Probate Litigation Attorneys
Adam M. Fried will be presenting "Erosion of Attorney-Client Privilege: Fiduciary Exception," at the Dayton Bar Association's 2018 Probate Law Institute.
Fried's presentation is is part of a full-day 6.0 Continuing Legal Education program. The CLE will be held on March 9th from 8:30 am to 4:15 pm at Sinclair Community College, Building 12.
Trustees Under Attack Through the Erosion of the Attorney Client Privilege: Recent Case Law Development and the Fiduciary Exception to the Attorney Client Privilege
Ohio State Bar Association "Quick Webcast" Program
December 13, 1:00 PM EST
1.0 CLE hour / 1.0 Professional Conduct hour
The attorney client relationship between trustees, executors and their attorneys can be complicated. The relationship is more complex when disputes develop and claims are raised against the fiduciary. From the pitfalls of conflicts of interests as identified in Cincinnati Bar Association v. Robertson to the question as to whom the attorney owes a duty when representing a fiduciary who, in turn, owes duties to the beneficiaries will be discussed in this one-hour program.
Can a disinherited person force the production of information necessary to substantiate the efforts required to pursue a challenge to a Will, beneficiary designation, or Trust?
Isolation and manipulation of a loved one by those who are intent on deriving benefits from an estate are frequent realities in estate litigation cases. Undue influence, the process by which a person’s mind is subjugated so that the decision-making is actually that of the perpetrator, is almost always done behind closed doors. The byproduct of isolation and conduct perpetrated in the dark is lack of information. Family members are left with only questions and no answers.
Lexis Nexis claims that 55% of American adults do not have a last will and testament or some kind of an estate plan. This means that more than half of American estates have their personal assets pass via intestacy - without a will and pursuant to the statutory scheme of the state where they live.
The Ohio Supreme Court provided more guidance regarding how creditors present their claims against estates with its ruling in Wilson v. Lawrence, Case Nos. 2015-2081, 2016-0180, 2017-Ohio-1410.
The main issue the Supreme Court addressed is to whom a creditor claim must be presented. Pursuant to R.C. § 2117.06, a creditor must present its claim against the estate within six months following the decedent’s death.
When Ohio House Bill 432 and Ohio Revised Code Chapter 2137 became effective on April 4, 2017, estate fiduciaries were given new tools for managing a decedent’s digital property.
From social-media profiles, to email accounts, to Apple and Amazon digital libraries of music, movies, and media, more and more people are dying with digital assets stored in various clouds. Upon Chapter 2137 becoming effective, executors, administrators, and trustees can request a catalogue of the decedent’s digital assets with various providers and access to the same.