Talk:Probate

message: The introductory sentence of this article asserts that "Probate is the legal process of settling the estate of a deceased person; specifically, distributing the decedent's property."  In reality, the purpose of probate is twofold.  Nominally, it is to distribute the decedent's property to his or her rightful heirs.  An equally important function of probate -- some would say the real reason probate exists -- is to notify a decedent's creditors of his or her passing so that said creditors can present legal claims against the decedent's estate.  While the heirs of a decedent are most often laypersons, creditors are typically sophisticated and powerful entities who are intimately familiar with the procedures of probate.  Without probate, the property of a decedent would pass to his or her heirs, rightful or otherwise, and the creditors would have no opportunity to collect what is due them.  In practice, the heirs to an estate, rightful or otherwise, often take what they want without notifying anyone -- i.e., steal anything of value -- and there are no property or funds left to pay the decedent's creditors. // Internet Esquire 01:28, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The use of the word "probate" to refer to the entire process of administering a decedent's estate, and regardless of whether or not there is a will, always makes me cringe.  Although that is a popular meaning of the word, I think than an encyclopedia should be more precise, and that an article on "probate" should be limited to the probate of wills, with a cross-reference to other articles on intestacy and the administration of decedent's estates.  Evansdb 12:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Purpose of Probate 

message: That's all very interesting but what about probative valu (The exclusionay discretion and weighing "probative value"? This goes hand in hand with prejudicial impact. Every day judges are faced to weigh the probative value versus the prejudicial impact. (that's why we have a pendulum scale that represents law). Do we make a new article? --CyclePat 20:36, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Probative value 

message: --CyclePat 16:39, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: How illegal is it in the US to squat in a home during probate? 72.15.89.210 07:54, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: This page needs a lot of clean up and referencing.  The discussion of "Avoiding Probate" is out of place, doesn't really discuss the topic (there are other reasons to wish to avoid probate), and probate isn't always necessary in the United States.  Moreover, most of the discussion (at least as it stands) could be done away with by a reference out to an article on trusts.  Most importantly, there is absolutely no reference to the Uniform Probate Code (UPC).  Probate in the United States, is a general term for Administration of Estates it is only historically a reference to the proving of wills.  Wills are still proved but intestate estates are "probated" as well.  The process can vary widely where the UPC has not been adopted.  I'm collaborating on a probate practice manual for attorneys and will take a longer look at this as I get more time.  Doug. 07:47, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean Up 

message: In my edit summary for this edit I promised to explain at talk. I see a couple of problems. Firstly, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and the tone of this material is entirely wrong for us. That, of course, might have been fixable. However, the fact that the information is copied from a website (EstateSettlement.com) which has a copyright notice means that we cannot accept this material at all. The notice is fairly prominent and reads "© Copyright 2008 All Rights Reserved EstateSettlement.com". See WP:COPYVIO for more detail on this policy. I note the comment "(submitted by site owner)" after the source, but I don't think that's nearly enough to satisfy our copyright policy: it's inconsistent to release material under our licence, GFDL, yet reserve all rights in the same material elsewhere. Besides, we cannot necessarily accept that a user is the owner of another site just because they claim to us that they are. If you still feel this material is appropriate, feel free to discuss the matter, here. AndyJones (talk) 16:09, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  EstateSettlement.com 

message: I think it would be a good idea to split or list the process of probate (and non-probate) in each state. Substantial differences can be noted on how each of these systems work, where the buildings are located (i.e. here in Maryland each county has a Register of Wills, which is run by a Registrar who is elected every four years, however the Register of Wills is a division of the Orphan's court, dramatically different who how other states handle their probate courts), what the breakdown is for probate fees, limitations to will registration, are lawyers required for probate,  and etc.
I'd be willing to tackle Maryland's probate law, at least from the perspective as an auditor for the state (I assess probate and inheritance tax, and audit accounts to closing), however, it would be goofy to  only have a single state's probate law. 
Anyways this is more of a ramble, then a concise post, however I'd be willing to work with someone to do some of the probate state pages (I have some experience with Ohio and Florida Probate law as well) Gcbeehler (talk) 01:06, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Probate by State 

message: Noticed this addition by Justin D Spealman
"Probate can also be avoided by setting up P.O.D (paid on death) designations on all of your bank accounts and T.O.D (transfer on death) on all your brokerage accounts, 401k's and IRA's that have named beneficiaries will automaticly avoid probate. As for real estate its a little different, you must add a named beneficary to your deed, which is done by utilizing a Life Estate Deed, the property can be passed several generations using this method.
The key to avoiding probate is having named beneficiaries on all of your assets, that is the case for life insurance as well. A some what common error on life insurance is naming the insureds estate as the contingent beneficiary doing so will place the proceeds from that policy into probate."
I think it's important to weigh assets in planning an estate. Obviously having an inter vivos trust written for an estate that has 200,000K in assets is probably ill-advised. The big myth about trusts is that they avoid probate. Almost every estate out there has something that hasn't been added to the trust, and the estate has to go to probate for that item to "pour over" into the trust. 
Another point to emphasis is what probate fees will be versus what a trust costs. An estate in Maryland of  $2,000,000 to $5,000,000 would have a probate fee of $2,500, with anything over $5,000,000 being $2,500 plus .02% of the amount exceeding $5,000,000. Additionally trust still have to pay Maryland Estate taxes, as well as Federal estate taxes if they qualify. 
An advantage of a living trust is keeping finances out of public record. However if money is left to collaterals, inheritance taxes will still be assessed. Also MET and the Fed's still expect you to provide itemized details of assets. Another advantage is having a legacy left to provide for others and to control asset management for them, such as special needs children. 
More needs to be done to explain these myths and help people decide what they really accomplish with a trust. I know it sounds fancy to say you have a Trust, however if you paid $5,000 in 2008 to avoid $500 in probate fees in 2048, I don't think you're the one winning in the long run.
Maryland Probate Fee Schedule  
Gcbeehler (talk) 02:32, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Avoiding Probate? 

message: Joint accounts/property aren't the cure all of avoiding probate. A significant gamble is being made. Adding someone's name to your account as an equal, aside from exposing you to them emptying the account, put you at risk on paying taxes on your own money.
Consider this, which is a fairly typical scenario for a shared checking account between two collaterals (taxables).
Person A (Tim) has a checking account with $100,000 in it, Tim's best friend is Greg. Tim adds Greg as a joint owner with rights of survivorship to the account expecting that he will die before Greg does. All $100,000 was contributed by Tim, and not a penny was added by Greg. Greg unexpectedly dies before Tim. It plays out like so:
The account is assumed to be owned by both people in equal shares. So $50,000 is Greg's and $50,000 is Tim's, however in reality all of the money was Tim's to begin with. Tim will be assessed inheritance tax on Greg's half of $50,000. In Maryland, the collateral inheritance tax is 10%, Tim would pay $5,000 to "inherit" the $50,000. So what was gained by with joint account?
There are other risks involved as well, especially if the asset involving assets that are constantly changing in value. Almost all assets are valued at date of death. So if this account was $100,000 in stock/bonds/real estate when Greg passed away, and like recently the market has slide, Tim still pays tax on the original value of $50,000 regardless of whether it's worth $50,000 in the future. (this goes both ways, if the stocks/bonds/real estate appreciate to $500,000 after date of death, tax is only paid on $50,000).
Gcbeehler (talk) 02:44, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joint Accounts, Joint Property 

message: in looking for videos on probate on youtube, i came across many that have to do with african-american fraternities and sororities. clearly unrelated to this meaning. apparently a ceremony of some sort. initiation? thoughts on a small mention of differentiation in the article?Toyokuni3 (talk) 15:55, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  different meaning? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Probate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131227131435/https://courttribunalfinder.service.gov.uk/areas-of-law/probate to https://courttribunalfinder.service.gov.uk/areas-of-law/probate
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:56, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm sure this is a minor matter, but  pointed out that "pr." isn't exactly often used as an abbreviation for "probate". Nor is the statement wrong. I'm partial to "prob."; I've seen it before in multiple courts, etc. Thoughts? — Javert2113 (talk) 15:38, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I have tried unsuccessfully to delete this so-called “abbreviation.” I was a practising  lawyer in England for 43 years and never saw it used. If the word was abbreviated, for example in an Abstract of Title, it was always “Pbte”, or more usually “Gt of Pbte.” “pr.” could mean anything; a large number of English words begin with those letters, and it is commonly used instead of “pair,” as in e.g. “pr. of socks” or “per pr.” when pricing two items sold together. I’ve never heard of the dictionary of abbreviations quoted, either. Wikipedia please note.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.108.81.253 (talk) 16:37, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

text: I agree that the abbreviation should be removed. If nobody objects, I suggest boldly going ahead and making the change. Arllaw (talk) 19:54, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

text: I agree with the above, and there have been no objections in over two months. Even if it's not incorrect per se, "pr." isn't an official abbreviation (the source quoted is a general abbreviations dictionary, not a legal textbook) and there are many variants, (e.g., the courts service uses "PA" (their probate form reference is "PA1"). jamacfarlane (talk) 19:30, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I'd forgotten about this conversation. Well, nemine contradicente, nemine contradicente, nemine contradicente. I'll change it, then. —Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 19:48, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

text: Whoops, looks like it's been done already. Thanks, everyone! —Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 19:49, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Probate Abbreviation 

message: The article now says (Sep. 24, 2019): "If the decedent dies without a will, known as intestacy, the estate is distributed according to the laws of the state where the decedent resided."  In the USA that is false.  Real property (land, easements, servitudes, etc.) is distributed according to the law in force where the land is, not (necessarily) the law "of the state where the the decedent resided," even if a will is probated (proven up) in the decedent's state of domicile.  (There is in rem probate jurisdiction for real property.)  Furthermore, it is the law at the decedent's legal domicile at death, not the residence, that determines probate jurisdiction and applicable law for personal (non-land, non-real) property.  If the decedent was domiciled in state A and owned land in a different state B, then the personal property (money, securities, furniture, etc.) passes by the law of state A, and the real property in state B passes by the law of state B.  Usually the estate's executor is required to appoint a separate ancillary administrator in a state B probate court in order to distribute the land there (after paying off any local creditors there of the deceased).  See, generally, textbooks about "Conflict of Laws" and the Restatement of Conflict of Laws 2.    2600:1700:2000:E740:1AA:1205:7C67:D0D5 (talk) 07:53, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong statement, for real property, and "resided"