Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Pre-Nups: Estate Planning
When drafting and executing prenuptial agreements, the parties are generally concerned about protecting their assets and delineating their rights upon divorce. In addition to provisions in the event of divorce, however, careful attention also must be paid to the disposition of one's assets upon death. The provisions in the event of death may be particularly important where the assets to be protected were received from one's family or are comprised of a family business. Depending upon the circumstances, the death provisions of a prenuptial agreement may be used to negotiate more favorable divorce provisions for your client. Whether or not used in negotiation, any death provisions included in a prenuptial agreement require an understanding of complex federal tax issues, knowledge of state property law, and thoughtful drafting.
Waivers Applicable At Death
While the details vary from state to state, the law is generally protective of the surviving spouse of a decedent. Through the spouse's elective share, a surviving spouse is granted a certain amount (which, depending on the state, differs dramatically), either outright or via a life estate, of his or her deceased spouse's assets. In addition, some states still grant a surviving spouse dower, or a life estate in the decedent's real estate, which in some cases can be the estate's most valuable asset. The spouse's elective share, dower and the many other benefits and rights granted by law to widows and widowers should be addressed by way of waivers and other provisions in any prenuptial agreement. In the absence of such provisions, a party's well-thought-out estate plan can be nullified and the protections gained by signing a prenuptial agreement can disappear upon the death of one of the parties.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.