Thursday, December 30, 2021

Ring v. Harmon (2021)

Estate planning
In Ring v. Harmon, the Court of Appeal in California considered “an alleged loan scheme to drain equity out of a house held in a probate estate.”

When Awana Ring was 80 years old, she lost her daughter Vickie Atiyeh. Vickie left Awana a house when she passed away. According to Awana, her son and grandson developed a scheme to “swipe much of the equity in the house—an inside job without outside help. ”

Awana’s son Scott and grandson Zachary collaborated with a loan broker to pushed Away to be appointed as personal representative of Vickie’s estate, and then baited Away into taking out a predatory loan at a rate of 10.99 percent. “Scott and Zachary took the loan proceeds for themselves while the loan broker received fees and an income stream on the loan.”

Although the San Bernardino County Superior Court found that Awana only had claims as a personal representative of Vickie’s estate, since it was in that capacity that she received the loan. However, the Court of Appeal found that Awana’s “dual position” as both personal representative and beneficiary was a “special circumstance that justified allowing her to sue based on her beneficial interest in the estate.”

See Ring v. Harmon (2021) (Cal.App.5th). 

Special thanks to Jim Hillhouse (Professional Legal Marketing (PLM, Inc.)) for bringing this Case to my attention.

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/trusts_estates_prof/2021/12/ring-v-harmon-2021.html

Elder Law, Estate Administration, Estate Planning – Generally, New Cases | Permalink

Comments

Post a comment