Contact Us
LONICH PATTON EHRLICH POLICASTRI
1871 The Alameda, Suite 400, San Jose, CA 95126
Phone: (408) 553-0801 | Fax: (408) 553-0807 | Email: contact@lpeplaw.com
LONICH PATTON EHRLICH POLICASTRI
Phone: (408) 553-0801
Fax: (408) 553-0807
Email: contact@lpeplaw.com
1871 The Alameda, Suite 400
San Jose, CA 95126
Located in San Jose, Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri handles matters for clients in northern California, specifically San Jose and Silicon Valley. Our services are available to anyone within the following counties: Santa Clara, San Mateo, Contra Costa, Santa Cruz, Monterey, San Benito, and San Francisco. For a full listing of areas where we practice, please click here.
MAKE A PAYMENT BY SCANNING THE QR CODE BELOW:
DISCLAIMER
This web site is intended for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Nothing in the site is to be considered as either creating an attorney-client relationship between the reader and Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri or as rendering of legal advice for any specific matter. Readers are responsible for obtaining such advice from their own legal counsel. No client or other reader should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any information contained in Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri Web site without seeking appropriate legal or other professional advice on the particular facts and circumstances at issue.
© 2024 Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy
Aretha Franklin Did Not Have a Will
/in Estate Planning /by Michael LonichBut Did Aretha Franklin Need a Will?
Tragically, Aretha Franklin passed away on August 16, 2018 from pancreatic cancer. She left behind four sons but no will or estate plan. Because she did not have a will, during the court process all her assets will be made public. Aretha Franklin’s estate is estimated to be around $80 million and includes financial accounts, personal and real property, and music copyrights. The law of Michigan, where Aretha Franklin died, requires that her assets be divided equally between her four sons. While this may seem simple, it is very common when there is no will for the estate to be contested.
For example, Prince’s estate has been highly contested by the executor of his estate, Comerica Bank and Trust, and his heirs – his six siblings – over the value of his estate and how it should be divided. Prince passed away in 2016 and his $200 million estate has paid lawyers and consultants over $5.9 million while his heirs have yet to receive anything. Lawyers for three of Prince’s heirs claim that it is a “legitimate concern” whether Prince’s heirs will receive anything at all.
If Aretha Franklin had created a trust, her estate would remain private, fees would be reduced, and her heirs would receive their portion of the estate much faster.
Do I Need a Will?
Over half of Americans do not have a will. Most claim they have simply not gotten around to it and many believe that they do not own enough property to pass down.
While most Americans will not leave behind an estate as large as Aretha Franklin or Prince, a will or trust is still extremely valuable.
It is important to remember that your debts as well as your assets are included in your estate. With a will, you can dictate which debts are paid first, this could allow specific property to not be used to pay debts.
Another crucial element is guardianship of children. When there is no will, the court will appoint a guardian. The court will generally appoint the surviving spouse as guardian. However, if the spouse is unavailable the court will appoint a grandparent, and failing that, the next closest relative. With a will, you may nominate a specific guardian who you feel will be best equipped to care for your children.
One more significant factor to consider is who you want, or who you don’t want to execute your wishes. In California if you do not leave a will, your family members may petition to be the administrator of your estate. The court will appoint the petitioner as an administrator if all family members with higher priority decline to serve as an administrator. With a will, you can appoint an executor who you feel is most capable. Alternatively, you may spell out in your will who you do not want to execute your will.
There are many tangible benefits of a will, however the process of drafting a will can be complex. If you are considering a will or another form of estate planning, please contact one of the experienced attorneys at Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri. We offer free half-hour consultations.
Please remember that each individual situation is unique, and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may detail general legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Roses, Chocolates, and Prenups
/in Family Law /by Michael LonichAbout forty percent of all marriage proposals occur during the proposal season – the time between Thanksgiving and Valentine’s day – with Valentine’s day as one of the most popular days of the year. While Valentine’s day brings a romantic feeling full of roses and chocolates, February is also the beginning of another season: divorce season. February has the highest rate of divorce filings out of the year, and there is a dramatic increase in referrals for divorce lawyers the day after Valentine’s day. Valentine’s day can elicit strong emotions and the statistics show that people follow their passions this month either by beginning or ending a marriage.
Staying married is not always easy or simple. In the United States, the divorce rate is around 50% and is even higher for second and third marriages. There are many complex issues that arise during marriage that a couple must navigate, particularly surrounding finances. Money is often the number one cause of conflict in a marriage, and as many as thirty percent of couples that fight about money end up divorced.
Typically, a premarital agreement is intended to create conditions that will encourage the growth and health of a marriage. The traditional agreement tends to focus on property owned before marriage by the couple as well as property that may be earned during the marriage. Although it seems like a premarital agreement would be counter-intuitive to romance, discussion of these important financial issues can help a couple grow. It can benefit the confidence in a relationship for couples to openly discuss their concerns and to plan together for the future.
Because of the cost, a premarital agreement may not be for everyone. The traditional factors a couple should consider include the total amount of wealth they possess, and whether there is an un-equal amount of wealth between the couple. Additionally, premarital agreements are gaining popularity with young people who have pursued careers that may lead to a lucrative profession. Protecting their personal efforts is an increasing concern amongst people who might rather not have the state determine their financial future.
If you are feeling swept up by Valentine’s day romance and are planning to propose, considering a premarital agreement may be a great benefit to your future. For more information and advice, please contact one of the experienced attorneys at Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri.
Please remember that each individual situation is unique, and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may detail general legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Who Dunnit: Playing the Blame Game in a Divorce
/in Family Law /by Gina PolicastriObtaining a divorce can be time consuming and expensive, especially when one spouse blames the other for the marriage’s end. Will the court take into consideration who behaved badly or caused the divorce? Although courts in England will be concerned with who is at “fault” before granting a divorce, California courts will not take “fault” into consideration.
In California, a couple may obtain a “no-fault” divorce – neither spouse must prove the other is at fault for the marriage’s breakdown. In the 1800s, however, England only allowed divorces where one spouse could prove the other was at “fault.” This rule remains in effect today, in part.
In England, courts will grant a divorce only if the party seeking the divorce can prove the marriage has irretrievably broken down by establishing one of the five following facts: (a) adultery, (b) unreasonable behavior, (c) desertion, (d) two years of separation with consent, or (e) five years of separation with or without consent. While the last two grounds for divorce do not require one spouse to prove that the other spouse was at fault, proving adultery and “unreasonable behavior” often requires spouses to play the blame game.
On July 25, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom ruled Tini Owens, an English wife, must remain married to Hugh Owens, her husband of 40 years after she failed to prove her husband was at fault for the breakdown in their marriage. Tini contemplated divorce in 2012 and moved out of the couple’s home in February 2015. Tini argued her husband engaged in “unreasonable behavior” such that she could not reasonably be expected to continue their marriage. Hugh argued if the marriage had broken down, it must have been because Tini had an affair or was “bored.”
While many progressives and lawyers hoped for the court to grant the divorce, the court refused. One Supreme Court judge stated that Parliament had “decreed” that being in a “wretchedly unhappy marriage” was not a ground for divorce. Thus, the Supreme Court rejected the modern trend toward the “no-fault” divorce system in the United Kingdom and United States.
Fortunately, in California, grounds for divorce range from “irreconcilable differences” to “permanent legal incapacity to make decisions,” formerly known as “incurable insanity.” Moreover, evidence of specific acts of misconduct are not admissible in dissolution or separation proceedings, except for history of domestic abuse in cases involving child custody or restraining orders. If you are contemplating divorce, regardless of who is at “fault,” contact the experienced attorneys at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri for a free half-hour consultation.
Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may detail general legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship
GAVRON WARNING – BE SELF-SUPPORTING OR RISK LOSING SPOUSAL SUPPORT
/in Family Law /by Lonich Patton Ehrlich PolicastriPart of the divorce process will require both parties to divide the assets acquired during the marriage, and one spouse is often required to support the other after divorce. How long will the support order last? Will the court allow the supported spouse to remain supported for the rest of his or her life? In cases where support is ordered, the court will likely issue a “Gavron Warning” to the supported party. This warning may have a significant impact on the spousal support order, and the supported spouse may risk having income imputed to him/her.
A Gavron Warning is a notice issued by the court to a spouse receiving support that he or she is expected to become self-supporting. Typically, a Gavron Warning will be issued at the time the spousal support order is made. Under certain circumstances, including marriages of long duration, the court may decide that a Gavron Warning is not necessary. Unless the supported spouse has been warned by the court, he or she cannot be penalized for not becoming self-supporting. Once the court issues a Gavron Warning, the court expects the supported spouse to make all reasonable efforts to become self-supporting within a reasonable period of time.
Courts will aim to issue Gavron Warnings for a reasonable period of time. A reasonable period of time is generally one-half the length of the marriage, except for marriages of long duration (over 10 years). (Fam. Code, § 4320.) However, the Court has discretion to order support for a greater or lesser length of time, based on other factors and the specific circumstances of the case. Spouses who need further education or training to become employable “will usually need more advance warning than spouses who already possess job skills and only need to find suitable work.” (Marriage of Schmir (2005) 134 Cal.App.4th 43, 48.) If the supported spouse does not make reasonable good faith efforts to become self-supporting, the supported spouse risks having income imputed.
If the court issues a Gavron Warning to the supported spouse, and the supported spouse fails to become self-supporting, the court may treat the supported spouse as if he/she is earning an income within his/her earning capacity, or impute income to the supported spouse. Moreover, the court may use this imputed income to justify a modification or termination of spousal support. For example, if a party receives a warning to become self-supporting, and the party’s earning capacity is $60,000 per year, but the party fails to become self-supporting after receiving a warning, the court will treat the party as if he/she is earning $60,000 and no longer needs the existing amount of spousal support. The court may choose to reduce the spousal support order or terminate it altogether.
If the court issues a Gavron Warning, the court can impute income, and reduce or terminate spousal support if the warned party fails to make reasonable good faith efforts to become self-supporting. Spousal support and divorce are complicated processes, and an attorney can help you navigate through both. If you are seeking help with a Gavron Warning, obtaining spousal support, or divorce, contact one of the experienced attorneys at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri – we offer free half-hour consultations.
Each individual situation is unique, and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may detail general legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.
THE EFFECTS OF A LITIGANT’S DEATH DURING A DIVORCE PROCEEDING
/in Family Law /by Lonich Patton Ehrlich PolicastriLife is unpredictable and sometimes one of the parties dies before the final judgment is made in a divorce case. Naturally, the salient question is: “How will property be divided when one spouse dies during the divorce?”
Assuming the death of the spouse was not criminally expedited by the other, the answer to that question hinges on whether the parties obtained a bifurcation of marital status. A party seeking bifurcation of marital status is essentially asking the court to separate or “bifurcate” the issue of marital status from the rest of the other issues such as property division, custody, and spousal/child support. Because a typical divorce can take over a year and a half to finalize, a bifurcation might be desirable when one party wants to terminate their marital status early and be pronounced single again.
The termination of marital status can affect the division of property in two ways. On one hand, if a party dies after their marital status is terminated, then the family court maintains jurisdiction over the property and the decedent’s personal representative continues to represent the estate’s interests. The community property presumption applies so that property held in joint tenancy will be divided between the surviving spouse and the estate of the deceased spouse. The surviving spouse will have no right of survivorship. In the other scenario, if a party dies before the marital status is dissolved, then the family court loses jurisdiction of the property division and the case is moved to the probate court for further adjudication. Unlike the first scenario, the community property presumption does not apply meaning that property held in joint tenancy will pass, by right of survivorship, to the surviving spouse. (Estate of Mitchell (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 1378,1386.) These two vast differences illustrate why dissolving marital status and severing joint tenancies can be critical in protecting a litigant’s property interest.
A distinctive feature of joint tenancy, as opposed to other interests in land, is the right of survivorship. This means that when one joint tenant dies, their interests vests automatically to the surviving joint tenant. When a party severs the joint tenancy, the parties will no longer hold title as joint tenants, but rather as tenants in common thereby extinguishing the right of survivorship. This alternative form of property ownership means that each party has a distinct, separate ownership share in the property thus allowing for a party to bequeath (transfer via will) his or her property interest to another person other than the surviving spouse if he or she so chooses. A joint tenant may sever a joint tenancy in real property unilaterally by: (1) executing and delivering a deed to a third person, (2) executing a deed to him or herself, (3) executing a written declaration of severance, or (4) executing any other written instrument evidencing an intent to sever. (Civ. Code, § 683.2, subd. (a); Mitchell, supra, 76 Cal.App.4th at p. 1385.) The simplest of the options is executing a written declaration of severance and recording it. These written instruments must be recorded before the party dies for it to become effective.
Another important consideration to protect one’s property interest in the event of an untimely death is to create a new will. Although the California Family Law Summons contains automatic restraining orders (“ATROS”), the ATROS do not prevent either party from creating a new will. The new will enables a party to decide an alternate inheritance plan excluding a former spouse. It is likewise important to destroy the old will.
If you are seeking information or counsel regarding estate planning or protecting your property during divorce, please contact one of the experienced attorneys at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri – we offer free half-hour consultations. We also offer free simple wills to all our family law clients during the process of their divorce.
Lastly, please remember that each individual situation is unique, and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may detail general legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.