Siblings With Dueling Deeds

Could your family situation be any worse?  Imagine the Thanksgiving dinners.  Take the situation of these six siblings.  In July 2001, Harold secures a deed signed by his mother Ethel giving him the family home.  He records the deed.  In November 2001, Ethel signs another deed transferring the family home to a trust, with daughter Deborah and herself as the co-trustees.  Ethel reserves a life estate for herself.  That deed and trust are recorded a few months later.  In the many estate plans created by Ethel, sons Harold and Lawrence were always excluded because they were provided for through a prior gift of the family oil business.  The other four children were to inherit the remaining estate.  Ethel's last will is in 2008, and she continues to exclude Harold and Lawrence specifically because of the lifetime gift of the business.  Ethel dies in December 2009, and shortly thereafter, Deborah learns of Harold's claim to the family home.  Her lawsuit is filed in January 2010.

Today, in Allen v. Allen, 13-P-605, the Appeals Court in Massachusetts affirmed the Land Court Judge's determination that the first deed was defective, and title to the property is held in the name of the trust. The case was one of first impression and dissects the recording statute, G.L.c. 183, Section 4.  Key to the findings was the fact that the attorney and notary of the first deed could not remember Ethel being before him to sign the deed, and after evidence indicated that Ethel may not have been in the state at the time it was signed, he agreed that the date and place on the notary acknowledgment might not be accurate.  In a 23 page decision, the court determined that even though a notary acknowledgement is not required for a deed to be valid, it is required to record the deed.  Because of the defect in the certificate of acknowledgement, the recording was in error and the deed did not provide constructive notice to the world of its existence.  Harold was unable to prove that Deborah had actual knowledge of the transfer, and the court refused to impute knowledge.  The subsequent deed was held to be valid.

There are many take-aways for lawyers from this case.  A simple online title search at the time of recording the November deed would have alerted her children to the July deed while Ethel was still alive.  The take away for clients: parents beware - you run the risk of estate disputes when children are treated differently.  Any hoped for harmony is nearly impossible without thoughtful discussion about succession and transparency while you are alive.

U.S. Supreme Court Rules on Two Cases

The U.S. Supreme Court decided two cases recently. One case involved a widow's claim that her children conceived by her late husband's sperm were entitled to survivor's benefits and the other case held that illegal immigrants cannot take advantage of a parent's lawful residence status when they are charged with crimes subjecting them to deportation, according to a report in the Los Angeles Times.

In Astrue v. Capato, the Court upheld "the government's multi-part definition of who deserves survivors benefits" in a 9-0 decision. Karen Capato had used sperm her late husband had deposited in a sperm bank to conceive her twins. She argued that the children were entitled to survivors benefits because they qualified as "natural children", despite being born after her husband's death, under the Social Security Act. The Court rejected her claim because regulations "define a 'natural child' as one who could inherit the father's property under state law." The Capatos were residents of Florida where state law specifies that children conceived after a parent's death are not entitled to inherit the late parent's property. The children were not named in their father's will before he passed.

In Holder v. Martinez-Gutierrez, the Court ruled that when illegal immigrants are charged with a crime that exposes them to deportation, they cannot take advantage of their parent's lawful residence. The Court held that "individuals must hear their own leniency through years of lawful residence."

Glickman Turley's experienced attorneys represent individuals on a wide range of immigration matters, as well as other legal issues. Please contact our attorneys if you wish to discuss representation on immigration matters, real estate purchase and sales, condominium associations, criminal defense, non-profit law, civil litigation, business litigation, business law, trademark law, probate matters including wills, powers of attorney, health care proxy, same-sex co-parent adoptions, guardianships, animal law, or LGBT legal matters.  

Massachusetts Appeals Court Hears Arguments Over 351 Year Old Will

The Wall Street Journal Law Blog reported that the Massachusetts Appeals Court heard arguments over dispute involving a will that is 351 years old. William Payne was a wealthy Massachusetts merchant who bequeathed in his will that a land called "Little Neck" in Ipswich, Massachusetts, "shall never be sold, and shall 'for euer' be used to benefit Ipswich public schools" and that "the sayd land not to bee sould or wasted." 


The trustees of the will had been planning to sell the land recently but a group of Ipswich parents are fighting to stop the sale. A lawyer for the trustees said that proceeds from the land sale could be invested and bring in more funds to Ipswich public schools. One Ipswich parent argued that the point of this lawsuit is not about the money, but rather a question of why anyone in Massachusetts would bother creating a charitable trust if the terms of the trust can be violated. Under current Massachusetts law, if the mission of the trust becomes impossible to carry out, then the terms of a charitable trust can be violated. The Massachusetts Appeals Court has not rendered a decision in this case yet. 


Glickman Turley's experienced attorneys represent individuals on a wide range of immigration matters, as well as other legal issues. Please contact our attorneys if you wish to discuss representation on immigration matters, real estate purchase and sales, condominium associations, criminal defense, non-profit law, civil litigation, business litigation, business law, probate matters including wills, powers of attorney, health care proxy, same-sex parent adoptions, guardianships, animal law, or LGBT legal matters.

U-Visa for Victims of Crime

Attorneys at Glickman Turley LLP represent a variety of clients on U-visa petitions. Our clients who have been victims of domestic violence, sexual crimes, and racially motivated attacks have been granted protection in the US in the form of a temporary 4-year U-visa and later permanent resident status.

You may be eligible for a U-visa if you have been the victim of a crime in the US, have suffered substantial physical or emotional injuries, and helped or will help law enforcement with the investigation or prosecution of the crime. Please contact our attorneys if you believe that you may be eligible for a U-visa or if you would like to discuss representation on other immigration matters. Our attorneys also represent clients on matters relating to real estate purchase and sales, condominium associations, criminal defense, non-profit law, civil ligitation, business litigation, business law, probate matters including wills, powers of attorney, health care proxy, adoptions, and guardianships, animal law, gay lesbian bisexual transgender law.

Also, please see a recent USCIS memorandum regarding its approval of 10,000 U-visa petitions in the past year.

Online Estate Planning Programs

Millions of Americans still die without a valid will, even though every single one knew that he or she would die at some point.

In an effort to avoid paying a lawyer for something that he could get free from the internet, a client recently showed me a will he had written with the help of an online program. I hate to look at these documents because once I review it, I assume the liability of having drafted it. But, in this instance I could not help but comment on his document. Despite a lot of the required bells and whistles, it was missing a signature line. How he got it witnessed and notarized is beyond me, but sadly, if presented to a Court, his missing signature would have invalidated the document in full.

If you let us help you craft an estate plan, it will include a valid will. Promise.