South Florida Estate Planning Law : Florida Estate Planning Lawyer & Attorney : David Shulman Law Firm : South FL Wills & Trusts

Estate planning attorneys love to beat you over the head with the fact that you need a will. It's one of our favorite pastimes, after late night readings of the latest generation skipping transfer tax regulations.

But what happens if you die without a will? That is what's known as intestacy. If you die intestate, then the law governs how your property is distributed. This law is based upon your marital status and whether you have any descendants.

The law is also significantly changing on October 1, 2011. Under the new law, if the Decedent's descendants are all also descendants of the Decedent's surviving spouse, and the surviving spouse does not have any descendants who are not descendants of the decedent, then the surviving spouse receives the entire estate.

Perfectly clear, right?

Yeah, I know. Not so much.

In the past, I've written about Kelley's Homestead Paradigm, which takes Florida's notoriously complicated laws regarding the disposition of your home upon your death, and makes it understandable through an easy to follow chart. Inspired by Rohan Kelley's work, I decided to make a flow-chart showing how Florida's new intestacy law works.

It's not as fancy as Kelley's Paradigm. I always received bad grades in arts in crafts. But I think it does its job.

PDF Link here.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

I was talking to someone the other day who wanted to change their Will, which was not originally drafted by me, and asked me if I would do a a codicil for them.

I told them no.

While I would be happy to draft a new will from scratch, I don't do codicils to wills that were drafted by other attorneys, and I generally don't even like doing them to Wills that were drafted by me.

What is a codicil?

Quite simply, a codicil is an amendment to a Last Will and Testament. Instead of drafting an entire new will, a codicil merely amends certain sections of the Will. It could be 4 pages, 3 paragraphs, 2 sentences, or even one word.

Back in the days before computers, or even typewriters, long documents like Wills were drafted by hand. While attorneys often did the creating of the documents, the actual copying and physical writing of the documents were done by scriveners (Ah, Bartleby! Ah Humanity!). As a Will could be, and often was, a document of significant length, it did not make any sense to write out a 20 page document in long hand, just for some minor changes. Enter the codicil.

Eventually, the assembling of legal documents moved from being written out longhand, to being typed on manual (and then electric) typewriters. These typewriters had no memory, So once again, without the ability to do a short codicil, a small change to a Will would require a secretary to retype the entire document, instead of a few pages.

But there are problems with codicils.

First, the law is in a constant change of flux. Congress and the state legislatures are always changing the tax laws and the laws regarding probate and real property. Lawyers have to constantly update the "boilerplate" of their Wills and other documents to conform to the changes in the law. If you do a codicil to a Will in which, for example, the testator excludes one of their children, or adds a grandchild, it's possible that the changes in the law since the last Will will not be incorporated.

While in the past it might have been more efficient to do a codicil that reflects all of the changes, it's certainly not efficient now. Depending on when the Will was drafted, there may be multiple changes in multiple places, or few changes. If it was a document that I drafted, I would at least know where those changes are. But if someone else drafted it, it would take considerable time to pour through the Will and checking the law -- much less time than it would take for me to create a new one that has all of the updated language to conform with the law.

Another issue is the signing of the Will. As I've written about before, How you sign a Will Can Be Just as Important as What It Says . If I did not preside over the execution ceremony, I have no idea whether or not the original Will was validly executed in the presence of two witnesses who were in the presence of each other and the testator. If the original Will is invalid, then the Codicil may also be invalid. It's possible it could be valid by incorporating the prior Will, but again, drafting a new Will is safer.

Finally, in the age of computers, word processors (the computer program, not the human kind), and document assembly programs, there is no reason, for me at least, to do codicils, instead of new Wills. It no longer takes a scrivener or a secretary hours to recreate the document from scratch. Instead, I can use their previous Will to make the changes according to their wishes, and I'll know where to make changes to the law. The rest of it can just be re-printed, and does not have to be recreated.

So why do attorneys still do codicils? Some do it out of force of habit, in that's the way it's always been done. Some are still dictating Wills for secretaries using forms and do not have document assembly programs. And some think that clients prefer a short codicil than a new Will.

But for me, I'd rather be safer and do a new Will, and leave the codicils to Bartleby.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments

Sometimes, posts on law blaws can get a little bit esoteric. Every now and then I think it's useful to go back to the beginning, and set forth the documents that comprise a basic estate plan. Every single adult should have these in place, regardless of age, marital status, wealth, and whether or not they have children. These documents are:

1. Last Will and Testament - Your Last Will and Testament sets forth how and where your assets will be distributed, who will be nominated the personal representative of your estate, and if you have minor children, who will be nominated the guardians of your minor children. Without a proper Will, your assets may pass through intestacy, in which the law dictates who inherits your property instead of you.
2. Durable Power of Attorney - In your Durable Power of Attorney, you nominate a person, who, in the event you become incapacitated, will have the power to make all non-medical decisions for you. They can open your mail, pay your bills, manage your bank accounts, run your business. Everything that you could have done, the appointed attorney can do for you. Of course, you can make the nomination as narrow or as broad as you choose.
3. Designation of Health Care Surrogate - The designation of health care surrogate is like the power of attorney, except that it allows you to designate someone to make medical decisions for you in the event that you are incapacitated. This is not about "end of life" decisions, but the more basic medical decisions that you may be unable to make on your own. Without a Durable Power of Attorney and Designation of Health Care Surrogate, then if you become incapacitated, you might be subject to a "Guardianship." A Guardianship is a process in which the court appoints someone to make decisions for you. It can be extremely costly, and burdensome on you and your family.
4. Living Will - The Living Will contains your instructions, so that in the event that you are in an "end stage" condition, or a permanent vegetative state, you let your loved ones and caregivers know whether or not you wish to be kept artificially alive by machines, or to be removed from the machines and able to die with dignity.

Some estate planning professionals will state that every single person should have a revocable trust. As I've written in the past, while they are good for some people, not everyone needs them.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

I'd like to talk a little bit about do-it-yourself wills., but not necessarily in the way that you might think.

One thing that estate planning attorneys --especially those who blog and tweet-- like to rail about are online and store bought do-it-yourself wills. LegalZoom is the enemy, and the lesser-known companies are even worse. I know that I too have in the strongest possible terms castigated do it yourself solutions.

Well, I'm here to tell you that in certain circumstances, and for certain people they may be okay.

But, what are those limited circumstances?

Let's say you are 22 years old, unmarried, childless, and have minimal assets. You don't own a home, you have maybe a few thousand dollars in checking and savings, or even the beginnings of a retirement account. There are certain lawyers who will tell you, that not only do you need a professionally prepared a last will and testament, but that you also need a revocable living trust.

You don't.

For me, estate planning is helping my clients provide for and protect themselves in the event of incapacity, and to provide for and protect their families in the event of their death. Also, it is about helping my clients plan for and minimize taxes.  This involves preparing trusts that protect the decedent's assets for their children upon their death, bypass trusts for spouses to minimize taxes, life insurance trusts, charitable remainder trusts, and other tax minimization strategies like Grantor Retained Annuity Trusts (GRATS).

But there are some people, like the 22-year-old above, who really only need a will to "say where their stuff goes." They don't need a trust for children, because they don't have any children. They don't need a revocable living trust, because they can use a pay on death designation on their bank accounts.  As far as their personal property goes -- let's be honest.  No one is going to really care about their broken down Ikea table.

For them, an online or store bought Will, along with durable power of attorney and health care surrogate is probably ok.  I'm actually more concerned about the health care surrogate and durable power of attorney, as there is certain language that is required to be in there, and I don't know if the DIY companies include it.

My other real concern regards the execution of the documents. The problem often is that these do-it-yourself wills are not properly executed. In Florida, in order for Will to be valid, it has to be executed in the presence of two witnesses who are also in the presence of each other. Then, in order for it to be self proved, the testator and the witnesses need to sign again in the presence of a notary public. The problem with these do-it-yourself wills is that the companies either do not provide proper instructions to their "clients" about how to execute the documents, or, the clients completely ignore them and do not follow the instructions. This can be a problem.

But other than that, for certain people, a LegalZoom will is probably fine.

Now, if you have children, or more significant assets, or real estate, then I do not recommend a do-it-yourself estate planning solution. But, if you are single, childless and broke, you don't need me, and you certainly don't need a revocable living trust, and anyone who tells you otherwise is just trying to sell you something.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

One thing that makes our country both great and frustrating is that for certain types of law, there are often different, incompatible, conflicting laws that vary by state. On occasion, various committees are formed to draft "Uniform" Codes, but it is still up to the individual state legislatures as to whether or not they should be adopted, and what changes are to be made before they are.

One such area of law in which there are a wide variety of rules is the probate law.

I was reading an article on the Wealth Law Blog, the blog of Samuels, Yoelin, Kantor, Seymour & Spinrd LLP in Portland, Oregon. In an article titled, "Don't Write Off Holographic Wills," the author, Victoria Blachy writes that under certain circumstances, a handwritten will may still be valid, because of certain backdoor rules. She write "many states (let's label it "State A") recognize that a will executed in a foreign state ("State B"), pursuant to the laws of State B when executed, can also be valid in State A. For example, see ORS 112.255(1)(c) and RCW 11.12.020. This can come into play when you are dealing with states that recognize holographic (handwritten) wills, like California, and states that do not recognize such wills, such as Oregon and Washington."

I am not licensed to practice law in either California or Oregon, so I'll be talking about Florida law. But first, I think we need to define what exactly a "holographic" will is, as it sounds like something that Mr. Spock would enter into the Enterprise's log before being killed fixing the warp core. A holographic will is a will that is entirely in the Testator's handwriting and signed by the Testator. No typing, no writing.

In Florida, in order for a will to be valid, section 732.502 of the Florida statutes provides that in order for a will to be valid it has to be signed (or acknowledged) at the end by the testator in the presence of two witnesses who must be in the presence of the testator and the presence of each other when signing. If there are two witnesses, but each sign separately, and do not see both each other and the testator sign, then the will is invalid.

In her post, Ms. Blachy points out that often states have a rule that if a will executed by a resident of another state would have been valid in that state at the time it was executed, then it will be valid in the new state too. Florida has a similar rule. For example, let's Michael executes his will while he lives in a state that only requires one witness and not two. If Michael later moves to Florida, then that will will be valid in Florida also. Under the Florida Statute 732.502, "Any will, other than a holographic or nuncupative will, executed by a nonresident of Florida, either before or after this law takes effect, is valid as a will in this state if valid under the laws of the state or country where the will was executed."

In other words, in Florida, even if a Holographic will would have been valid in another state, it still will not be accepted in Florida. Of course, if the will is properly witnessed, then it is valid either way.

PS. A "nuncupative" will is an oral will. They're not valid in Florida either, even if videotaped or put on YouTube.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments

The Year Without an Estate Tax continues.  

As I have previously written, due to Congress's extreme irresponsibility and inability to get anything done at all, the Estate and Generation Skipping taxes are repealed in 2010, but for one year and one year only.  Last December, in a post entitled, The Real Danger of the Expiring Estate Tax: Existing Documents, I discussed that the biggest concern among estate planners is that none of the documents that we've been drafting for clients make any sense.  They don't "work."

The problem is that the dispositions of property in the documents are often worded in such a way that they take the estate tax into account.  Take a look at the following examples that might be found in an existing Will or Trust:

1. "I give to my children an amount equal to my remaining estate tax exemption, and give the balance of my estate to my spouse."
2. "I direct that my Personal Representative set aside an amount equal to my remaining generation skipping tax exemption, and said amount shall be held in trust for my grandchildren."  
3. "I give to the United Way the minimum amount necessary to reduce my estate tax liability to zero, with the remainder of my estate to be equally divided among my children."

If there is no estate tax, then if each of the above formula dispositions are literally followed, then they will result in a disposition of the estate that the testator did not intend.  Although the estate tax is federal law, the interpretation of wills and trusts and other documents is state law.  So, like usual, the states are left to deal with Congress's irresponsibility.

I saw, via, Miami Attorney Juan Antunez's Florida Probate & Trust Litigation Blog, the Forbes Magazine article, States Race to Clean up Congress's Estate Tax Mess.  The article explains that the lapse in the estate tax could, "lead to the unintended disinheritance of spouses, which could in turn lead to expensive legal fights among family members and, ultimately, the impoverishment of some widows or widowers."  Apparently, various state legislatures are introducing legislation to try to insert some sanity -- or at least a roadmap -- for fixing these problems.

For the full text of Florida's proposed fix, along with a copy of Florida Attorney Bruce Stone's presentation from the Heckerling Institute, see Juan's blog.  Below is some selected language from Florida's proposed fix:

1) Upon the application of a trustee or any qualified beneficiary of a trust, a court at any time may construe the terms of a trust that is not then revocable to define the respective shares or determine beneficiaries, in accordance with the intention of the settlor, if a transfer occurs during [a time when the tax is repealed] and the trust contains a provision that:

(a) includes a formula devise referring to the "unified credit", "estate tax exemption," "applicable exemption amount," "applicable credit amount," "applicable exclusion amount," "generation-skipping transfer tax exemption," "GST exemption," "marital deduction," "maximum marital deduction," or "unlimited marital deduction;"

. . .

(3) In construing the trust, the court shall consider the terms and purposes of the trust, the facts and circumstances surrounding the creation of the trust, and the settlor's probable intent. In determining the settlor's probable intent, the court may consider evidence relevant to the settlor's intent even though the evidence contradicts an apparent plain meaning of the trust instrument.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

If you read the tabloids, or even the mainstream press, you may have come across the sad tale of Casey Johnson. Johnson was one of the great-great granddaughters of Robert Wood Johnson I, and an heiress to the Johnson & Johnson fortune. Her father, Woody Johnson, owns the New York Jets.

Johnson's life, to put it mildly, was a mess. A contemporary of Paris Hilton, she had a long history of alcohol and drug problems, public battles with family members, and a recent"engagement" to reality tv star Tila Tequila (if you don't know who that is, do your own internet search. But the images might not be safe for work). The thirty year old woman was found dead in her home on January 4, 2010, leaving behind an adopted four year old daughter. Police are saying that she could have been dead for several days.

I'm sure there are going to be criminal investigations, recriminations, lawsuits, and possibly a messy probate, which I may or may not write about as it happens. For now, I am only interested in one aspect of this: the estate tax.

I don't know what Johnson's financial situation was at her death, I hear that she was "cut off" and broke, but it's also quite possible that she had substantial assets in trust that would be includable in her estate for estate tax purposes, but was beyond her reach for her own protection. This amount could be several million or even tens of millions of dollars.

As I have been discussing, 2010 is currently the year without an estate tax. That means that if Johnson died in 2010, no matter how large her estate was, it will not be subject to the federal estate tax. If she died in 2009, then her estate is taxed at 45% of its value over $3.5 million . If she had a taxable estate of $10,000,000, then her estate will owe $2,925,000 in taxes to the federal government. . I believe (although I do not know for sure) that her death certificate shows the date of death as the date she was found, January 4, 2010. However, if the evidence shows that she died in 2009, then her estate is liable for the tax.

Let's take this one step further. Assume that she did die in 2010. Most people think that Congress is going to retroactively reinstate the estate tax back to January 1, 2010 at some level -- probably the 2009 exemption of $3.5 million. Most legal scholars also believe that it is constitutional for Congress to do so. If someone dies during that time and owes a minimal amount of tax, then it's likely their estate will just pay it, instead of challenging the constitutionality in court, which of course requires hiring attorneys. But if there is enough money at stake, then I wouldn't be surprised if Johnson's estate does challenge it. It would be worth the risk to see how the Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Alito Court would rule.

Of course, none of this would be an issue if Congress weren't so deadlocked, so incompetent, so unable to get anything at all done. But that's for another day.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

I honestly never believed that it would happen.

I never thought that Congress would actually be this irresponsible.  After all, they've known that it was happening since 2001.  But here we are.  It is 2010 and there is no estate tax.  For now.

What does this mean?

First, remember that in 2009, the estate tax only applied to a person who died owning assets in excess of $3.5 million.  So for most people, it means absolutely nothing.  

However, along with the temporary repeal of the estate tax, there is also a temporary repeal of what's known as step up in basis.  Let me explain.  Generally, when you inherit assets from someone, your basis in the asset is the value at the time of death.  So that when you go to sell the 100 shares of IBM that you inherited from Grandma, you don't have to figure out how much she paid for it.  You only have to figure out what it was worth at the time of her death.

With the repeal of the estate tax, there is also a repeal of the step up in basis rules.  Instead there is "carry-over basis" and a decedent's estate will have $1.3 million of basis to spread around their various assets.  How will this be done?  I don't know.  But the effect is actually a tax increase on estates valued between $1.3 million and $3.5 million.

Then, one  year from now, the estate tax comes back to life with a $1 million exemption, and a 55% rate.  

Of course Congress could change all of this.  Most people agree that they can retroactively change the law to reinstate the estate tax.  I'm sure there will be lawsuits if they do though.  

What is going to happen?  I have no idea and anyone who says they do is lying.  I was so sure that they weren't going to let repeal happen, and I was wrong.  So we'll just have to wait and see.

But don't throw momma from the train just yet.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks

The Illinois Supreme Court ruled today in the Estate of Max Feinberg,

Even though I'm not an Illinois attorney (which means the case does not directly apply to me), I find it very interesting both as a Trusts and Estates attorney and as a Jew. Fort Lauderdale and Broward County have a large, often elderly Jewish population who are engaging in estate planning. I have, on more than one occasion, per my clients' wishes, drafted a will or a trust which provides that descendants are disinherited if they marry outside of the Jewish religion.

The facts of the case are as follows:

Max Feinberg died in 1986. Prior to his death he drafted a standard pourover will and revocable living trust. The trust provided that upon his death, his assets would be split into a standard credit shelter trust and a marital deduction trust. Max's widow, Erla, was the lifetime income beneficiary of both trusts, and had, according to the opinion, "a limited right to withdraw principal," presumably according to certain ascertainable standards.

Upon Erla's death, the property would be distributed to Max's descendants. Fifty percent of the trust estate was to be held in further, separate trusts for Max's grandchildren (or to be more specific, for the descendants of Max's children) during their lifetime on a per stirpital basis. However, and this is the key part, the trust provided that any descendant who married outside the Jewish faith or whose non-Jewish spouse did not convert to Judaism within one year would be disinherited.

I'm cutting the facts very short here, but one of the grandchildren sued, saying that the provision disinheriting someone from marrying outside the Jewish faith should be void as against public policy. For a more thorough discussion of the facts see the case itself, or the lower court opinion.

The lower court opinion held for the grandchildren holding that the trust clause disinheriting someone if they married a non-Jew was void against public policy. The lower court held that under Illinois law the provision was invalid because it seriously interferes with the right of individuals to marry a person of their own choosing. While I think the term "impassioned dissent" is a bit of a cliche, in there was certainly an impassioned dissent in the lower court case. (I highly recommend that you read Justice Greiman's discussion on why this clause should be valid).

The lower court's decision was appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court, and has been closely watched by both Estate Planning attorneys (be they in Illinois, or Fort Lauderdale or elsewhere), and various religious and civil rights groups. As I wrote earlier, the Supreme Court reversed the lower appellate court's ruling and upheld the clause, but for different reasons.

What I did not point out earlier (and I'm a little surprised that the lower courts did not focus on it) was that Max granted his wife Erla a power of appointment, which Erla exercised giving $250,000 to each of her children and grandchildren who would not be deemed to be disinherited by the previous clause. The court changed and clarified the issue that they were deciding on. The Court wrote:

Thus, the question we must answer is whether the holder of a power of appointment over the assets of a trust may, without violating the public policy of the state of Illinois, direct that the assets be distributed at the time of her death to then-living descendants of the settlor, deeming deceased any descendant who has married outside the settlor's religious tradition. In effect, we are not called upon to consider the validity of Max's estate plan as a whole, which would have continued to hold the assets in trust for the benefit of the grandchildren only so long as they complied with the restriction. Rather, we must assess Max's beneficiary restriction clause in conjunction with Erla's directions for distribution."

I'll discuss the Court's decision and the legal reasons behind it in my next post.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments

I have written in the past about the dangers of "do it yourself" wills.  I have pointed out all of the traps for the unwary regarding Homestead, the Surviving Spouse, and Pretermitted Heirs.  One thing I haven't written about is the danger of improperly signing the document.  If the proper procedure is not followed, it does not matter how good the Will is, and it does not matter what the signer's intent was.  An improperly signed Will is invalid, and the estate passes through the laws of intestacy.

(Like always, this post only covers the law of Florida.  The laws in other states may vary).

In Florida, the laws regarding the execution of Wills is covered by Florida Statute 732.502.  Under the statute, every will must:

1. Be in Writing;
2. Signed by the testator, or if the testator is unable to sign (say due to paralysis), signed by some other person in the testator's presence and at his direction;
3. The Will must be signed in the presence of two witness who are also in the presence of each other.

I can't tell you how often people mess up #3 above.  When I do a Will Signing, me, the testator and the witnesses all sit at a single table, and no one leaves until everyone is done signing.  I will serve as the notary.  

A handwritten will without two witnesses, is invalid.  A Will in which the testator's signature is notarized but there are no witnesses is invalid.  If you take the Will to the bank, and one person Witnesses the signing, and then goes and gets another teller (who did not witness you or the other witness signing), then that Will is invalid. 

The law is strict and unforgiving, and there are no exceptions at all.  If the Will is invalid then the estate passes by way of intestacy, in which there is a predetermined formula as to how the assets are distributed.   

So even if the "DIY" Will is perfectly drafted, if it is improperly executed, then it is invalid.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Like many people today, I love the Internet. It is a great business, social, and financial tool. I am member of a number of various discussion forums (legal, technological, social, and personal), have a Facebook Account, a twitter account, multiple email addresses for business and personal use, and  now have friends all over the world, many of whom I've never met

Additionally, in managing my personal finances, I try to live a paperless life as much as possible. I probably physically write less than 10 cheques a year, and sign up for paperless billing for every account that offers it. I wish that I could produce digital Wills and Trusts for my clients, but the law hasn't caught up with the technology yet, but that's a topic for another time.

I'm sure that many of you reading this are nodding your head in agreement because you are just like me. But have you ever thought about what will happen to your online life after you die?  The process of administering your estate or your trust upon your death involves gathering your assets, paying your creditors, and then distributing the assets to the beneficiaries. Generally when someone dies we file a form with the US Post Office so that the decedent's mail is forwarded to their personal representative, trustee, or to the attorney administering their estate. Most banks, credit card companies, brokerages, etc, send a monthly (or at the very worst quarterly) statement. Thus, it's not that hard to figure out what the decedent owned (and owed).

More after the Jump

UPDATE: Jeremy Toeman of Legacy Locker responded to this post and his comment and my response are in the comment section below.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks

This post concerns what I see are the dangers of people buying fill in the blank Wills in stores, over the internet, or using consumer software.  And I am going to admit right up front that I have a personal and financial bias.  My job is to provide estate planning services, which may include wills, trusts, advanced directives and other documents, to clients.  Like anyone else who works for a living, I certainly prefer that people hire me and not someone else.  If instead of going to me, people buy software that purports to prepare Wills, or they buy a Will from a company that constantly advertises on the radio, then I am not benefiting financially.

But this post isn't about that at all.  If a client chooses to hire an attorney other than me then I'm not making money either, yet that does not bother me.  What bothers estate planning attorneys about store bought fill in the blanks wills and trusts, or software, or internet Wills, is that they often end in disaster.  Virtually every estate planning attorney has more than one story about a bereaved family finding out after their loved one's death that the do it yourself Will did not accomplish what it was supposed to, or wasn't properly executed and therefore was invalid.

My main concerns with do it yourself estate planning are as follows:

1. People are choosing what they need without professional advice.  Someone will get into their mind that they "need a trust" and will go onto the internet and order one.  It would be like if I woke up one morning with a stomachache and without going to the doctor decided that I needed an appendectomy.  A person needs to sit with an expert to decide whether they need a trust, and what kind, and what it should say.  And even if the person does need a trust, it still has to be properly funded, something a form can't do.
2. The "one size fits all" problem.  A fill in the blank form bought in a store or ordered over the internet is not going to be custom tailored to an individual client's needs.  Every person has their own special set of circumstances, whether it is the type of assets they own, or special provisions that might be necessary for their children.  Just one example, if you are in Florida and you own a home, the rules regarding how you may devise your Homestead are extremely complex. No preset form, or company in another state can possibly get it right, because there are too many variables, and every situation is different.
3. The Law is constantly changing.  How often are these forms updated to reflect changes in the law?  Can you have confidence that the document is valid for your state?
4. People who buy premade Wills often do not execute them properly causing the Will to be invalid.  The law regarding the execution of Wills is very strict and unforgiving.  In Florida, a testator must execute his Will in the presence of two witnesses who also must sign in the presence of each other.  There are numerous cases of Wills being declared invalid because the signing requirements were not adhered to.  If a Will is invalid then the estate passes through intestacy. An estate planning attorney is likely to have presided over the execution of hundreds, if not thousands, of Wills and will have a procedure to ensure that each and every Will is properly executed.

I understand why people buy store bought Wills or software instead of going to an attorney.  Money and time.  They see an attorney as far too expensive, and probably don't really understand what an estate planning attorney truly does.  They think the $39.95 form or $49.95 software will be "good enough." 

If time and money are the motivating factors, then you should know that it is much more expensive and it takes a lot longer to fix the mistakes after you are dead than it would have been to do it right the first time.  A Probate, especially one complicated by a Will with errors or that is invalid, will most likely cost at least 3 times as much as proper planning would have.

I'm not saying that the software, forms, or internet wills will always be invalid.  I'm just saying think of your family, and be careful.  Like anything else, there is no substitute for personalized one on one advice.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks