About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (July 2020 - August 2021)

handle is hein.ali/retpwodt9950 and id is 1 raw text is: PROPERTY 3D: WILLS AND OTHER DONATIVE TRANSFERS DIVISION II. NONPROBATE TRANSFERS (GIFTS AND WILL SUBSTITUTES) CHAPTER 6. GIFTS § 6.1 Requirements Applicable to All Gifts of Property N.D.2020. Subsec. (d) cit. in sup. Estate of deceased husband filed a petition against estate of deceased wife who had been granted power of attorney by husband, alleging that wife did not have authority to transfer property owned solely by husband to herself while the couple was still living, because the transfer constituted a gift and wife only had the power to make gifts to maximize the value of husband's estate and to minimize estate-tax obligations. The trial court entered judgment for defendant, finding that the transfer was valid and enforceable. This court affirmed, holding, inter alia, that wife did not exceed her power of attorney when she made the transfer. The court explained that the undisputed facts indicated that the transfer was made to satisfy husband's obligations to support wife, wife suffered from severe chronic illnesses that required support out of husband's individual property, and, under Restatement Third of Property: Wills & Other Donative Transfers § 6.1(d), transfers made pursuant to obligations were not gifts and thus were not restricted by the power of attorney's restrictions on gifts. Matter of Estate of Lindvig, 951 N.W.2d 214, 218. DIVISION III. PROTECTIVE DOCTRINES CHAPTER 8. INVALIDITY DUE TO THE DONOR'S INCAPACITY OR ANOTHER'S WRONGDOING PART B. PROTECTION AGAINST WRONGDOING § 8.3 Undue Influence, Duress, or Fraud Pa.2020. Subsec. (d) cit. and quot. in ftn. After wife divorced husband, wife filed a petition to terminate an irrevocable inter vivos trust created by the parties and encompassing the parties' marital assets, alleging that she was fraudulently induced into creating the trust and agreeing to designate husband as sole trustee, because he failed to disclose certain marital properties in order to prevent wife from becoming aware of his extramarital affair, and she would not have agreed to create the trust if she had known about the existence of the properties. The trial court granted wife's petition. In an en banc hearing, the court of appeals reversed. This court affirmed, holding that the trust was not voidable under the theory of fraud, because husband's failure to disclose was not material to the creation of the trust. The court rejected wife's assertion that she met the elements for fraud in the inducement as set forth in Restatement Third of Property: Wills & Other Donative Transfers § 8.3(d), and explained that the common-law theory of fraud already provided a workable and established test to prove fraud in the COPYRIGHT ©2021 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most