<div dir="ltr">Thank you to all who responded!</div><br><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Feb 7, 2025 at 9:43 AM Eric Nelsen <<a href="mailto:eric@sayrelawoffices.com">eric@sayrelawoffices.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class="msg5305656835914975840">
<div lang="EN-US" style="overflow-wrap: break-word;">
<div class="m_5305656835914975840WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">When I’m looking to protect a PR, I have two standard avenues: either everyone agrees to a resolution (TEDRA agreement), or I petition the court for an order approving the PR’s intended act. I agree that a
TEDRA agreement between beneficiaries 1-5 is the best solution. But if everyone can’t agree, then the PR could have the vote performed by beneficiaries 1-4, and then petition the court for an order confirming the will has been properly followed and instructing
the PR to give beneficiary 5 $X or Y% or whatever, pursuant to the vote. Give notice and an opportunity to be heard to the people opposing the decision, and let them have their day in court.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Sincerely,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Eric<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Eric C. Nelsen<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Sayre Law Offices, PLLC<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">1417 31st Ave South<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Seattle WA 98144-3909<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">206-625-0092<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"><a href="mailto:eric@sayrelawoffices.com" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(70,120,134)">eric@sayrelawoffices.com</span></a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"> <a href="mailto:wsbapt-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com" target="_blank">wsbapt-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a> <<a href="mailto:wsbapt-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com" target="_blank">wsbapt-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Ryan Castle<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, February 7, 2025 9:13 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv <<a href="mailto:wsbapt@lists.wsbarppt.com" target="_blank">wsbapt@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [WSBAPT] Unusual Codicil Distribution Scheme Question<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">OK this would make a good bar exam question maybe:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I represent a PR in a large WA testate estate. PR is daughter of deceased. No spouse. PR just appointed by court, no bond, nonintervention. Decedent executed valid Will with attorney representation. Then years later decedent executed valid
codicil without assistance of attorney (!!!). The Codicil has a horrible distribution scheme that reads:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Beneficiary 5 "to receive an amount agreed upon by" PR (also Beneficiary1), Beneficiary 2, Beneficiary 3, and Beneficiary 4 "by mutual decision. PR (Beneficiary 1) is the tie breaker."<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Beneficiary 5's gift would come out of residuary, thereby reducing gifts of other residuary beneficiaries listed in Will. Of the "voting" benes, only bene 4 is a residuary beneficiary. My concern obviously is the discretion given to my
client PR who has fiduciary duties to estate/beneficiaries. I am inclined to advise that my client simply "vote" to follow the original will distribution scheme in order to adhere to her fiduciary duties. The other "voting" beneficiaries seem inclined to do
the same but unsure at this point. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Any advice on how to handle this horribly drafted clause to protect my client? Best if they all simply abstain from voting, assuming they all agree to do that? I assume the "voting" Benes should document their decision via TEDRA Agreement?<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="m_5305656835914975840gmailsignatureprefix">-- </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Ryan Castle (he/him)<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Castle Law Firm, PLLC<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Managing Attorney<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">T: 360-592-3504<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">1313 E. Maple St., Suite 790<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Bellingham, WA 98225<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://ryancastlelawfirm.com/" target="_blank">https://ryancastlelawfirm.com/</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.***<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
WSBAPT mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:WSBAPT@lists.wsbarppt.com" target="_blank">WSBAPT@lists.wsbarppt.com</a><br>
<a href="http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt</a></div></blockquote></div><div><br clear="all"></div><div><br></div><span class="gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><br></div><div>Ryan Castle (he/him)</div><div>Castle Law Firm, PLLC</div><div>Managing Attorney<br><div>T: 360-592-3504</div><div>1313 E. Maple St., Suite 790</div><div>Bellingham, WA 98225</div><div><a href="https://ryancastlelawfirm.com/" target="_blank">https://ryancastlelawfirm.com/</a><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>