Matthew Curtiss, Esq

Mystic Seaport's Moby Dick Marathon

I was tempted to blog about something legally compelling like an analysis of  Knight v. Commissioner and its impact on deductions by a trust for investment advice.

Instead, something a bit different.

The Mystic Seaport is having its annual "Moby Dick marathon"!  According to the Mystic Seaport website

The reading of all 135 chapters of Moby-Dick begins at noon on Thursday, July 31st. It continues overnight, concluding at noon on Friday, August 1st, Melville's birthday.

Visitors are invited to participate in the marathon, which includes spending the night aboard the Charles W. Morgan, the last wooden whaleship in the world. Copies of the novel are available for those who want to follow the reading. Visitors, staff and volunteers can choose to take turns reading chapters throughout the marathon, except for chapter 1, "Loomings," and the Epilogue, both of which are read by an actor portraying Mr. Melville himself! A great white birthday cake arrives at noon on August 1st, marking the end of the marathon.

The Moby-Dick Marathon is free with admission; however, space for overnight stay on the Charles W. Morgan is limited.

To reserve a space, contact Central Reservations at 860.572.5331

I always wanted to take part in this marathon as Moby Dick is one of my favorite books, but time has never been on my side.  It might be fun to at least wander over and watch a few chapters being read.

Good Luck, CT Bar Exam Takers

The Connecticut Bar Exam starts today in Hartford at the Expo Center.  For those who have never been there, imagine an immense almost barn-like structure with large fans blasting warm air from the outside and birds flying overhead in the rafters.  When I took the exam in 2005,  I think the temperature outside was close to 95 or so. 

I survived.  I passed.  I even wrote an essay where I couldn't even identify the legal topic that was covered.

Today and tomorrow may suck, but believe me, Friday will feel like Christmas day.

Under the Weather

There's a mean stomach bug going around and I seem to have gotten it.  After a night of little sleep, no serious blog postings today.

If you need your fix, check out the ABA's Blawg Directory. 

Art as a Tax Deduction

Collectors of fine art used to be able to "donate" paintings, sculptures, etc to museums and take advantage so-called "fractional gifting"- a method to avoid capital gains tax.  From what I gather from this WSJ article (subscription possible required), owners of fine artworks could loan out the pieces to a museum for a partial year, take a deduction as part of the reduction in value of the art by the virtue of it being in the possession of the museum, and continue to do so over time until the value was exhausted.

Not so anymore.  The article states that, in light of changes made in 2006 as part of a pension-reform law, the IRS now looks at the value of the painting at the time of the first gift.

The article illustrates the before and after effects as follows:

Here's how it worked: The donor would take a deduction based on the first contributed stake -- say, $4,000 for donating a third of a $12,000 painting. If the collector donated another one-third stake later, and the $12,000 painting had appreciated to $30,000, the next deduction would be $10,000. The donor could continue to take advantage of this until he gave away the entire interest in the artwork, and he could take as many years as he wished to do so.

.....

Today, it doesn't matter if that $12,000 canvas leaps in market value to $30,000; art contributors can't take ever-larger deductions if the donated artwork continues to rise in value. As far as the Internal Revenue Service is concerned, for deduction purposes, the value remains frozen at $12,000, the value at the time of the initial gift. Worse for donors, if the artwork happens to depreciate, later calculations are based on that lesser value.

Additionally, art givers now have only 10 years -- or until the donor dies, whichever comes first -- to hand the work over to a museum for good. Otherwise, the IRS recoups a portion of the deduction, plus interest and penalties.

The downside to all of this?  Donations to museums are down and curators are complaining to their congressional representatives.

The article further delves into other methods of tax planning for artwork:  charitable remainder trusts and donor-advised funds.

Myself?  I'm keeping my "Dogs Playing Poker" print on my office wall.

NYT: Long-Term Care Insurance

I previously blogged on how you could preserve assets to pass on to you kids.  One of the recommendations I had was Long-Term Care Insurance as it was a means to shift the risk in your favor in the face of extended late-in-life full time nursing care.  I fully admit that a) I don't sell or know insurance, and b) I've never had a client in the position to consider such insurance.  I've mentioned it to my parents, but I think the boomers (my parents being a sort of post-boom: too young for Elvis, too old for the Beatles) don't really have any concept of what long-term care insurance is or what risks it possibly mitigates.

Well, I'm learning.  That's my job.  And I pass my learning onto you.

The New York Times has a whole host of blogs; one being The New Old Age which examines the issues of aging and being a senior in today's world.  It hosted a Q&A on long-term care insurance and posted some great answers here and here.

The consensus seems to be:  if you can afford the premiums, begin coverage in your mid-50s to mid-60s.

How to Choose a Guardian for your Children

Of all of the decisions a parent must make when finalizing their estate planning documents, I think choosing a guardian is the most difficult.  For us married folk, we naturally want to give all of our property to our spouses and then to our kids in equal amounts.  Our executors (those who represent the estate in probate) are a relatively simple choice (spouses or a close family member who is deemed responsible or able to handle that sometimes difficult task).  But choosing a guardian is more of a personal and emotional choice than anything else.  Do you choose a sibling or a family friend?  Will a sibling be upset if I don't choose them?

Leanna Hamill  of the Mass. Estate Planning and Elder Law Blog and Sabrina Winters of the North Carolina Estate Planning Information Blog have both posted their thoughts on choosing guardians.

Both authors have great points on the decision:  lifestyle of the guardian, the guardian's job, whether your kids like these people.  The common theme, which I also share when advising my clients, is to choose based on what would be the best for the children.  Unlike choosing a best-man or bridesmaid, their is no "protocol" you sometimes have to follow in order not to put someone's nose out of joint. 

You are allowed to go outside of your immediate family on this one and absolutely do so if you don't feel your child's interests would be best served by such a choice.

25 Greatest Legal Movies

Robert Ambrogi has a posting over at Legal Blog Watch on the 25 Greatest Legal Movies as determined by the ABA.  The list has all of the usual suspects:  To Kill a Mockingbird, 12 Angry Men, Philadelphia, The Paper Chase, even Chicago.

I like a lot of the list, though I haven't seen them all.  Perhaps its time to update my Netflix queue! 

My top 3, if I had to choose my own, would be:

1) To Kill a Mockingbird: Gregory Peck's Atticus Finch was No. 1  on the American Film Institute's Top 100 Movie Heros list...for good reason.

2) The Verdict:  Paul Newman lost out to Ben Kingsley for Best Actor.  I haven't seen Gandhi; but I think that's a travesty considering how great Newman was.

3) My Cousin Vinny:  As funny as this sounded at the time (and it still does), one of my law school professors suggested watching this movie as a primer on how to introduce evidence at trial.   I saw it on TNT last week and it still endures as a darn funny flick.

Article: Crunch Time Coming For Probate Courts

My colleague Attorney Matthew Berger sent along this article from The Connecticut Law Tribune in one of his email updates.

Interesting reading for those following the drama in the wake of last week's resignation by the Court Administrator.  According to the article, "[a] Probate Assembly meeting on Aug. 12 will feature consideration of some plans for righting the ship. All plans must be submitted to Shelton Probate Judge Fred J. Anthony, the assembly's president, by July 29."   

Our Pets are Property

Last week I blogged about the varying ways we can provide for our pets in our estate plans.  One of the reasons why you cannot bequest items or money to your pet is because, by tradition (legal anyways), pets are considered personal property.  Because property cannot own property, pets cannot legally be beneficiaries under a will or a trust.  The next time you're perusing the pet aisle at Stop and Shop and see a nice present for your cat, remember, perhaps you're only establishing a bailee/bailor relationship...but that's a subject for another time.

Uniform Trust Code section 408, which has been adopted by 14 states, provides

Trust For Care of An Animal:

Unif. Trust Code § 408 (amended 2003). 

(a) A trust may be created to provide for the care of an animal alive during the settlor’s lifetime. The trust terminates upon the death of the animal or, if the trust was created to provide for the care of more than one animal alive during the settlor’s lifetime, upon the death of the last surviving animal.

(b) A trust authorized by this section may be enforced by a person appointed in the terms of the trust or, if no person is so appointed, by a person appointed by the court. A person having an interest in the welfare of the animal may request the court to appoint a person to enforce the trust or to remove a person appointed.

(c) Property of a trust authorized by this section may be applied only to its intended use, except to the extent the court determines that the value of the trust property exceeds the amount required for the intended use. Except as otherwise provided in the terms of the trust, property not required for the intended use must be distributed to the settlor, if then living, otherwise to the settlor’s successors in interest.

Similarly, some states have enacted Uniform Probate Code Section 2-907 which allows for honorary pet trusts.  11 states have adopted that provision.

Until Connecticut law changes, take this article to heart, pet lovers.  Since Connecticut has no animal custody statute, a civil action known as replevin (action to recover personal property) was required to get custody of a pet from a former paramour.

Fishing Friday- 7.18.08

Looks to be another hot weekend with possibilities of afternoon storms.   No fish last weekend, but can't say I tried that hard.  At some point, I may have to temporarily put down the saltwater gear and go after some trout.  I fear that waterflows may be low as we haven't had rain in over two weeks.  The best freshwater fishing reports I've found are put out by the DEP and can be found weekly here.

For the saltwater angler, here's a fishing report from The Day.  Sounds like there's some big stripers out there beyond Fisher's Island if you have the boat to get you there.  I've seen some sizable fish caught off Clubhouse Point/Groton Long Point and heard good reports from Ram Island Reef just off the lower Mystic River.

No blogging of river access this week as promised.  Instead, I present to you, Connecticut's law on seaweed property rights, as blogged by my friend and colleague, Ryan McKeen.