July 23rd, 2012

Trustees aren’t always one-stop shops.  In some states, trustees can delegate certain investment decisions.  Also, most trust instruments allow trustees to hire people to help them perform certain activities, such as lawyers and accountants.  Occasionally, an aggrieved party sues these people hired to help the trustee.  In these circumstances, the question becomes what duty was owed by the person hired by the trustee.  That question can often be answered by figuring out what that person was hired to do for the trustee.

In Taylor v. Barberino, the Appellate Court of Connecticut recently considered that question as applied to an accounting firm.  A successor trustee sued an accounting firm that was engaged by the trusts to provide accounting services on the grounds that the accounting firm failed to accurately maintain records of the operation of the trusts and failed to properly account for the financial activities of the trusts.  The trial court granted summary judgment to the accounting firm and the appellate court agreed.  Here’s why . . . (more…)

June 27th, 2012

Testamentary capacity is a continuum.  Somewhere along the line, a testator slips from having the requisite capacity to execute a will to not having it.  Where that line falls, however, is the subject of much litigation.

In Deroy v. Estate of Baron, the Appellate Court of Connecticut helped clarify that line under Connecticut law.

A trial court had ruled that a testator lacked the capacity to make a will based on a neurologist’s report about the testator that stated:  ”Given her cognitive impairments, it is unlikely that she would be able to make fully informed, thoughtful judgments regarding complex financial issues.”

This, however, was the wrong standard to apply. (more…)

December 21st, 2011

Guardians and conservators don’t get appointed because things are going swimmingly for the ward.  In a good many of these cases, a guardian and conservator are appointed because there has been some type of financial exploitation of the ward.  Once the ward has been protected going forward, the question turns to how to try to recover what the ward has lost from the exploitation and who has standing to bring the claims on behalf of the ward?

When it comes to a ward’s financial losses, in Kawecki v. Saas, the Appellate Court of Connecticut clarified that it is the conservator of the estate – and not the conservator of the person (similar to a guardian in other jurisdictions) – who has standing to bring a lawsuit to recover the ward’s financial losses. (more…)