Most people think of prenuptial agreements as something rich men use to keep their assets from falling prey to their new, less wealthy (and usually younger) wives — the gold-diggers.
Others see it as a sign of mistrust. If you need a
prenuptial agreement, you must not trust your future spouse.
I see it differently.
When I married my wife, neither of us had assets to protect, so our agreement was not about protecting assets. Rather, it was about what in our relationship we would value and how we would value it. We committed it to writing because memories fade over time and because we are both lawyers.
Click here to read more.
When a court opinion begins, “…. what should have been a simple estate and trust matter became protracted and contentious,” you know you’re in touble.
The Court of Appeals recently published Estates of Foster, 165 Wn. App. 33 (2011). In this case the Executor and his brother teamed up to distribute from their parents’ estates disproportionately to themselves rather than to the parents’ grandchildren trust beneficiaries as set forth in the parents’ trust documents.
The case is significant for a couple reasons. First, the court confirms that the Executor was not entitled to a jury trial because, while his fiduciary breach was the gravamen of the case, it was still a probate/trust matter, and restoration of the stolen funds, as opposed to general damages were sought. The former types of cases don’t get juries; the latter do.
The case is also significant becuase of how the court treats the statute of limitations. The grandchildren brought their claim more than three-years after the alleged breach. The statute of limitations for fiduciary breach claims is three-years. The court allowed the claim, applying the “discovery rule” without much analysis other than finding that the breach could not have been discovered earlier because of the Executor’s failure to cooperate when the grandchildrens’ early information requests.