Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

When Beneficiaries Predecease: An Empirical Analysis, Adam J. Hirsch Jan 2022

When Beneficiaries Predecease: An Empirical Analysis, Adam J. Hirsch

Emory Law Journal

Under current law, bequests to beneficiaries who predecease the testator “lapse” to the beneficiary of the residuary, unless they are preserved for the descendants of predeceased beneficiaries under an “antilapse” statute. The beneficiaries covered by antilapse statutes vary from state to state, but in most states today the statutes apply only to blood relatives of the testator as distant as first cousins. This Article examines the public policy of antilapse statutes, assessing them by undertaking the first-ever survey of popular preferences concerning the matter. Harvesting evidence for five types of beneficiaries, the study finds that the prevailing structure of antilapse …


Divorcees Turn About In Their Graves As Ex-Spouses Cash In: Codified Constructive Trusts Ensure An Equitable Result Regarding Erisa-Governed Employee Benefit Plans, Sarabeth A. Rayho Jan 2007

Divorcees Turn About In Their Graves As Ex-Spouses Cash In: Codified Constructive Trusts Ensure An Equitable Result Regarding Erisa-Governed Employee Benefit Plans, Sarabeth A. Rayho

Michigan Law Review

A revocation-by-divorce statute essentially nullifies a devise in a divorced decedent's will when the devise bequeaths property to the decedent's ex-spouse and the will was executed during their marriage. Until recently, state revocation-by-divorce statutes unquestionably applied not only to wills but also to will substitutes, including ERISA-governed employee benefit plans. In 2001, the Supreme Court held in Egelhoff v. Egelhoff ex rel. Breiner that ERISA preempts traditional state revocation-by-divorce statutes as applied to ERISA-governed employee benefit plans. In the wake of the Egelhoff decision, plan administrators may automatically pay proceeds to the listed beneficiary, even an ex-spouse, regardless of the …


The Rise Of The Perpetual Trust, Jesse Dukeminier, James E. Krier Jan 2003

The Rise Of The Perpetual Trust, Jesse Dukeminier, James E. Krier

Articles

For more than two centuries, the Rule against Perpetuities has served as the chief means of limiting a transferor's power to tie up property by way of successive contingent interests. But recently, at least seventeen jurisdictions in the United States have enacted statutes abolishing the Rule in the case of perpetual (or near-perpetual) trusts. The prime mover behind this important development has been the federal Generation-Skipping Transfer Tax. This Article traces the gradual decline of the common law Rule against Perpetuities, considers the dynamics behind the recent wave of state legislation, examines the problems that might result from the rise …


Insurance--1959 Tennessee Survey, William R. Andersen Oct 1959

Insurance--1959 Tennessee Survey, William R. Andersen

Vanderbilt Law Review

What is the meaning of the term "actual cash value" in the standard fire policy? The middle section of the court of appeals, following a prior Tennessee case and the weight of authority, held that the phrase is synonomous with "market value" only where the goods are readily replaceable in a current market. Where there is no market, or where the market value is inadequate to properly indemnify the insured, "actual cash value" means the "'value to the owner' or the loss he suffers in being deprived of the goods." Since the goods involved in this case were personal effects, …


Trusts-Right Of Trustee To Purchase Trust Property May 1931

Trusts-Right Of Trustee To Purchase Trust Property

Michigan Law Review

The trustees under a will filed a petition in the district court asking for an order of court authorizing them to sell and convey to two of the trustees a portion of the real estate held by them in trust, and for authority to sell and convey the remainder of the real estate to the husband of one of the trustees. Three of the beneficiaries were not sui juris, and the remaining beneficiaries refused to give their consent. Held, that a trustee can not purchase trust property from himself when the beneficiary is not sui juris or when …