What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? I live in Ohio, but Utah is the state where this Will AND Trust are being probated.
I was named as a beneficiary in my cousin's Trust. He lived in Utah at the time of his death--which was 07-4-08. This past June (2009) I received a letter stating that the Trustee had withdrawn money from the brokerage account that I was entitled to a percentage of--stating that it had been done to "repay" my cousin's estate for supposed "loans" that they said that I owed my cousin. The Trustee is basing this allegation on a note written in the memo of 4 checks that my cousin had given me back in 2005--which he wrote: "Interest Free Loan."
I do not owe my late cousin anything. I have multiple emails and letters from my late cousin that clearly state the reason he wrote what he did in the memos of the checks was because he didn't want to end up paying gift tax on the money he gave me to help me out if the amount ended up exceeding a particular amount . . . which it never did anyway.
Here are the facts in order, as they have occurred:
1. I was originally never given an opportunity to refute the Trustee's allegations regarding the supposed "owed" money. The amount they believed I "owed" was just taken and given to the Trustee as a "finder's fee." I didn't even find out about it until four and a half months after the fact.
2. When I did finally get notified of what had taken place, I began requesting documentation to validate what their actions had been based upon--which I never received.
3. I was forced to get an attorney, who, finally received the first "installment" of information from Utah on Monday, October 05, 2009--In the form of a copy of a "Motion for Declaration and Determination of Rights" that apparently had been filed with the Utah Probate Court on September 29, 2009. The documents are basically asking the court's permission to take the money from the brokerage account that I'm entitled to as "repayment" of the supposed "loans." The ironic part is, nowhere in the documentation filed with the court, do they state that they ALREADY TOOK THE MONEY WITHOUT THE COURT'S PERMISSION OVER EIGHT MONTHS AGO WITHOUT BOTHERING TO TELL ME ABOUT IT FIRST!
4. My attorney (Ohio) is now telling me that if I want to object to this motion, that I must do it "Pro Se" because she is not licensed in to practice in Utah--but has also told me that the Trustee now wants to know what amount of money I would be willing to accept to settle the case--rather than let the judge "decide." I have also been told that I have only until Tuesday, October 13, 2009 to decide.
_________________________________________________________________
My question(s) are these:
How good are my chances that the judge will side with me regarding the fact that they shouldn't have taken the money--and THEN asked permission to do it--only when they found out that I was not going to just let it slide?
How much "weight" does a note in the memo of check actually hold--when I have several documents that explain why it was written? Which argument is more "legally" compelling? (For lack of a better way to put it . . . )
What reasons would/could the Trustee and her legal team have for wanting me to "settle," if they truly believed that they were justified in taking the money in the first place?
Thank you for your input . . .
I was named as a beneficiary in my cousin's Trust. He lived in Utah at the time of his death--which was 07-4-08. This past June (2009) I received a letter stating that the Trustee had withdrawn money from the brokerage account that I was entitled to a percentage of--stating that it had been done to "repay" my cousin's estate for supposed "loans" that they said that I owed my cousin. The Trustee is basing this allegation on a note written in the memo of 4 checks that my cousin had given me back in 2005--which he wrote: "Interest Free Loan."
I do not owe my late cousin anything. I have multiple emails and letters from my late cousin that clearly state the reason he wrote what he did in the memos of the checks was because he didn't want to end up paying gift tax on the money he gave me to help me out if the amount ended up exceeding a particular amount . . . which it never did anyway.
Here are the facts in order, as they have occurred:
1. I was originally never given an opportunity to refute the Trustee's allegations regarding the supposed "owed" money. The amount they believed I "owed" was just taken and given to the Trustee as a "finder's fee." I didn't even find out about it until four and a half months after the fact.
2. When I did finally get notified of what had taken place, I began requesting documentation to validate what their actions had been based upon--which I never received.
3. I was forced to get an attorney, who, finally received the first "installment" of information from Utah on Monday, October 05, 2009--In the form of a copy of a "Motion for Declaration and Determination of Rights" that apparently had been filed with the Utah Probate Court on September 29, 2009. The documents are basically asking the court's permission to take the money from the brokerage account that I'm entitled to as "repayment" of the supposed "loans." The ironic part is, nowhere in the documentation filed with the court, do they state that they ALREADY TOOK THE MONEY WITHOUT THE COURT'S PERMISSION OVER EIGHT MONTHS AGO WITHOUT BOTHERING TO TELL ME ABOUT IT FIRST!
4. My attorney (Ohio) is now telling me that if I want to object to this motion, that I must do it "Pro Se" because she is not licensed in to practice in Utah--but has also told me that the Trustee now wants to know what amount of money I would be willing to accept to settle the case--rather than let the judge "decide." I have also been told that I have only until Tuesday, October 13, 2009 to decide.
_________________________________________________________________
My question(s) are these:
How good are my chances that the judge will side with me regarding the fact that they shouldn't have taken the money--and THEN asked permission to do it--only when they found out that I was not going to just let it slide?
How much "weight" does a note in the memo of check actually hold--when I have several documents that explain why it was written? Which argument is more "legally" compelling? (For lack of a better way to put it . . . )
What reasons would/could the Trustee and her legal team have for wanting me to "settle," if they truly believed that they were justified in taking the money in the first place?
Thank you for your input . . .