Jenna G. Rubin of Gutter Chaves Josepher Rubin Forman Fleisher Miller P. A., writes about a recent decision in Keul v. Hodges Blvd. Presbyterian Church. The post begins as follows:
This decision deals with whether a POD designation can be invalidated for undue influence , as well as the right of a probate court to require a party to return POD funds to an estate instead of entering a money judgment against the party for the amount of the funds.The decedent’s 2009 will provided that at her death, her entire estate would go to Hodges Boulevard Presbyterian Church. A few days before she died, the decedent’s neighbor/friend/caregiver/attorney in fact/health care surrogate claimed the decedent asked her to help her get a POD form to change her beneficiary designation to leave all of her assets to the neighbor and her family.Following the decedent’s death, the church objected to the inventory and sought to remove the neighbor as personal representative, arguing that the neighbor had failed to include the POD account in the inventory. The trial court ultimately found that the neighbor used her confidential relationship with the decedent and actively procured the POD designation, and as a result it invalidated the POD designation.
Click here to read the full post.
Posted by Logan Davis, Associate Editor, Wealth Strategies Journal.