses. An in terrorem clause essentially states that when someone objects or attacks the will (through the appropriate legal process), then the challenger will no longer receive a legacy or residual distribution that they otherwise would have received through the will.
Under Maryland law, an in terrorem clause in a will is void where there exists probable cause for instituting law suit. Md. Code, Est. & Trusts Art. § 4-413. Someone considering whether or not to challenge a will should consult with an experienced estates and trusts attorney to determine whether there exists probable cause to challenge a will.
An in terrorem clause is ineffective from preventing a challenge by someone who is disinherited as there is no stick (or carrot) to make the challenger think twice prior to challenging. If they have nothing to lose, then there is nothing to prevent them from hiring an estate litigation attorney to challenge the will.
A no-contest or in terrorem clause may still be a good idea to include in your estate planning documents depending on your particular family dynamics. While no clause can prevent all estate litigation, these clauses may be useful in preventing meritless litigation, i.e., a baseless challenge designed to extract a monetary settlement. In addition, it may be a useful tool for your personal representative to use when negotiating a settlement with a will challenger as it can make estate litigation an all-or-nothing proposition.
No one wants to think about their family fighting over their estate. Having a thorough and frank conversation with your estate planning attorney can help identify red flags and allow the planning attorney to attempt to draft around those challenges. One such solution is appointing a third party as personal representative because the disinterested person can help prevent the estate administration from becoming a battle ground for long simmering family disputes. Avoiding estate and trust litigation before it starts can save your family many tens of thousands of dollars in costs.

References: v. 
 § 13
 § 4
 v. 
 § 1
 § 14
 § 14
 § 13
 § 13
 § 13
 § 13
 § 4