Attorney Michael J. Durkin's Legal Cases

Trusts

Taylor vs. Feinberg (In Re Estate of Max Feinberg)

Nov 23, 2009

OUTCOME: Illinois Supreme Court reversed ruling.

Appellant coexecutor challenged a decision from the Illinois Court of Appeals, which affirmed a trial court's decision in favor of appellee grandchild stating that a trust provision was unenforceable a ... s a violation of public policy. A grandfather executed a will and created a trust, which was later altered by the grandmother under a testamentary power of appointment. There was a beneficiary restriction clause in the trust that prohibited his grandchildren from inheriting if they did not marry into the Jewish faith or their spouse did not convert to Judaism within one year of marriage. This litigation followed, and the court of appeals upheld a trial court's decision that the clause at issue violated public policy. In reversing, the supreme court determined that the public policy of Illinois valued freedom of testation, as demonstrated by several statutes. The beneficiary restriction clause did not implicate the principal that trust provisions that encouraged divorce violated public policy; rather, this case involved a decision to marry. The grandchildren did not receive a vested interest in the trust upon the death of the grandfather because the terms of the trust were subject to change until the grandmother's death. Since no grandchild had a vested interest in the trust assets and because the distribution plan adopted by the grandmother had no prospective application, there was no violation of public policy.

Probate

In Re ESTATE OF HAZEL TEALL, Deceased.

Mar 29, 2002

OUTCOME: Reversed and remanded in part

The Circuit Court, Cook County (Illinois), found in plaintiff caregiver's case against an estate and defendant estate administrator's case to recover funds that the joint bank accounts involved were co ... nvenience accounts, that funds in the accounts and some checks written on them belonged to the estate, and that the caregiver was entitled to recover for personal services rendered. The caregiver appealed and the estate administrator cross-appealed. The caregiver found her neighbor, decedent, lying injured on decedent's kitchen floor after a fall. The caregiver had the decedent transported to the hospital. The caregiver then fixed certain deplorable living conditions in decedent's home. The caregiver had the decedent sign a power of attorney to conduct transactions for the decedent through joint bank accounts opened after decedent's fall. The caregiver also helped the decedent with personal and financial matters. The decedent admitted she benefitted from the services, but never stated the caregiver was to receive the money in the joint bank accounts at decedent's death. After the trial court ruled the bank accounts were "convenience accounts" in which the caregiver had no interest, the appellate court found the trial court's finding was not error as the caregiver was a fiduciary to the decedent before the joint accounts were opened, and, thus, fraud was presumed and not rebutted regarding any benefit the caregiver received. However, it found a contract implied in law arose for those services the caregiver rendered to the decedent within the five-year limitations period prior to the time the caregiver filed suit. The trial court's ruling that the joint accounts were convenience accounts was affirmed. However, the monetary award for services performed before a certain date, which was beyond the statute of limitations, was reversed and the case was remanded to the trial court for it to recalculate the award for services provided within the statute of limitations up to and including the decedent's death.

Michael J. Durkin's Legal Cases (2)

Taylor vs. Feinberg (In Re Estate of Max Feinberg)

In Re ESTATE OF HAZEL TEALL, Deceased.