Mandatory Arbitration Clauses in Donative Instruments: A Taxonomy of Disputes and Type Differentiated Analysis

Jessica Beess and Chrostin has published “Mandatory Arbitration Clauses in Donative Instruments: A Taxonomy of Disputes and Type Differentiated Analysis” in the Real Property, Trust and Estate Law Journal.  The abstract reads as follows:

 

Arbitration clauses have become increasingly more common in wills and trusts as a means to avoid the court system, and as a way to benefit from the alleged advantages of alternative dispute resolution. The majority of current literature on this topic focuses on whether the beneficiary has consented to arbitration. However, this article poses a different question—even if mandatory arbitration clauses in testamentary instruments are enforceable, should they be enforceable as a matter of public policy? The author asserts that analyzing testamentary disputes by type—validity disputes and administrative disputes—reveals that the benefits of arbitration do not translate to either type of dispute.

Read full article at Mandatory Arbitration Clauses in Donative Instruments: A Taxonomy of Disputes and Type Differentiated Analysis (ABA membership required).

 

Posted by Lewis J. Saret, Co-General Editor, Wealth Strategies Journal.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s