April 26, 2016 § 6 Comments

Judges’ Meeting this week.

Next post May 2, 2016.

§ 6 Responses to

  • Hoping for a “what the judges are talking about” post re: last week’s judicial college.

    Curious whether the proposed MRCP 16 (trial must be set at start of litigation) being discussed.

    • Larry says:

      It was a fairly unremarkable meeting. The new TPR statute was discussed in detail.

      As for R16, it is uniformly considered unworkable in chancery and totally unsuitable for probate matters. The consensus is that it will actually slow down divorces and most other trials, and will be used as a delaying tactic. We passed a resolution asking the court to make it inapplicable in chancery.

      • Sounds very sensible. I don’t think it’s much more workable in circuit. Seems much wiser to require discovery to be concluded by a date certain, and then have courts issue trial settings for the cases that actually get that far. But I’m just some guy without a robe!

  • Chris Hemphill says:

    Judge, I have searched your blog and cannot locate anything on this topic. I am up in the Columbus area so this issue is not in your court. I am handling as estate involving an older man in a second marriage. He and his wife did have a prenuptial. He left a LWT that states that after payment of debts, administrative expenses and funeral expenses, he leaves his wife the sum of $50,000. The rest, residue and remainder of his estate, he left to his adult children. The problem (issue) is that his new wife helped him spend most of his money to the tune of leaving about $2000 and very little personal property of value. Probated claims are about $50,000. He did leave substantial real estate that passed to his children through the residuary clause of his LWT. Of course, I understand the real property will have to be used to satisfy probated claims, but (and this may be so elementary I cannot find any law on it) does the real property have to be used to satisfy the wife’s $50,000 general legacy? I believe that it probably does since “rest, residue and remainder” would be what is left over after debts, expenses and legacies are paid.

    • Larry says:

      Without doing any research, I do believe that the real property will have to be used to satisfy the specific bequest.

      • Chris Hemphill says:

        Thank you Judge. That is what I believe also, just could not find specific law on point.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading at The Better Chancery Practice Blog.

meta

%d bloggers like this: