Presley trust dispute – mediation is worth a try – as is mediation in basically all probate court cases whether relating to trusts; wills; estates; administrations; elder, spousal and dependent abuse; conservatorship; real property, etc.

Although information remains unknown in the Lisa Marie Presley trust case – indeed, it is very early in the case, the pleadings appear to still be unsettled, written discovery will be propounded, and depositions will be taken – in some cases an early mediation can be successful, or at least beneficial even if the mediation does not result in settlement at this point but requires multiple mediations.

As in most trust, estate and probate court cases there are multiple issues of fact, law, evidence admissibility, burdens of proof, and presumptions that could go one way or the other if the case proceeds to trial.

For example, it is reported in the news that one claim or allegation is that there was a requirement that the purported 2016 amendment to trust be served on the trustee(s) of the 2010 restated trust, and that that service was not done. It so happens that there have been a couple of new relatively recent California cases on this issue – i.e., what actions need to be taken for a purported amendment or modification to trust to be effective? It can be a complicated issue of law and fact based on the applicable statutes in the Probate Code, the trust wording (the wording in both the purported new amendment and in the prior existing trust instrument), case law decisions, factually what occurred and what did not occur, and the trier of fact (in this case, the Judge). And, if the case proceeds to evidentiary hearing/trial, there is always the prospect of a possible appeal.

As reported in the news, other claims or allegations might include questions about the signature and possible name misspelling. On the other hand, if the signature is authenticated and if the amendment is not otherwise invalid for some other reason, there is a rebuttable presumption that a person who signs a document understood and intended her actions and the provisions in the document (assuming, that is, that the document is clear, isn’t ambiguous, and covers all of the relevant issues that are involved in the factual situation). In California there is also a broad general rule that the wishes of a person who executes a testamentary instrument should be upheld; however, in some cases that general rule might merely beg the questions or issues in the case. Based on the news reports I can also imagine that there might be other possible additional issues that the news has not reported.

Mediation should be tried in all probate court cases, at least because of the significant uncertainties that exist, and sometimes multiple times in a particular case. In addition to issues of fact, law, etc., in most probate court cases relationships and personalities also are important and related to getting past impasse and to resolution.

You will know from this blog that I both litigate these cases and also serve as a mediator in other cases. Mediation is important to reach resolution or at least to reduce the issues or to speed discovery and ultimate resolution. I have attached below the current version of my Questions to Consider to Help Facilitate Dispute Resolution and Settlement.

Thank you for reading. Please do pass this blog and blog post and information to other people who would be interested as it is only through collaboration and sharing that great things and success are more quickly achieved.

* * * * * * *

Best to you,

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

  • Business litigation and disputes – business, breach of contract/commercial, co-owners, shareholders, investors, founders, workplace and employment, environmental, D&O, governance, boards and committees.
  • Trust, estate and probate court litigation and disputes – trust, estate, probate, elder and dependent abuse, conservatorship, POA, real property, mental health and care, mental capacity, undue influence, conflicts of interest, and contentious administrations.
  • Governance, boards, audit and governance committees, investigations, auditing, ESG, etc.
  • Mediator and facilitating dispute resolution:
    • Trust, estate, probate, conservatorship, elder and dependent abuse, etc.
    • Business, breach of contract/commercial, owner, shareholder, investor, etc.
    • D&O, board, audit and governance committee, accountant and CPA related.
    • Other: workplace and employment, environmental, trade secret.

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation, or as or for my opinions and views on the subject matter.

Also note – sometimes I include links to or comments about materials from other organizations or people – if I do so, it is because I believe that the materials are worthwhile reading or viewing; however, that doesn’t mean that I don’t or might not have a different view about some or even all of the subject matter or materials, or that I necessarily agree with, or agree with everything about or relating to, that organization or person, or those materials or the subject matter.

Please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two blogs are:

http://tateattorney.com – business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. – previously at http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing only as an attorney in California.

New case – alleged undue influence by family members; anti-SLAPP motion should not delay elder abuse restraining order; the attorney representing the elder must be a zealous advocate free from conflict of interest; more

White v. Davis is a new California case with a long, detailed discussion of the background and of the various multiple applicable laws. White v. Davis (January 5, 2023) California Court of Appeal, Fourth District case no. E077320. A pdf copy of White v. Davis is provided at the bottom of this discussion.

In White v. Davis it was alleged that family members unduly influenced nonagenarian Thomas to change his estate planning. The facts include multiple marriages and adult children from each marriage. The case also involves conservatorship proceedings, and alleged continuing efforts to influence Thomas even after the legal case was filed and during the pendency of the case.

White v. Davis is a reminder that good people need to be vigilant and aware of what is going on in the elder’s life and relationships, and take action by seeking help, including legal help.

The majority of my cases involve multiple marriages with adult children, or a single marriage with multiple adult children who have not gotten along for years, or one spouse abusing or mistreating or being influenced or used or controlled into abusing or mistreating the other spouse, or a multiple of these situations. White v. Davis is no exception – but the decision in White is more noteworthy for several legal procedural issues, and as a reminder that good people need to be vigilant and take action.  

To digress briefly on a different issue: could or can this case be resolved and settled? Yes, absolutely. Every dispute and case can be resolved if all or each of the necessary parties are or can become sufficiently motivated. Trust, will, estate, elder, conservatorship and probate court cases are legally complicated and are also highly and personally involved. In White you have issues of law, evidence and proof (such as, for example, alleged undue influence, possible susceptibility to undue influence, the change from prior estate planning, age (optics), and family and possible confidential or fiduciary relationships and duties, burdens of proof, and presumptions. And, of course, you have the various different personalities, emotions, personal involvement, and the money – in many cases I am seeing these issues as being equally or even more important than the legal and evidentiary issues for resolution and settlement purposes.    

In White an application for elder abuse restraining order (EARO) was filed. An anti-SLAPP motion was also filed – an anti-SLAPP motion is a special motion in which a defendant party can argue to the court at an initial pleading stage that the defendant’s allege wrongful conduct is protected conduct and, thus, that the case or some of the case against the defendant should be dismissed or disallowed.

The trial court in White ultimately delayed and did not proceed with the hearing and matter on the application for EARO. Instead, the trial court first proceeded with the anti-SLAPP motion, and then further delayed addressing the EARO because the court’s decision on the anti-SLAPP motion was subsequently appealed and an appeal stays most other actions in a case from proceeding until the resolution of the appeal. Typically an underlying case is or can be delayed pending the outcome of the anti-SLAPP motion.

I cannot get into EARO and anti-SLAPP intricacies in this post – as this post already is getting long and detailed – suffice it to say that EARO and anti-SLAPP motions, and appeals, are complicated and very time intensive proceedings. With respect to the decision in White, an important holding by the appellate court is that the trial court should have gone forward with the proceeding and the hearing on the application for EARO, and, for example, at least could have considered whether to grant a temporary restraining order, instead of delaying the EARO proceeding until after the anti-SLAPP motion. The appellate court held that the EARO and the anti-SLAPP motion are two separate proceedings and that the proceeding on the possible restraining order to stop the alleged elder abuse should not have been delayed for the anti-SLAPP motion – it is important to be allowed to separately and independently proceed on the application for EARO to protect the elder from the alleged abuse and from possible additional, continuing and ongoing abuse.  

The decision in White also includes an important discussion about how the court should identify and evaluate which alleged wrongful conduct is at issue on the anti-SLAPP motion. There are a lot of appellate decisions relating to anti-SLAPP motions; however, these motions are complicated and still are a developing area of law – I appreciate that the appellate court included discussions about the procedural aspects of anti-SLAPP motions in the context of a litigation case involving alleged wrongdoing relating to trust, conservatorship, estate planning, and alleged elder abuse and undue influence issues and matters.

Finally, the decision in White also includes an important discussion about the requirement that an attorney who represents an alleged abused elder, or who represents a prospective or actual conservatee, must be an independent, zealous, qualified advocate for the elder or conservatee, and must be free from any conflicts of interest (or perhaps even an appearance of possible conflicts). This is an issue that every court should be looking at and evaluating in every case that involves allegations of possible elder abuse, and also in conservatorship cases, to make sure that the elder and/or conservatee is appropriately, independently and zealously represented. The court’s evaluation must include not only the attorney’s experience and qualifications, but also who asked the attorney to become involved, who retained the attorney, who is communicating with the attorney, what relationships does the attorney have with the other people who are involved in the case, and what actions has the attorney taken or been involved in on behalf of or with respect to the elder or prospective or actual conservatee?

The following is a pdf copy of the decision in White v. Davis:

Thank you for reading. Please do pass this blog and blog post and information to other people who would be interested as it is only through collaboration and sharing that great things and success are more quickly achieved.

* * * * * * *

Best to you,

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

  • Business litigation and disputes – business, breach of contract/commercial, co-owners, shareholders, investors, founders, workplace and employment, environmental, D&O, governance, boards and committees.
  • Trust, estate and probate court litigation and disputes – trust, estate, probate, elder and dependent abuse, conservatorship, POA, real property, mental health and care, mental capacity, undue influence, conflicts of interest, and contentious administrations.
  • Governance, boards, audit and governance committees, investigations, auditing, ESG, etc.
  • Mediator and facilitating dispute resolution:
    • Trust, estate, probate, conservatorship, elder and dependent abuse, etc.
    • Business, breach of contract/commercial, owner, shareholder, investor, etc.
    • D&O, board, audit and governance committee, accountant and CPA related.
    • Other: workplace and employment, environmental, trade secret.

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation, or as or for my opinions and views on the subject matter.

Also note – sometimes I include links to or comments about materials from other organizations or people – if I do so, it is because I believe that the materials are worthwhile reading or viewing; however, that doesn’t mean that I don’t or might not have a different view about some or even all of the subject matter or materials, or that I necessarily agree with, or agree with everything about or relating to, that organization or person, or those materials or the subject matter.

Please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two blogs are:

http://tateattorney.com – business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. – previously at http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing only as an attorney in California.

Hiking picture with the blue pacific in the background 01/21/2023 – forwarding a post from my other blog: http://www.tateattorney.com

Thank you for reading. Please do pass this blog and blog post and information to other people who would be interested as it is only through collaboration and sharing that great things and success are more quickly achieved.

* * * * * * *

Best to you,

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

  • Business litigation and disputes – business, breach of contract/commercial, co-owners, shareholders, investors, founders, workplace and employment, environmental, D&O, governance, boards and committees.
  • Trust, estate and probate court litigation and disputes – trust, estate, probate, elder and dependent abuse, conservatorship, POA, real property, mental health and care, mental capacity, undue influence, conflicts of interest, and contentious administrations.
  • Governance, boards, audit and governance committees, investigations, auditing, ESG, etc.
  • Mediator and facilitating dispute resolution:
    • Trust, estate, probate, conservatorship, elder and dependent abuse, etc.
    • Business, breach of contract/commercial, owner, shareholder, investor, etc.
    • D&O, board, audit and governance committee, accountant and CPA related.
    • Other: workplace and employment, environmental, trade secret.

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation, or as or for my opinions and views on the subject matter.

Also note – sometimes I include links to or comments about materials from other organizations or people – if I do so, it is because I believe that the materials are worthwhile reading or viewing; however, that doesn’t mean that I don’t or might not have a different view about some or even all of the subject matter or materials, or that I necessarily agree with, or agree with everything about or relating to, that organization or person, or those materials or the subject matter.

Please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two blogs are:

http://tateattorney.com – business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. – previously at http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing only as an attorney in California.

David Tate, Esq. (inactive CPA) practice meet and greet slide

I am forwarding this post from my other blog: http://www.tateattorney.com. I have provided below a meet and greet slide for my practice. Pre-COVID I had a practice of doing regular meet and greets, and just reaching out, making connections and looking for mutual opportunities for growth. With the beginning of COVID I continued doing so, but less often, and also less often in part because of the tragic death of my sister Deb and how she/her remains and property have been controlled post-death by the man (Trotta) who Deb had finally decided to divorce. You can see a couple of prior posts relating to Deb’s tragedy and how I have now started integrating and using what I have learned and experienced to help other people (Deb’s case and getting her ashes and property are still ongoing) – and I will be posting more information.

The purpose of this post is to say I have also started returning to my previously more active meet and greets and connecting – and I will be expanding those efforts. More to follow.

Below is a meet and greet slide for my primary practice areas. And I am working to make my posts and materials more useful and personal for people who need help and for people and professionals who have experience and work or practice areas that are different than mine.

Thank you for reading. Please do pass this blog and blog post and information to other people who would be interested as it is only through collaboration and sharing that great things and success are more quickly achieved.

* * * * * * *

Best to you,

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

  • Business litigation and disputes – business, breach of contract/commercial, co-owners, shareholders, investors, founders, workplace and employment, environmental, D&O, governance, boards and committees.
  • Trust, estate and probate court litigation and disputes – trust, estate, probate, elder and dependent abuse, conservatorship, POA, real property, mental health and care, mental capacity, undue influence, conflicts of interest, and contentious administrations.
  • Governance, boards, audit and governance committees, investigations, auditing, ESG, etc.
  • Mediator and facilitating dispute resolution:
    • Trust, estate, probate, conservatorship, elder and dependent abuse, etc.
    • Business, breach of contract/commercial, owner, shareholder, investor, etc.
    • D&O, board, audit and governance committee, accountant and CPA related.
    • Other: workplace and employment, environmental, trade secret.

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation, or as or for my opinions and views on the subject matter.

Also note – sometimes I include links to or comments about materials from other organizations or people – if I do so, it is because I believe that the materials are worthwhile reading or viewing; however, that doesn’t mean that I don’t or might not have a different view about some or even all of the subject matter or materials, or that I necessarily agree with, or agree with everything about or relating to, that organization or person, or those materials or the subject matter.

Please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two blogs are:

http://tateattorney.com – business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. – previously at http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing only as an attorney in California.

You should have periodic checkups with an estate planning attorney; investment, FINRA or financial planner advisor; banker; CPA; health provider; or other person – to help you to avoid or get out of situations of financial abuse, exploitation, control, and lack of information, access and possession

The following is the slightly longer version of the title to this discussion:

Another reason why you should have periodic checkups with an estate planning attorney, investment, FINRA or financial planner advisor, CPA, banker, fiduciary or trustee, mental or physical health, medical or care provider, or other person – who can help you to avoid or to get out of situations of elder, spousal, partner, dependent adult, and joint- or co-owner financial abuse, exploitation, control, and lack of information, access and possession.

            This discussion is primarily to provide another good reason for, and to encourage people to, periodically meet or talk with an appropriate professional for a checkup as a regular matter of practice. I realize that in my litigation practice I only see the bad cases. But I am seeking a lot more cases of elder, spousal, partner, dependent adult, and joint- or co-owner financial abuse and exploitation where one person in the relationship controls the finances including information about the finances, accounts and investments, and access to and possession of the finances, money, accounts and investments.

            It is not uncommon for one person in a relationship to be primarily responsible for or tasked with handling most financial matters or tasks. And in most relationships that ends up being fine. But it creates a potential risk or an issue of risk management that might not be obvious or known until the person who is not handling the finances begins to ask questions and wants to have information and access, or when the relationship begins to sour or even ends. At some point you may begin to see resistance from the person who has been in charge of or tasked with the finances, and as you persist and even begin to push for information, and access and possession, you may begin to see that the person who has been in charge or has been tasked with the finances is not as trustworthy or benevolent has you had thought – instead you may begin to see a controlling, possessive, secretive, self-centered, or vindictive personality, or even dysfunctional, dangerous and damaging. Whereas things had seemed fine until you started wanting to become knowledgeable and involved, if you persist you may see an effort being made to convince you that all is fine and that you are being unreasonable or even paranoid, or that you are being insulting to or untrusting of the person in control, or to downplay or misrepresent the situation and or the narrative, or to gaslight, intimidate, belittle, coerce, or force you stay in line and to accept the status quo. The potential scenarios and efforts to keep and maintain the status quo are numerous.  

            If the above scenarios sound dark, that is because they are dark. But I am doing this discussion because I am seeing more and more of these situations including between and involving spouses, partners, dependent adults, joint- or co-owners, and other family members or relatives. These situations also often include instances of undue influence or persuasion, taking undue advantage, and fraud. In most cases the wrongdoer digs in, tries to control and misrepresent the narrative, gaslights, and says well . . . take it back if you can. As I talk with other attorneys, they are seeing the same. These cases can be long and complicated to pursue – which fits the strategy of the wrongdoer to deny, delay, and hide, and to prevail by grinding down. In every case there is the applicable law, and what you know and can prove through evidence that is admissible, what you need or want to know, and what you don’t know but believe that you can obtain and find out through investigation and discovery.

            The primary point of this discussion is to try to safeguard and protect people from, and to prevent, the above situations, and to be able to remedy them if they occur. These situations are best prevented if there is or if there becomes mutual access to information about the finances, and access to and possession of the finances, accounts, money, and investments (other than those assets that truly are separate property by law).  

            Thus, why do I say that people should periodically see an estate planning attorney; investment, FINRA or financial planner or advisor; CPA; banker; fiduciary or trustee; mental or physical health, medical or care provider; or other person for a checkup? Because they and other professionals can or may be able to help or to help guide the victim or person at risk to avoid or how to avoid or get out of situations of elder, spousal, partner, dependent adult, and joint- or co-owner financial abuse, exploitation, control, and lack of information, access and possession.

This discussion is not about professional legal duties. If you are a professional you should already make sure that you are knowledgeable or that you become knowledgeable about your legal duties and practices. Regardless of legal duties, if you are a professional, you may already have, and I encourage you to have, standard procedures or processes whereby you obtain information that could help to indicate whether your client, or one of your clients if you are representing joint clients, is a victim or is at risk of being a victim of elder, spousal, partner, dependent adult, and joint- or co-owner financial abuse, exploitation, control, and lack of information, access and possession. Thus, for example, the client could be seeing you for a periodic, or even an initial, checkup to discuss changes in the law, new opportunities, and relevant changes in their lives or wishes.

            If you are an estate planning attorney, investment, FINRA or financial planner or advisor, CPA, banker, fiduciary or trustee, or mental or physical health, medical or care provider there may well already be reasons for you to ask about or to discuss with your client, or clients jointly or separately, the significant financial assets, accounts and investments, and who has, or controls, access, possession, and information, as a standard practice for the purpose of providing professional services. Answers, or lack of answers or information may also identify abuse, exploitation, risk and or issues of risk management. It is far better to identify, prevent and avoid significant risk, and to remedy any significant risk, as soon as possible. A person who is at risk should not be alone or in a silo about the situation, and should be made to be comfortable coming out and discussing the situation and possible needs, options, remedies, and who to see for help. And also ask the client in a private one-on-one setting to provide names of and contact information for trusted family members, trusted friends, and people who the client designates as trusted contacts in circumstances of concern or need.

_________________________________________

In Loving Memory of Deborah Ann Tate Trotta (September 12, 2021).

You can see a discussion about Deb, and her situation before and after death by clicking on the below link which is titled and discusses:

Someone who should not be a suicide decedent’s representative, or control or get the suicide decedent’s remains, property or assets – every state needs a law and cause of action. In loving memory of Deborah Ann Tate Trotta (September 12, 2021). https://californiaestatetrust.com/2022/12/25/someone-who-should-not-be-allowed-to-become-a-suicide-decedents-representative-or-to-get-the-suicide-decedents-assets-and-property-a-law-and-cause-of-action-that-every-stat/

Good people need to be on the lookout, and take actions.

Thank you for reading. Please feel free to pass this blog and blog post and information to other people who would be interested.

* * * * * * *

Best to you,

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

  • Business litigation and disputes – business, breach of contract/commercial, co-owners, shareholders, investors, founders, workplace and employment, environmental, D&O, governance, boards and committees.
  • Trust, estate and probate court litigation and disputes – trust, estate, probate, elder and dependent abuse, conservatorship, POA, real property, mental health and care, mental capacity, undue influence, conflicts of interest, and contentious administrations.
  • Governance, boards, audit and governance committees, investigations, auditing, ESG, etc.
  • Mediator and facilitating dispute resolution:
    • Trust, estate, probate, conservatorship, elder and dependent abuse, etc.
    • Business, breach of contract/commercial, owner, shareholder, investor, etc.
    • D&O, board, audit and governance committee, accountant and CPA related.
    • Other: workplace and employment, environmental, trade secret.

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation, or as or for my opinions and views on the subject matter.

Also note – sometimes I include links to or comments about materials from other organizations or people – if I do so, it is because I believe that the materials are worthwhile reading or viewing; however, that doesn’t mean that I don’t or might not have a different view about some or even all of the subject matter or materials, or that I necessarily agree with, or agree with everything about or relating to, that organization or person, or those materials or the subject matter.

Please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two blogs are:

http://tateattorney.com – business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. – previously at http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing only as an attorney in California.

Someone who should not be a suicide decedent’s representative, or control or get the suicide decedent’s remains, property or assets – every state needs a law and cause of action. In loving memory of Deborah Ann Tate Trotta (September 12, 2021).

There is someone or a type or category of person who should not be allowed to be the representative of a decedent who died by ending her or his own life (i.e., by suicide), or to control, or to get the decedent’s remains, property or assets – every state needs a law and a cause of action to prevent this – below is draft wording that I propose:

(1)  If someone ends her or his own life, i.e., commits suicide,

(2)  At least in part because of someone else, or because of something that someone else did or did not do, or because of a bad relationship, that in some manner contributed to, or was relevant to, or was associated with, or was involved in, or that influenced the decedent ending her or his own life,

(3)  And if that person or that person’s action or inaction was in some manner a breach of a duty that that person had or owed to the decedent,

(4) Each state should have a law that allows for a claim or cause of action to be made that the person who breached the duty cannot be the representative of the decedent or inherit, recover or receive the things, property and assets in which the decedent had an interest or benefit prior to her or his death, regardless of the estate planning documents, representation documents, property ownership documents or other similar documents of the decedent, and regardless of the other representation and inheritance or asset statutes and laws that exist at the time of the decedent’s death.

Because whatever the documents or the statutory provisions were at the time, under those circumstances the decedent would not or might not want or wish for the other person to be her or his representative, or to inherit, recover or receive her or his real property, personal property and other assets and things – and under the circumstances it is not likely and would not be expected that the person who is going to commit suicide is going to run out and change her or his documents before ending her or his life. The overriding consideration and objective is that the decedent’s representative, and to whom the decedent’s things, property and asset are distributed should be in accord with the decedent’s wishes as best as they can be determined at the time of decedent’s death after taking everything into consideration.

Or, in the alternative, version two:

(1) If someone ends her or his own life, i.e., commits suicide,

(2) And if the decedent had in some manner communicated or provided some manner of communication arguably evidencing in some manner that she or he would not want a particular person, or particular people, to be the representative of the decedent or inherit, recover or receive the things, property and assets in which the decedent had an interest or benefit prior to her or his death,

(3) Each state should have a law that allows for a claim or cause of action to be made that the person or people identified in (2) above cannot be the representative of the decedent or inherit, recover or receive the things, property and assets in which the decedent had an interest or benefit prior to her or his death, regardless of the estate planning documents, representation documents, property ownership documents or other similar documents of the decedent, and regardless of the other representation and inheritance or asset statutes and laws that exist at the time of the decedent’s death.

Again, because whatever the documents or the statutory provisions were at the time, under those circumstances the decedent would not or might not want or wish for the other person or people to be her or his representative, or to inherit, recover or receive her or his real property, personal property and other assets and things – and under the circumstances it is not likely and would not be expected that the person who is going to commit suicide is going to run out and change her or his documents before ending her or his life. Again, the overriding consideration and objective is that the decedent’s representative, and to whom the decedent’s things, property and asset are distributed should be in accord with the decedent’s wishes as best as they can be determined at the time of decedent’s death after taking everything into consideration.

Does your state have such a law, claim or cause of action? Your state should. These are issues and situations of law, fact and evidence, relationships, personalities, and duties, actions and conduct, about which I will continue to connect, share and collaborate with other people who have similar concerns. Depending on the relationships of the people involved, and on the age of the decedent, an argument might also be made that dishonoring the wishes of the decedent it might be considered a form of spousal and/or elder abuse, or perhaps decedent abuse, but occurring post-death. However, I am not aware that state laws have progressed that far.

_________________________________________

In Loving Memory of Deborah Ann Tate Trotta (September 12, 2021). Discussion is provided below.

Deb and her beloved Annie:

My beloved sister Deb’s body was found on September 12, 2021, at a beach that she frequented only a few miles from her home in Hobe Sound, Florida. When I was called by husband on September 12, 2021, and was told that Deb had been missing since the prior morning of September 11 (24+ hours), and when I then spoke with the detective a short time later on September 12 after Deb’s body was found at the beach reserve, I said that I wanted to know what had happened, and everything that had occurred and a full investigation. I was looking for answers – who wouldn’t want answers in these situations? There are also a couple of my earlier posts about Deb, and her situation before and after her death.

Deb’s death was tragic, and I have learned and have come to know much. Now when I read or hear in the news that someone has ended her or his own life I wonder why, what were the causal circumstances, what was said or not, what were the relationships, and what could or might have been done (in some circumstances legally should have been done) to prevent and avoid this tragedy? And in Deb’s case made all the more tragic by what has occurred post- death, which should not happen to or be caused upon any decedent or her or his remains and property in violation and breach of her or his wishes in the circumstance of suicide or in any circumstance – and also should not happen to or be caused upon the family, relatives and life-long friends who loved and cared about Deb.

Unfortunately getting Deb’s ashes to be spread in California as Deb wished, Deb’s things and personal items and property, and easily available information all have been denied. Since September 12, 2021, absolutely everything even including Deb’s ashes, pictures, phone, videos, clothes, Annie, and all personal and Tate legacy and ancestry property has been kept, kept secret, and controlled in Florida – this has been a learning process – at that time I never would have believed that this would occur or that someone would do this, but I certainly do now with what I have experienced and have come to learn and know.

It has been 15+ months, and counting, and two Christmases since Deb’s body was found. Two elder people who cared about Deb have also themselves passed during that time. Long ago Deb should have been freed and released and her ashes obtained from Florida control, possession and secrecy to be spread in California as Deb wished, and to allow some closure for Deb, her family and relatives, Deb’s life-long friends, and ancestors. Long ago Deb’s personal property including Tate legacy and ancestry items and things, pictures, videos, notes and writings, messages, texts, and emails, jewelry, phone, Annie, a particular blanket, and other things and items also should have been freed and released and obtained from Florida possession, control and secrecy. What person would not simply do so, at least for Deb?

I tried several, perhaps many, times to resolve this and to get Deb’s ashes to California. It is difficult to imagine a situation and a case that would not be easier to resolve, except for the possession, control, secrecy and personality issues that exist.

Deb was a naturally positive and beautiful person who looked for the good in people and situations with a view toward making things better. The Medical Examiner has said that Deb ended her own life. Prior to Deb’s situation I had never been directly impacted by someone ending their own life. Whatever the circumstances are, and certainly the circumstances vary from person to person, it must mean that at that time the person is so distraught and unhappy and that she or he cannot get out of or solve the problem circumstances, situation, predicament, or relationship, such that she or he can only see ending her or his life as the sole choice and solution.

Indeed, there was a supposed note. I say supposed because what happened to the supposed note was controlled and I was denied access. I did obtain the short wording of the possible note that was typed in the Sheriff’s report. There is also other information including September 11-12, 2021, information on Deb’s phone and the phone account to which I have also been denied all access. Regarding the supposed note, at times Deb could also be a doodler who would simply write things to herself just for consideration or thinking purposes. A lot of people do that.

The supposed note does not mention ending her life – it is a very short note – but it does start with, and end with the same two words “Best Solution.” That is really sad – that with what had occurred and when Deb considered her circumstances, predicament, relationship, and the personalities, ending her own life by gunshot was her best and only solution. There should have been other options available as instead Deb was getting a divorce attorney with the help of others, and Deb talked about her wish that she could get access to money (i.e., get access to her money, investments and financial resources) to move back to California with her beloved Annie (her standard poodle who Deb named after Anne (Zitter) Tate). Deb said that a private investigator should be hired so that she could find out and get access to the accounts and what was and should have been Deb’s money and investments. About Annie who Deb loved 100% unconditionally, Deb named a few people to whom Annie should go if the need ever arose – and Deb communicated that under no circumstances should Annie ever go to husband.

With the help of others, I now know enough about what had been happening and what happened. We will never know all of the facts as things, information and access have been controlled and denied.

They had an argument on September 11, 2021 (as noted per the Sheriff’s report). There is independent information about what was said about divorce, which also confirms what Deb had said about threat of divorce and a day or two earlier that she had finally decided to go forward with the divorce. Unfortunately, other than that there had been an argument, the Sheriff’s report contains no other information about the relationship or the argument, or about what was said, or anything about divorce – instead, what the detective was told was that Deb suffered from extreme paranoia and would practice suicide. Consider, if that had been true, after the argument the morning of September 11, no phone calls were made to Deb’s family, relatives, or close life-long friends, not even to Deb’s local, close Florida relatives.

The scenario that I have been experiencing post-Deb’s death, i.e., that absolutely everything even including Deb’s ashes, pictures, phone, videos, clothes, jewelry and keepsakes, and all personal and Tate legacy and ancestry property and things have all been kept, kept secret, and controlled in Florida, has been as Deb had been describing her situation and relationship. Deb had also expressed concern about her lack of access to and her lack of information about the money, investments and finances, and her wanting to know where they were or why they were gone?

Based on information that has been presented, on the morning of September 11, the argument and the divorce process and financial terms that were told or directed at Deb were limiting, controlling, restricting and unfavorable to Deb and her entitlements after being in that marriage for 20 years. A different approach would have been easy, such as: Deb, here is the information that you want about the accounts, money, investments and finances; here is $30,000 to $50,000 right now; yes, instead of my attorney also representing you, you should hire your own separate independent attorney to represent your interests; and the attorneys will work out the alimony, sale of asset and divisions after full disclosure of information and production of documents.

Despite the denials of access and the possible presumptions of evidence that those denials raise, Deb’s texts and what she said, in addition to information from other people close to Deb and the affidavits filed, provide evidence of much of what had occurred and was said. And now in keeping with pre-death as Deb described, post- Deb’s death it has been made necessary to fight in Court just to get anything at all including Deb’s ashes, Deb’s personal matters, information, etc., from husband who was divorcing Deb and who Deb was finally divorcing before instead becoming convinced that ending her own life by gunshot was her “Best Solution.”

I now truly believe that unless it is ordered by the Court, we will never have Deb’s ashes to be spread in the locations in California as Deb had wished, nor will we ever have Deb’s personal property and the Tate legacy and ancestry personal property. I will never understand why someone, anyone, would ever control and deny Deb’s ashes and her personal items, and Deb’s wishes, and in a relationship that Deb expressed as very bad (and worse) and headed for divorce. In fact, we do not know what if anything still exists (the existence of Deb’s ashes, Deb’s personal and Tate property, Deb’s other things and assets are all still controlled and being kept secret and unknown). An order to compel production and even information is required. For all we know, Deb/Deb’s ashes and her property all were disposed of after her death. The continuing possession, control and secrecy reflect what Deb had been describing before her death.

People have differing views of what happens to the soul or spirit of a person after death and the hereafter. It is impossible for me to reconcile that post-death the spreading of Deb’s ashes in the locations that Deb loved and as Deb had wished in Marin and Sonoma Counties, California, and some manner of closure for Deb, and for her family, life-long friends, and ancestors is being controlled and prevented by someone who was divorcing from Deb and who Deb had decided to divorce.

Months of texts from Deb and her communications have been attached to my affidavit filed with the Court, in addition to two additional affidavits, and also including communications from divorcing husband.

Consider my comments above about the need for states to have a law and a cause of action (I’ll call it Deb’s law). Please also learn more about mental health, damaging and dangerous relationships and personalities, spousal duties, elder and spousal abuse, and actions that can be taken to understand and to help people who are or who might be considering ending their own life.

These have become issues and situations of law, fact and evidence about which I am now and will continue to be involved. I am also tweaking my approach a bit and working to include, suggest, discuss, and involve professions, professionals within a profession, groups and organizations that have experience, backgrounds, and connections that are different than mine and who wear different hats. For example, estate planning and elder attorneys (whereas I primarily do litigation and disputes in those areas); investment, FINRA, and wealth advisors; CPAs, financial planners, and tax preparers; bankers and financial institutions; health and medical professionals including mental and physical health; fiduciaries including trustees, executors, and attorneys in fact under a power of attorney, people who are designated as trusted contacts; trusted family; trusted friends; and others. Please excuse if some of the above parts might sound a bit repetitive; however, what had been occurring and the situation before Deb’s death, and post- Deb’s death what has continued to happen, and is happening and being caused upon Deb and her family, relatives, life-long friends and ancestors are wrong and inappropriate, secretive, controlling and possessive, like a macabre twilight zone or nightmare, or there is an intent. We have reached the end of 2022 and move into 2023. More to follow.

Good people need to be on the lookout, and take actions.

Thank you for reading. Please feel free to pass this blog and blog post and information to other people who would be interested.

* * * * * * *

Best to you,

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

  • Business litigation and disputes – business, breach of contract/commercial, co-owners, shareholders, investors, founders, workplace and employment, environmental, D&O, governance, boards and committees.
  • Trust, estate and probate court litigation and disputes – trust, estate, probate, elder and dependent abuse, conservatorship, POA, real property, mental health and care, mental capacity, undue influence, conflicts of interest, and contentious administrations.
  • Governance, boards, audit and governance committees, investigations, auditing, ESG, etc.
  • Mediator and facilitating dispute resolution:
    • Trust, estate, probate, conservatorship, elder and dependent abuse, etc.
    • Business, breach of contract/commercial, owner, shareholder, investor, etc.
    • D&O, board, audit and governance committee, accountant and CPA related.
    • Other: workplace and employment, environmental, trade secret.

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation, or as or for my opinions and views on the subject matter.

Also note – sometimes I include links to or comments about materials from other organizations or people – if I do so, it is because I believe that the materials are worthwhile reading or viewing; however, that doesn’t mean that I don’t or might not have a different view about some or even all of the subject matter or materials, or that I necessarily agree with, or agree with everything about or relating to, that organization or person, or those materials or the subject matter.

Please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two blogs are:

http://tateattorney.com – business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. – previously at http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing only as an attorney in California.

The intersection of divorce and death in spousal and elder financial abuse, secretive control, misrepresentation, gaslighting and exploitation

The scenario: when one spouse is possessive and controlling, controls the finances and financial information, lies or misrepresents, creates false narratives, gaslights, and/or is secretive – and is not benevolent, honest or fiduciary to the other trusting, innocent, dependent spouse’s wishes, entitlements and rights. The intersection of divorce, spousal and elder abuse, death and probate.

I am now seeing versions of these scenarios in more and more cases and situations both pre-death and post-death of the innocent elder and spouse. Until recently my elder abuse cases had primarily been cases of financial and physical/care abuse, mistreatment, undue influence, fraud and duress, etc., by non-spousal family members, friends or neighbors, and third parties. But that has changed. I am now seeing cases and situations where one spouse is the direct actor, although sometimes influenced or used by others, against the trusting, innocent, dependent spouse and elder victim. I am now seeing versions of the above scenarios in more and more cases and situations both before and after the death of the innocent elder and spouse.

Good people need to be on the lookout, and take actions.

Thank you for reading. Please do pass this blog and blog post and information to other people who would be interested as it is only through collaboration and sharing that great things and success are more quickly achieved.

* * * * * * *

Best to you,

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

  • Business litigation and disputes – business, breach of contract/commercial, co-owners, shareholders, investors, founders, workplace and employment, environmental, D&O, governance, boards and committees.
  • Trust, estate and probate court litigation and disputes – trust, estate, probate, elder and dependent abuse, conservatorship, POA, real property, mental health and care, mental capacity, undue influence, conflicts of interest, and contentious administrations.
  • Governance, boards, audit and governance committees, investigations, auditing, ESG, etc.
  • Mediator and facilitating dispute resolution:
    • Trust, estate, probate, conservatorship, elder and dependent abuse, etc.
    • Business, breach of contract/commercial, owner, shareholder, investor, etc.
    • D&O, board, audit and governance committee, accountant and CPA related.
    • Other: workplace and employment, environmental, trade secret.

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation, or as or for my opinions and views on the subject matter.

Also note – sometimes I include links to or comments about materials from other organizations or people – if I do so, it is because I believe that the materials are worthwhile reading or viewing; however, that doesn’t mean that I don’t or might not have a different view about some or even all of the subject matter or materials, or that I necessarily agree with, or agree with everything about or relating to, that organization or person, or those materials or the subject matter.

Please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two blogs are:

http://tateattorney.com – business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. – previously at http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing only as an attorney in California.

California AB 1663 Slide – Important New Conservatorship Law Changes

I have provided below a slide summarizing the Legislative Counsel’s Digest for new California AB 1663, which makes significant changes to conservatorship law. As you might be aware, over the past several years both the courts and the Legislature have been making significant changes in California conservatorship law in an effort to enact conservatee and prospective conservatee protections. In relevant part, the new law gives the prospective conservatee additional power to name who the conservator will be (if in fact the court grants the conservatorship) and also requires much greater attention to and evaluation of available less restrictive alternatives to conservatorship.

Thank you for viewing and reading. Please pass this along to other people who would be interested as it is through collaboration and sharing that great things and success occur more quickly..

* * * * * * *

Best to you,

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

  • Business litigation and disputes – business, breach of contract/commercial, co-owners, shareholders, investors, founders, workplace and employment, environmental, D&O, governance, boards and committees.
  • Trust, estate and probate court litigation and disputes – trust, estate, probate, elder and dependent abuse, conservatorship, POA, real property, mental health and care, mental capacity, undue influence, conflicts of interest, and contentious administrations.
  • Governance, boards, audit and governance committees, investigations, auditing, ESG, etc.
  • Mediator and facilitating dispute resolution:
    • Trust, estate, probate, conservatorship, elder and dependent abuse, etc.
    • Business, breach of contract/commercial, owner, shareholder, investor, etc.
    • D&O, board, audit and governance committee, accountant and CPA related.
    • Other: workplace and employment, environmental, trade secret.

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation, or as or for my opinions and views on the subject matter.

Also note – sometimes I include links to or comments about materials from other organizations or people – if I do so, it is because I believe that the materials are worthwhile reading or viewing; however, that doesn’t mean that I don’t or might not have a different view about some or even all of the subject matter or materials, or that I necessarily agree with, or agree with everything about or relating to, that organization or person, or those materials or the subject matter.

Please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two blogs are:

http://tateattorney.com – business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. – previously at http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing only as an attorney in California.

David Tate, Esq. short video – tips for approaching dispute resolution, mediation and meetings

I have provided below a link on youtube for my short video discussing tips for approaching dispute resolution, mediation and meetings. I have also written more detailed materials to help you prepare for dispute resolution and mediation.

Thank you for viewing and reading. Please pass this along to other people who would be interested.

* * * * * * *

Best to you,

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

  • Business litigation and disputes – business, breach of contract/commercial, co-owners, shareholders, investors, founders, workplace and employment, environmental, D&O, governance, boards and committees.
  • Trust, estate and probate court litigation and disputes – trust, estate, probate, elder and dependent abuse, conservatorship, POA, real property, mental health and care, mental capacity, undue influence, conflicts of interest, and contentious administrations.
  • Governance, boards, audit and governance committees, investigations, auditing, ESG, etc.
  • Mediator and facilitating dispute resolution:
    • Trust, estate, probate, conservatorship, elder and dependent abuse, etc.
    • Business, breach of contract/commercial, owner, shareholder, investor, etc.
    • D&O, board, audit and governance committee, accountant and CPA related.
    • Other: workplace and employment, environmental, trade secret.

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation.

Also note – sometimes I include links to or comments about materials from other organizations or people – if I do so, it is because I believe that the materials are worthwhile reading or viewing; however, that doesn’t mean that I don’t or might not have a different view about some or even all of the subject matter or materials, or that I necessarily agree with, or agree with everything about or relating to, that organization or person, or those materials or the subject matter.

Thank you for reading this post. I ask that you also pass it along to other people who would be interested as it is through collaboration that great things and success occur more quickly. And please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two blogs are:

http://tateattorney.com – business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. – previously at http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing only as an attorney in California.

Pathway through the CARE Court

Below is a picture of the Pathway through the CARE Court, from the State of California CARE Court website.

Many key word are noted, including but not limited to: voluntarily engage (or not); petition for evidence; appoints legal counsel; voluntary supporter; order a clinical evaluation; orders the development of a CARE plan; CARE plan may include behavioral health treatment, stabilization medication, and a housing plan, etc. Although the Pathway is not called a conservatorship, it is still court-ordered, with a court-appointed attorney representing the individual. You should also note that SB 1338 is a long piece of legislation that goes into many areas including insurance plans and coverage, situations of possible criminal behavior, and situations involving possible LPS or general conservatorships, in addition to the separate CARE Court provisions. CARE stands for: The Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act. Here is the link for the State of California CARE Court website https://www.chhs.ca.gov/care-act/

More to follow as the State and the first group (cohort) of counties start to put details into exactly how this program will be designed and will operate (the first counties include Glenn, Orange, Riverside, San Diego, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne, and the City and County of San Francisco).

Thank you for reading. Please pass this along to other people who would be interested.

* * * * * * *

Best to you,

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

  • Business litigation and disputes – business, breach of contract/commercial, co-owners, shareholders, investors, founders, workplace and employment, environmental, D&O, governance, boards and committees.
  • Trust, estate and probate court litigation and disputes – trust, estate, probate, elder and dependent abuse, conservatorship, POA, real property, mental health and care, mental capacity, undue influence, conflicts of interest, and contentious administrations.
  • Governance, boards, audit and governance committees, investigations, auditing, ESG, etc.
  • Mediator and facilitating dispute resolution:
    • Trust, estate, probate, conservatorship, elder and dependent abuse, etc.
    • Business, breach of contract/commercial, owner, shareholder, investor, trade secret, etc.
    • D&O, board, audit and governance committee, accountant and CPA related.
    • Other: workplace and employment, environmental.

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation.

Also note – sometimes I include links to or comments about materials from other organizations or people – if I do so, it is because I believe that the materials are worthwhile reading or viewing; however, that doesn’t mean that I don’t or might not have a different view about some or even all of the subject matter or materials, or that I necessarily agree with, or agree with everything about or relating to, that organization or person, or those materials or the subject matter.

Thank you for reading this post. I ask that you also pass it along to other people who would be interested as it is through collaboration that great things and success occur more quickly. And please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two blogs are:

http://tateattorney.com – business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. – previously at http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing only as an attorney in California.