
James F. McDonough
Of Counsel
732-568-8360 jmcdonough@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: James F. McDonough
Date: July 17, 2013
Of Counsel
732-568-8360 jmcdonough@sh-law.comOccasionally, cases present fact patterns that were unanticipated at the time I was in law school. Today, however, a person’s ability to anticipate these situations is guided by the dramatic changes in medicine and reproductive technology. In Burnett v. Burnett, a guardian filed a divorce action on behalf of the ward for the primary purpose of Medicaid planning. The Michigan court was faced with two non-traditional trust issues raised by the Guardian.
The facts are that a traditional couple was married in the 1980s. One spouse underwent gender reassignment surgery in 2003. The State of Michigan did not recognize same-sex marriages in 2003, so a question arose as to whether the reassignment surgery operated to end the marriage. The Court held that the sexual reassignment did not invalidate the marriage. The reason the action was filed was to obtain a divorce in order to preserve assets. The court held that the Guardian had the authority to file an action for divorce and that Medicaid planning was a valid reason.
One issue that was not part of the case before the Michigan court was whether the reassigned partner could remain a beneficiary of a hypothetical trust. Most trusts that are funded and operating today were probably drafted before advances in reproductive and reassignment. Most trusts provide for children, grandchildren and occasionally for their spouses. Many trusts require that the in-law remain legally married to the descendant to continue as an eligible beneficiary. Suppose the sexually reassigned partner was a son-in-law or daughter-in-law. Would customary language exclude this person as a beneficiary because the marriage is no longer recognized under state law?
What does a trustee do when presented with these facts? Does the trustee seek to limit its liability from claims of other beneficiaries by taking the position that the couple is no longer married under the terms of the trust or state law? What would the outcome be if the couple and the trust resided in different states with the law of each jurisdiction being different?
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
Author: Dan Brecher
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
Author: Patrick T. Conlon
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Occasionally, cases present fact patterns that were unanticipated at the time I was in law school. Today, however, a person’s ability to anticipate these situations is guided by the dramatic changes in medicine and reproductive technology. In Burnett v. Burnett, a guardian filed a divorce action on behalf of the ward for the primary purpose of Medicaid planning. The Michigan court was faced with two non-traditional trust issues raised by the Guardian.
The facts are that a traditional couple was married in the 1980s. One spouse underwent gender reassignment surgery in 2003. The State of Michigan did not recognize same-sex marriages in 2003, so a question arose as to whether the reassignment surgery operated to end the marriage. The Court held that the sexual reassignment did not invalidate the marriage. The reason the action was filed was to obtain a divorce in order to preserve assets. The court held that the Guardian had the authority to file an action for divorce and that Medicaid planning was a valid reason.
One issue that was not part of the case before the Michigan court was whether the reassigned partner could remain a beneficiary of a hypothetical trust. Most trusts that are funded and operating today were probably drafted before advances in reproductive and reassignment. Most trusts provide for children, grandchildren and occasionally for their spouses. Many trusts require that the in-law remain legally married to the descendant to continue as an eligible beneficiary. Suppose the sexually reassigned partner was a son-in-law or daughter-in-law. Would customary language exclude this person as a beneficiary because the marriage is no longer recognized under state law?
What does a trustee do when presented with these facts? Does the trustee seek to limit its liability from claims of other beneficiaries by taking the position that the couple is no longer married under the terms of the trust or state law? What would the outcome be if the couple and the trust resided in different states with the law of each jurisdiction being different?
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!