[WSBAPT] Dispute over decedent's remains

Richard Wills richardwills at washington-probate.com
Fri Nov 28 11:27:54 PST 2014


*Marketa --- I can't help you with the TRO but here's a Motion & Order 
Shortening Time.**  My recollection is that you have to note its hearing 
& give opposing counsel reasonable notice of its hearing (eg, 24 hours 
by telephone or Email etc.).
*

On 11/28/2014 9:02 AM, Marketa Vorel wrote:
> Richard,
>
> thank you for taking the time to reply. I read all your posts on here 
> and always learn. I really appreciate it. It's only my 3rd probate 
> (first contested one). I feel green and worried about missing something.
>
> An additional issue: the deceased sibs live in Ireland and have 
> control over deceased's bank account and assets in Ireland. There is 
> good reason to suspect they already transferred his assets. I think I 
> should also get a TRO for the overseas accounts.
>
> If you would be willing to share any thoughts or pleadings for an 
> Order Shortening Time and a TRO for assets, I would be most grateful. 
> But I completely understand that's a tall order to ask.
>
> Thank you in advance for your help.
>
> M.
>
> Sent from my iPhone.
>
> On Nov 28, 2014, at 7:16 AM, Richard Wills 
> <richardwills at washington-probate.com 
> <mailto:richardwills at washington-probate.com>> wrote:
>
>> *I've been involved in several of these disputes in which the issue 
>> was presented to the Court for resolution (sometimes on an Order 
>> Shortening Time), & in all cases, the Court's response was to resolve 
>> the matter according to the Court's interpretation of the statute 
>> unless the parties could unanimously agree in writing on some other 
>> disposition.*
>>
>>
>> On 11/27/2014 10:57 AM, Marketa Vorel wrote:
>>> Great advice, Katherine, thank you.  Is it too ballsy to ask if 
>>> you'd be willing to share a TRO order for that purpose?  Never had 
>>> to do one and afraid I will miss something!  No worries if not.
>>>
>>> Thanks so much!!
>>> M.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Katharine P. Bauer 
>>> <kpb at bpblegal.com <mailto:kpb at bpblegal.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     Tro for accounts and ex parte special administrator to control
>>>     assets!? Not sure if that would work...  Hard one... Lots of
>>>     time while turkey cooks,!
>>>
>>>     On Nov 27, 2014 9:54 AM, "Marketa Vorel"
>>>     <marketa.vorel at gmail.com <mailto:marketa.vorel at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>         Thank you so much, Katherine. That's what we're facing, with
>>>         all 3 subs in Ireland.  The funeral home is sticking to the
>>>         statute.
>>>
>>>         I suppose I could schedule a hearing, give them notice and
>>>         see if they fly in to dispute it. No idea if the court would
>>>         agree that's fair.
>>>
>>>         Also, the Irish sibs control decedent's assets (bank account
>>>         with considerable amount). I fear the assets will be wiped
>>>         out before we open probate and get letters. Any thoughts?
>>>
>>>         Oh, and thanks for answering on Thanksgiving! Happy turkey day.
>>>
>>>         M.
>>>
>>>         Sent from my iPhone.
>>>
>>>         On Nov 27, 2014, at 6:53 AM, Katharine P. Bauer
>>>         <kpb at bpblegal.com <mailto:kpb at bpblegal.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>         My experience is this is more about control, than what the
>>>>         decedent wanted.  In one case, cremation and dividing the
>>>>         ashes worked.  Years ago, a decedent stayed in cold storage
>>>>         for more than a month while all the six siblings were
>>>>         located and went to mediation about whether to cremate or
>>>>         bury.  Mortuary got rich on that one...I felt we could make
>>>>         an argument PR ruled, but mortuary wouldn't accept that
>>>>         because of the statute.
>>>>
>>>>         On Nov 27, 2014 2:25 AM, "Marketa Vorel"
>>>>         <marketa.vorel at gmail.com <mailto:marketa.vorel at gmail.com>>
>>>>         wrote:
>>>>
>>>>             I knew I'd get one of these one day.  I appreciate any
>>>>             wisdom before I chase this too far down the rabbit hole.
>>>>
>>>>             Deceased and spouse (Client) lived in a meretricious
>>>>             relationship for 16 years (no children by either one),
>>>>             but did not register as domestic partners.  Deceased
>>>>             left a valid will, naming Client his PR and sole
>>>>             beneficiary.  Will does not address disposition of
>>>>             remains.  Client and next of kin (brother of Deceased)
>>>>             disagree about disposition.
>>>>
>>>>             My reading of RCW 68.50.160 is that the brother would
>>>>             have authority over remains if spouse was not
>>>>             registered as domestic partner.  Is the statute the
>>>>             definitive authority on this or are there any possible
>>>>             exceptions?
>>>>
>>>>             Thanks in advance,
>>>>             M.
>>>>
>>>>             -- 
>>>>             *Law Office of Marketa Vorel*
>>>>             1520 K Avenue
>>>>             Anacortes, WA  98221
>>>>             206.799.0541 <tel:206.799.0541>
>>>>             marketa.vorel at gmail.com <mailto:marketa.vorel at gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>             _______________________________________________
>>>>             WSBAPT mailing list
>>>>             WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com
>>>>             <mailto:WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com>
>>>>             http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
>>>>
>>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>>         WSBAPT mailing list
>>>>         WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com>
>>>>         http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         WSBAPT mailing list
>>>         WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com>
>>>         http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
>>>
>>>
>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>     WSBAPT mailing list
>>>     WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com>
>>>     http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> *Law Office of Marketa Vorel*
>>> 1520 K Avenue
>>> Anacortes, WA  98221
>>> 206.799.0541
>>> marketa.vorel at gmail.com <mailto:marketa.vorel at gmail.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WSBAPT mailing list
>>> WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com
>>> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WSBAPT mailing list
>> WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com>
>> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBAPT mailing list
> WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20141128/9f4e11d5/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Vukich Mot for Order & Order Shortenting Time.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 45056 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20141128/9f4e11d5/VukichMotforOrderOrderShortentingTime.doc>


More information about the WSBAPT mailing list