[WSBAPT] Against Public Policy?

[Setareh Mahmoodi]

Jeffrey,

I think in this instance, PC is not forcing or "bribing" daughter to
divorce or marry a specific person. It simply allows her to inherit the
assets in case she becomes a widow. One could argue that is the PC's way of
taking care of her daughter's financial needs and in a way providing
support and a better living condition for the grandchildren if they no
longer have a father at home or father's financial help due to his death or
divorce.

Does the daughter work? Is there bad blood? How old are the grandchildren?
Does PC and the current son-in-law get a long? I think the provision is
fine so long as it is not encouraging daughter to obtain a divorce in order
to inherit.

If there is bad blood, I would have concerns. For example, if PC dislikes
the current son-in-law and this is her way of encouraging her daughter to
obtain a divorce that could raise issues later on.

My .2 cents.

Setareh

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 2:29 PM, jeffrey winter <jdwinter at hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Listmates,
>
>
> A client would like to change her living trust so that upon her death, her
> assets would be held in trust for her grandchildren by her sole child
> (daughter). So far, so good.  However, she also wants to provide that if
> the daughter ever divorces (or current spouse dies), then all assets go
> directly to the daughter.
>
>
> I seem to recall issues of public policy coming into play where a testator
> specified that the child would only inherit if she married a certain
> person...is the reverse also true?  Would public policy render enforcement
> of the desired provision problematic?
>
>
> Thank you, in advance, for your thoughts.
>
>
> Jeffrey D. Winter
>
>
> Law Office of Jeffrey D. Winter, P.S.
>
> 604 North Main Street
>
> Ellensburg, WA 98926
>
> (509) 925-9600
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBAPT mailing list
> WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
>



-- 

Please always call 206-683-1006 or email before dropping by the office as I
could be in court or meetings. Thanks!

*Best regards, *


*Setareh Mahmoodi *

*Attorney at Law *

*18222 104th Ave NE, Suite 103*

*Bothell, WA 98011*

*Phone: 425-806-1500*

*Cell: 206-683-1006*

*Fax: 425-489-4142 (Please email documents if at all possible) *

*Website: **http://www.lawofficesofsm.com/ <http://www.lawofficesofsm.com/>*


*CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:* This email message and any attachments is a
transmission from the law firm and is intended for the recipient only.  It
may contain information that is confidential and legally protected by the
attorney-client, work product and/or other privileges.  If you are not the
designated or intended recipient, please destroy the message without
disclosing any of its contents and notify us immediately by reply email or
by calling (425) 806-1500.

Pursuant to U.S. Treasury Department Regulations, we are now required to
advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax
advice contained in this communication, including attachments and
enclosures, is not intended or written to be used, and may not be used, for
the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal
Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party
any tax-related matters addressed herein.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20170113/92f79e97/attachment.html>