ÿWPCC' Ó‡(!?ä1Öôü[*È6U÷¹Qã|üð¾ÊŠUø ¢Åå61 ÝÅþØ”15òÖ±î$¹ïaMàÉN (å]@‚öÌûóI×g(Pr³-$d£Ý¤ñ5ÙŒ”´m« c.þ~C‰#‡»ÔΡÑa¨nfEÊZ”©›k‚q€mÏ‹‰Ög;Û×OŸBÈì(sl¯«|λe®¹/ëË»‘áèJµ•S6Jnó' ¼Jâ€8hßLžìeÑ–´ÖPÍÅ'õUÝÏV4âkõ¨ÊîY§0—gAäm×~ʆ! 2X@ŠzáN!ëÈ–x¾S GuÓ¹ŸÏ²ÐJ ÃuUýkѸ õPÜ€ r±ó¯/oa‡Ê’ê Kqû©^ÔmÜѬA¡ä!­iÔp_}Ó>êh6‡ŒŸn”<ÿ/©Ôs&ð¿V¬ÎÏŸ¬\¶†,’Ö†?Ê«_)âæ›$hÙÉ"çXÙËU£W݃îA©)sÕOØÃ–»†%k4Ià‚¦RšË¨¸eñKæTy‡:Kóú¦1n‹‘öw®¼3)#¥¹Þ;Lö@ßie**†avPbGÕúb#~ÒÆïP2‰öà6¡p 4î‰~˜ Àþ💤ÑUÕKŽÓˆ-Џ–X˜‚زщ¬O -U%:v %°Ú¶ 0d 0fô 0`Z 0hº 0b" 0Ò„ 0ÕV 0Ø+ 0Ø 0ØÛ 0Ò³ 0z… 0Òÿ 0ÒÑ 0Ý£ 0Ý€ 0ç] 0RD 0Z–UBðUB2 D+tÆŸ 0e 0=ò AM/////|n[Œ 0rç$#!Y%Nz&U N|&^ Ê&w@Ö&4'*' m,'<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTô' Î STATUTORY PROBATE COURTS 2 *Glenn M. Karisch*0Glenn M. Karisch .   h~~ÿÿ:Default ParaDefault Paragraph FontÔ€XXXÔÔO€<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTOÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ€ôôôÔÔO€<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTOÔT‰~ ÿÿ:endnote textendnote textÓ  ÓÔ€XXXÔÔO€<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTOÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ€ôôôÔÔO€<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTOÔÓ  Ó^ÿÿ:endnote refeendnote referenceÔ€XXXÔÔO€<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTOÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔòòóóÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ€ôôôÔÔO€<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTOÔV‰~ ÿÿ:footnote texfootnote textÓ  ÓÔ€XXXÔÔO€<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTOÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ€ôôôÔÔO€<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTOÔÓ  Ó`ÿÿ:footnote reffootnote referenceÔ€XXXÔÔO€<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTOÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔòòóóÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ€ôôôÔÔO€<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTOÔ8;T ÿÿ,toc 1toc 1Ó  ÓÓXX°Ð (#ÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ>4°X°` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#>ÓÓ  Ó8>T ÿÿ,toc 2toc 2Ó  ÓÓXX°Ð (#ÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ>4°X°` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#>ÓÓ  Ó8AT ÿÿ,toc 3toc 3Ó  ÓÓ XX°` Ð (# ÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ>4°X°` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#>ÓÓ  Ó8AT ÿÿ,toc 4toc 4Ó  ÓÓ XX°` ¸ Ð (# ÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ>4°X°` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#>ÓÓ  Ó8AT ÿÿ,toc 5toc 5Ó  ÓÓ XX°¸ Ð (# ÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ>4°X°` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#>ÓÓ  Ó8;T ÿÿ,toc 6toc 6Ó  ÓÓXX°Ð (#ÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ>4°X°` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#>ÓÓ  Ó8! ÿÿ,toc 7toc 7Ó  ÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  Ó8;T ÿÿ,toc 8toc 8Ó  ÓÓXX°Ð (#ÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ>4°X°` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#>ÓÓ  Ó8;T ÿÿ,toc 9toc 9Ó  ÓÓXX°Ð (#ÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ>4°X°` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#>ÓÓ  Ó@>T ÿÿ0index 1index 1Ó  ÓÓXX°Ð (#ÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ>4°X°` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#>ÓÓ  Ó@>T ÿÿ0index 2index 2Ó  ÓÓXX°Ð (#ÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ>4°X°` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#>ÓÓ  ÓP8T ÿÿ8toa headingtoa headingÓ  ÓÓ XXÐ (#ÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ>4°X°` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#>ÓÓ  Ó@‰~ ÿÿ0captioncaptionÓ  ÓÔ€XXXÔÔO€<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTOÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ€ôôôÔÔO€<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTOÔÓ  Ó^~~ÿÿ:_Equation Ca_Equation CaptionÔ€XXXÔÔO€<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTOÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ€ôôôÔÔO€<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTOÔô\  `*Times New RomanTTô\  `*Times New RomanTT'ÈÈÈÈdxd Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(e2p“$££Ý ƒ$Ð!ÝÔ€'ô™õõôÔÔ€'Xf¢ Xõ'ô™ÔÓ  ÓÝ  Ý(ÿÿ$’’Ú  ÚÚ  ÚA<< cÿÿ3|x «<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTôôdþ6X@ÉDQô@<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTXXxþ6X@ÉDQX@ô\  `*Times New RomanTTîîdô\  PŽ6QîPô\  `*Times New RomanTT&&Jô\  PŽ6Q&Pô\  `*Times New RomanTT6ô\  PŽ6QPô\  `*Times New RomanTTÄ Ä Oô\  PŽ6QÄ Pô\  `*Times New RomanTTôôCô\  PŽ6QôP<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTTT&&nþ6X@ÉDQ&@ô\  `*Times New RomanTTXXPô\  PŽ6QXPô\  `*Times New RomanTTÜÜÉô\  PŽ6QÜP<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTTTÜÜ,þ6X@ÉDQÜ@(JÐ$¡¡Ô€'ô™õõôÔÔ€'Xf¢ Xõ'ô™ÔÓ  Ó˜HP LaserJet 6P/6MP - EnhancedÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0'©Ef Z‹6Times New Roman Regular9]%¬ ùúûUüDýUþDÿ[Àgd=G%ÿk„ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀÝ ƒ$Ð!ÝÔ€'ô™õõôÔÔ€'Xf¢ Xõ'ô™ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ€'îSìî X'Xf¢ÔÔ  ÔññÑ8€©Xõd¾X Xdæ8ÑññññÑ  ÑññSTATUTORYÔ_Ô€PROBATE€COURTSÐ ° ÐÔ€'&ro%î'îSìÔSTATE€OF€TEXASÐ Ð  ÐÌÔ€'Fˆ%'&roÔÔ€Fˆ'FˆÔò òññÔ‡ô™õFˆÔññGuy€Herman,€Presiding€Statutory€Probate€Judgeó óÔ€ô™õõô™ÔÐ tÄ ÐÓ  ÓÔ€ô™õõô™Ôñÿñò òñÿñP.O.€Box€1748,€Room€217Ð 4„ Ѐñÿñò òñÿñAustin,€Texas€ñÿñó óñÿñ78767Ì€(512)€473„9258ÌFax:€(512)€708„4418ññÔ#†Fˆõô™Ï#Ôñññÿñó óñÿñÐ t Ä ÐÌÓ  ÓÔ€Xf¢ XFˆÔÔ€Xf¢ X XXf¢ÔÌÌJuly€27,€1998ÌÌÔ_ÔKaLynÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔLaneyÔ_ÔÌState€Bar€of€TexasÌGovernmental€Relations€DepartmentÌÌRe:à0  àReal€Estate€Probate€and€Trust€Law€Section's€1999€Legislative€AgendaÐþN(#(# ÐÌDear€Ms.€Ô_ÔLaneyÔ_Ô:ÌÌà  àAs€expected,€our€state's€statutory€probate€courts€have€many€common€areas€of€interest€withÏthe€Real€Estate,€Probate€and€Trust€Law€Section€of€the€State€Bar.€As€Presiding€Judge€of€theÏStatutory€Probate€Judges€of€Texas,€I€appreciate€the€opportunity€to€express€my€and€my€colleagues'Ïthoughts€on€the€Section's€proposed€1999€legislation.€€I€must€apologize€for€my€comments€notÏbeing€submitted€earlier€in€the€process,€but€the€Section's€draft€proposals€were€not€submitted€to€meÏuntil€June€26,€1998.€€I€then€had€to€send€the€draft€proposals€to€the€statutory€probate€judges€forÏtheir€comments.€€None€of€us€judges€have€seen€the€final€versions€of€these€proposals;€therefore€ourÏcomments€are€to€the€drafts€enclosed€as€an€attachment.ÌÌÔ€XŒmX XXf¢Ôò òððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ89A€Contents€of€Application€for€Probate€of€Will€as€Muniment€of€TitleÐ ¬ü ÐÔ€XŒmX XXf¢ÔððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ89B€Proof€Required€for€Probate€of€a€Will€as€a€Muniment€of€Titleó óÐ ¢ò ÐÌStatutory€probate€judges€from€Ô_ÔBexarÔ_Ô,€Dallas,€E1€Paso,€Harris,€Tarrant,€and€Travis€Counties€haveÏindicated€their€strong€opposition€to€these€two€proposals.€The€current€versions€of€these€twoÏsections€were€enacted€during€the€last€legislative€session€as€part€of€a€compromise€package€theÏstatutory€probate€judges€had€with€State€Representative€Ô_ÔSenfroniaÔ_Ô€Thompson€regarding€theÏprobating€of€smaller€estates.€€Representative€Thompson,€Chair€of€the€House€Judicial€AffairsÏCommittee,€has€always€been€concerned€with€the€costs€of€probate€to€families€of€meager€financialÏmeans.€€Some€years€ago,€she€sponsored€legislation€commonly€known€as€"informal€probate"€thatÏwas€enacted€into€law.€€"Informal€probate"€was€an€attempt€to€address€the€high€cost€of€probate€byÏcreating€a€mechanism€for€a€layperson€to€probate€a€smaller€estateòò€pro€se.€óóIn€actuality,€"informalÐ ®(þ#) Ðprobate"€was€complicated€and€expensive€as€it€often€required€the€aid€of€a€lawyer.€It€was€also€aÏburden€on€the€courts€and€the€county€clerks€as€Ô_ÔlaypersonsÔ_Ô€using€"informal€probate"€wantedÏguidance€from€the€courts€and€the€clerks'€offices€in€the€art€of€"informal€probate".€The€statutoryÏprobate€judges,€being€well€aware€of€the€cost€concerns€many€people€have€with€probate,€workedÏwith€Representative€Thompson€to€find€an€alternative€that€would€address€her€concerns.€The€resultÐ ,-|(. Ðwas€legislation€in€which€Representative€Thompson€would€agree€to€repeal€her€"informal€probate"Ïif€the€statutory€probate€judges€would€support€new€legislation€that,€besides€other€changes,€addedÏtwo€new€muniment€of€title€sections€to€the€Probate€Code.€€One€of€these€was€an€applicationÏrequirement€section€and€the€other€was€a€proof€section.€€The€result€was€two€new€sections€in€theÏProbate€Code€that€would€allow€a€layperson€better€to€understand€a€common€method€of€probating€aÏwill€that€formerly€was€only€mentioned€in€passing€in€the€Code.€The€application€provisions€cameÏfrom€a€suggested€form€written€by€the€State€Bar.€The€proof€provision€tracked€State€Bar€practiceÏforms€as€well.€Obviously,€they€promulgated€these€forms€with€the€general€situation€in€mind€andÏcould€not€address€every€conceivable€circumstance.€€The€Legislative€Council€drafted€theseÏsections€as€general€application€and€proof€provisions.€€The€application€provision€contained€inÏÔ€XŒmX XXf¢ÔððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ89A€addresses€those€situations€where€one€cannot€meet€the€general€pleading€requirement€byÐ Æ   Ðinserting€a€provision€that€allows€deviation€from€the€general€pleading€rules€while€the€proofÏprovision€in€Ô€XŒmX XXf¢ÔððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ89B€is€designated€as€a€general€proof€provision.€€Clearly,€the€author€of€thisÐ  ð  Ðlegislation€recognized€that€there€would€be€times€when€the€specific€circumstances€might€overrideÏthe€general€situation.€€Certain€probate€lawyers€raised€the€issues€underlying€the€Section'sÏproposals€regarding€muniments€of€titles€with€members€of€the€House€Judicial€Affairs€CommitteeÏlast€session.€€The€Committee€rejected€the€concerns€as€unfounded.€€The€State€Bar€should€not€injectÏitself€into€this€matter€as€it€interferes€with€a€legislative€compromise€that€the€statutory€probateÏjudges€reached€with€a€legislator.ÌÌEven€if€one€believes€it€appropriate€for€one€group€not€party€to€a€compromise€to€change€the€resultÏlater,€the€Section€does€not€have€a€good€policy€argument€for€their€suggested€change.€€TheseÏproposals€would€amend€the€muniment€of€title€pleading€and€proof€provisions€to€allow€munimentsÏfor€reasons€other€than€allowed€under€current€law.€€The€statutory€probate€courts,€and€most€probateÏcourts€we€are€aware€of,€generally€limit€their€admission€of€wills€into€probate€as€muniments€of€titleÏto€those€estates€not€having€any€debts€other€than€those€secured€by€liens€on€real€estate,€unless€theÏdebts€are€barred€by€limitations€or€meets€the€requirements€under€Ô€XŒmX XXf¢ÔÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔðð139€of€the€Probate€Code.€€TheseÐ B’ Ðlatter€two€situations€and€the€circumstance€when€a€creditor€has€agreed€to€a€transfer€of€theÏdecedent's€debt€obligations€to€another€are€the€only€reasons€that€come€to€mind€for€a€probate€courtÏto€find€in€its€muniment€order€that€there€is€a€reason€of€no€necessity€of€administration€other€thanÏthere€are€no€debts€or€the€only€debts€are€those€secured€by€liens€on€real€estate.€€This€reference€in€theÏcourt€order€provision€of€Ô€XŒmX XXf¢ÔñMñ?ñMññNñððñNñÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ89C€allowing€the€probate€court€to€admit€into€a€probate€as€muniment€ofÐ À Ðtitle€when€the€court€"for€other€good€reason€finds€that€there€is€no€necessity€for€administration"Ïdoes€not€need€to€be€brought€into€the€pleading€and€proof€sections€for€muniments€for€manyÏreasons.ÌÌFirst,€many€would€construe€such€a€change€as€a€change€in€the€current€law€and€would€use€theÏamendment€to€argue€that€the€change€was€meant€to€add€to€the€existing€reasons€set€out€above€forÏthe€probating€of€a€will€as€a€muniment.€ñOñ€ñOñRest€assured,€the€Section's€proposed€amendments€wouldÏmost€likely€open€the€floodgates€to€additional€muniment€applications,€only€limited€by€what€anÏattorney's€orñPñ€añPñ€òòñQñañQñpro€se's€óóimagination€could€construe€as€another€reason€that€no€administration€isÐ ä'4#' Ðnecessary.€ñRñ€ñRñSecond,€even€if€not€construed€as€a€change€in€existing€law,€the€judges€are€concernedÏthat€the€proposals€will€bring€attention€to€what€is€already€the€law,€i.e.,€there€are€a€few€limitedÏsituations€other€than€no€debts€or€debts€secured€by€liens€in€which€a€court,€in€its€discretion,€mightÏexercise€its€authority€by€finding€no€necessity€for€an€administration€when€admitting€a€will.€ñSñ€ñSñInÏeither€event,€the€statutory€probate€judges€foresee€these€proposals€as€requiring€additional,Ïunnecessary€court€time€examining€"other€reasons"€that€will€be€suggested€and€the€necessaryñTñÐ H-˜(- Ðdiscussions€that€will€follow€when€the€"other€reason€for€no€administration"€is€rejected€by€theÏcourt.ÌÌOverall,€we€judges€believe€that€these€proposals€result€from€a€misconception€about€the€newÏmuniment€pleading€and€proof€provisions.€€Certain€attorneys€apparently€believe€that€the€newÏmuniment€statutes€are€unclear€and€do€not€adequately€address€the€"multitude"€of€instances€whereÏno€administration€is€necessary.€€None€of€the€statutory€probate€judges€have€informed€me€of€anyÏproblems€resulting€from€last€session's€muniment€legislation.€€Because€of€the€potential€problemsÏthe€Section's€proposed€legislation€would€create€and€the€lack€of€a€"problem"€needing€correction,Ïthe€statutory€probate€judges€are€resistant€to€further€tinkering€with€the€statute€to€appease€a€smallÏminority€of€practitioners€who€think€there€is€a€problem.ÌÌOn€another€note,€one€change€proposed€to€the€pleading€requirements€of€Ô€XŒmX XXf¢ÔððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ89A€would€also€removeÐ xÈ  Ðthe€requirement€of€listing€the€social€security€number€of€the€applicant€and€the€decedent€in€theÏapplication€for€muniment€of€title.€Although€the€statutory€probate€judges€were€not€opposed€toÏremoving€this€requirement€from€the€applications€for€letters€testamentary€during€the€last€session,Ïthe€judges€now€have€concerns€about€removing€the€requirement€from€the€muniment€provisions.ÏSome€judges€have€heard€complaints€from€county€clerks€throughout€the€state€regarding€anÏunforeseen€side€effect€of€the€removal€of€decedent€social€security€numbers€from€lettersÏtestamentary.€€Apparently,€the€listing€of€the€decedent's€social€security€number€was€a€useful€toolÏfor€county€clerks€in€updating€voter€registration€records.€€The€social€security€numbers€wereÏcompared€against€similar€names€in€the€voting€records€to€determine€which€names€should€beÏremoved€from€the€list.€€Many€county€clerks€have€commented€directly€to€me€that€they€do€not€wishÏto€see€this€tool€further€eliminated€by€removing€the€requirement€in€muniments€or€would€like€aÏsolution€to€the€problem€created€by€the€previous€legislative€deletion€of€the€requirement€to€pleadÏsocial€security€numbers.ÌÌÔ€XŒmX XXf¢Ôò òððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ270€Liability€of€Homestead€for€Debtsó óÐ P ÐÓ  ÓÌThe€Statutory€Probate€Judges€agree€that€this€is€appropriate€legislation€considering€the€recentÏconstitutional€amendment€regarding€home€equity€loans.ÌÌÓ  ÓÔ€XŒmX XXf¢Ôò òððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ149D€(New)€Final€Account€of€an€Independent€ExecutorÐ Ž!Þ  Ðó óÌStatutory€Probate€Judges€from€each€county€with€statutory€probate€courts€are€strongly€opposed€toÏthis€proposal€for€several€reasons.ñdñ€ñdñ€First,€this€proposed€legislation€would€eliminate€the€currentÏlimitations€period€(except€in€cases€of€fraud)€governing€the€actions€of€Independent€Executors€byÏallowing€Independent€Executors€to€terminate€their€liability€by€having€court€ratification€of€theÏpropriety€of€their€actions€during€the€administrations€by€the€filing€of€a€Final€Account.€ñeñ€ñeñWe€judgesÏdo€not€believe€it€appropriate€to€shorten€the€current€limitations€period€for€breach€of€fiduciary€duty,Ïespecially€when€the€court„appointed€fiduciary€is€operating€without€supervision€by€the€appointingÏcourt.€ñfñ€ñfñIndependent€Administrations€are€currently€conducted€under€the€Texas€Probate€Code€withÏno€direct€court€supervision.€Under€proposed€new€Ô€XŒmX XXf¢Ôñgñððñgññhñ?ñhñÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔñhñ€ñhñ149D,€an€Independent€Executor€is€allowed€aÐ š*ê%* Ðdischarge€of€liability€for€all€the€Independent€Executor's€actions,€even€though€the€court€had€noÏsupervisory€control€during€the€administration.€ñiñ€ñiñWe€know€of€no€policy€reason€that€would€justifyÏshortening€the€limitations€period.ñmñÐ Z-ª(- ЇSecond,€the€provision€does€not€even€allow€the€Court€òòto€questionóó€the€proposed€final€account€if€noÐ ° Ðinterested€person€contests€the€application€for€final€account.€€The€proposal€provides€that€the€courtÏ"shall€enter€an€order€approving€such€final€account€and€discharging€the€independent€personalÏrepresentative€from€any€or€all€liability€.€.€.€without€review€or€audit€of€such€account"€when€noÏinterested€person€contest€the€final€account.€€Only€if€an€objection€is€filed€will€the€court€conduct€aÏhearing€to€examine€the€final€account.€€Both€alternatives€are€highly€undesirable.€€If€no€objectionÏwere€filed,€the€Court€would€be€forced€to€approve€a€final€account€regardless€of€how€inaccurate€orÏimproper€the€account€appeared,€releasing€the€personal€representative€from€liability€and€denyingÏinterested€persons€the€standard€statute€of€limitations€often€needed€to€determine€whether€anÏIndependent€Executor's€actions€should€be€challenged.€€If€an€objection€was€filed,€the€Court€wouldÏneed€to€conduct€a€full€scale€audit€of€an€estate's€numerous€financial€activities€during€a€limited€timeÏframe.€€In€a€dependent€administration€or€a€guardianship,€the€court€is€conducting€its€financialÏaudits€on€an€annual€basis€and€reviews€actions€of€the€dependent€administrator€and€guardians€as€theÏaction€is€taken.€€Thus,€the€final€account€of€the€dependent€administrator€or€guardian€is€made€easyÏby€the€earlier€supervision€of€the€court.€It€is€quite€different€with€a€unsupervised€administration.ÏActions€taken€over€a€lengthy€period€of€time€that€are€unsupervised€by€the€court€would€be€difficultÏto€audit.€€The€more€complicated€the€estate,€the€more€detailed€and€time„consuming€the€court'sÏreview€would€need€to€be.ÌÌFinally,€the€state's€court€system€could€easily€be€burdened€by€the€addition€of€applications€filedÏunder€the€proposed€provision€by€fiduciaries€seeking€to€absolve€themselves€and€by€objectionsÏfiled€in€response€by€beneficiaries€simply€to€toll€the€application€of€the€statute€while€theÏbeneficiaries€proceed€with€discovery.€€Such€an€additional€workload€demand€could€overwhelm€allÏcounties,€and€would€be€especially€troublesome€to€smaller€counties€that€do€not€have€statutoryÏprobate€courts€or€that€much€familiarity€with€complicated€auditing€procedures.€€The€StatutoryÏProbate€Courts€would€probably€need€additional€personnel€merely€to€comply€with€the€auditingÏprovisions€of€proposed€ððÔ€XŒmX XXf¢ÔÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ149D.€€All€courts€would€also€undoubtedly€have€to€spend€additional€timeÐ  \ Ðto€ensure€that€the€Independent€Executor€complied€with€proper€notice€to€all€beneficiaries.ÌÌOverall,€the€proposed€legislation€appears€to€allow€an€Independent€Executor€and€his€or€herÏattorney€the€best€of€both€worlds€to€the€detriment€of€beneficiaries€and€creditors.€€MostÏpractitioners€and€judges€believe€that€Texas'€system€of€independent€administration€to€be€anÏmarked€advancement€over€the€probate€systems€of€other€states.€€Its€basic€underpinning€is€the€lackÏof€court€involvement€in€the€affairs€of€administration€and€this€non„court€intervention€conceptÏextends€over€a€period€of€time.€€There€are€several€statutory€prohibitions€against€beneficiaries€orÏcreditors€invoking€the€protections€of€the€court€system€until€a€considerable€period€of€time€hasÏpassed.€€It€does€not€seem€fair€to€allow€an€Independent€Executor€to€operate€outside€the€supervisionÏof€the€court€for€long€periods€of€time€and€then€to€invoke€the€court's€protections€(and€blessings)Ïwhenever€the€fiduciary€finds€it€convenient.€€Under€the€proposed€statute,€an€Independent€ExecutorÏcould€flaunt€the€provisions€of€the€probate€code,€and€escape€responsibility€if€no€one€complainedÏwithin€90€days€of€the€filing€of€the€final€account.ÌÌÔ€XŒmX XXf¢Ôò òððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ378B€Allocation€of€Income€and€Expended€During€Administration€of€Decedent's€Estate€ó óÐ l*¼%* ÐÌThe€Statutory€Probate€Judges€have€no€position€on€this€proposal,€but€only€wonder€why€we€are€justÏfiguring€out€that€Texans€have€been€paying€more€in€taxes€under€the€old€provision.€€€It€should€beÔ_ÔÐ .-~(- Ðnoted€that€a€reduction€in€federal€estate€taxes€paid€will€probably€result€in€a€reduction€of€stateÏestate€taxes€paid.ÌÌÓ  ÓÔ€XŒmX XXf¢Ôò òððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ42.0021€Additional€Exemption€for€Retirement€Planó óÐ b² ÐÌThe€Statutory€Probate€Judges€have€no€position€on€this€proposal.ÌÌÓ  Óò òðð221A€(New)€Resignation€of€Resident€AgentÐ  Z ÐÔ€XŒmX XXf¢ÔððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ222€Removal€(of€non„resident€personal€representative€without€resident€agent)Ð ð @ ÐÔ€XŒmX XXf¢ÔððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ760A€(New)€Resignation€of€Resident€AgentÐ æ 6  ÐÔ€XŒmX XXf¢ÔððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ761€Removal€(of€non„resident€guardian€without€resident€agent)ó óÐ Ü ,  ÐÌThe€Statutory€Probate€Judges€are€not€opposed€to€these€proposals,€but€some€statutory€probateÏjudges€would€suggest€that€the€address€of€the€personal€representative€be€included€in€the€filedÏdesignations€of€successor€resident€agents€proposed€by€Ô€XŒmX XXf¢ÔÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔÔ€XŒmX XXf¢ÔððððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ221A€and€760A.Ð „Ô  ÐÌÔ€XŒmX XXf¢Ôò òððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ865€Power€to€Make€Tax„Motivated€Giftsó óÐ ^® ÐÌThe€Statutory€Probate€Judges€have€no€position€on€this€proposal,€but€certain€statutory€probateÏjudges€have€questioned€the€need€for€such€an€amendment.€€These€judges€believe€there€is€not€aÏproblem€needing€to€be€addressed,€as€only€a€very€limited€number€of€guardians€avail€themselves€ofÏthe€power€to€make€such€gifts.ÌÌÔ€XŒmX XXf¢Ôò òððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ867€Creation€of€Management€TrustÐ ¸ ÐÔ€XŒmX XXf¢ÔððÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ868A€Discharge€of€Guardian€of€Estate€and€Continuation€of€Trustó óÐ ®þ ÐÌStatutory€Probate€Judges€from€each€county€with€a€statutory€probate€court€are€opposed€to€theseÏproposals€as€they€would€potentially€allow€individuals€to€reach€a€person's€assets€without€dueÏprocess€of€law.€€State€interference€with€a€person's€property€under€whatever€guise€one€wishes€toÏinvoke€requires€notice€and€hearing.€€Our€state's€guardianship€laws€are€founded€around€thisÏpremise€and€the€provisions€allowing€courts€to€create€trusts€over€guardianship€property€underÏcertain€limited€circumstances€were€based€on€the€idea€that€the€due€process€concerns€of€removingÏproperty€rights€of€individuals€was€best€addressed€in€the€guardianship€creation€context.€€Having€aÏhearing€after€notice€to€the€proposed€ward€and€those€interested€in€the€proposed€ward,Ïrepresentation€of€the€proposed€ward€by€an€attorney,€and€a€heightened€burden€of€proof€wereÏthought€to€be€minimum€standards€of€due€process€that€an€individual€losing€his€liberty€and/orÏproperty€rights€was€entitled€to.€€The€court„created€management€trust€concept€was€acceptable€toÏsome€judges€under€the€belief€that€the€guardianship€creation€process€would€continue€before€theÏissue€of€management€trusts€would€arise.€€The€due€process€concerns€of€the€judges€would€beÏsatisfied€by€the€guardianship€laws€built„in€procedures.€€The€end€result€would€be€the€appointmentÏof€a€guardian€of€the€person€or€estate€who€would€owe€a€fiduciary€duty€to€the€ward€either€directlyÏas€guardian€of€the€estate€or€as€guardian€of€the€person.€€The€creation€of€a€management€trust€underÏthe€current€provisions€does€not€interfere€with€this€fiduciary€duty.€€It€places€a€fiduciary€duty€uponÏa€second€party,€the€trustee.€The€Section's€proposal€would€remove€the€fiduciary€duties€imposed€onÏthe€proponents€of€the€court„created€trust€and€place€them€solely€on€the€trustee.€€This€is€not€a€goodÏidea€because€has€the€potential€of€defrauding€creditors€and€it€removes€another€line€of€defenseÐ œ-ì(- Ðavailable€to€those€whose€property€rights€have€been€removed.ÌÌUnder€proposed€ðð867(a)(4),€any€interested€person€may€file€to€create€a€management€trust€for€aÏòòproposedóó€ward€(before€the€guardianship€is€created).€€The€order€that€creates€the€management€trustÐ b² Ðcan€then€be€used€to€receive€any€money€or€property€owed€to€the€ward.€€Under€the€proposedÏamendment,€a€practitioner€could€obtain€this€order€and€transfer€funds€into€the€management€trustÏwithout€ever€creating€a€guardianship,€thus€circumventing€the€desires€of€the€court€and€any€laterÏnamed€guardian€of€the€estate.€€Such€allowed€transfers€would€also€give€the€trustee€the€opportunityÏto€defraud€creditors€since€the€proposed€revisions€have€no€notice€provisions€for€creditors;€theÏsame€creditors€are€afforded€due€process€and€notice€under€the€current€statute€requiring€the€creationÏof€a€guardianship.ÌÌMany€statutory€probate€judges€are€also€opposed€to€the€proposed€868A€revisions€because€of€theÏlack€of€court€supervision€that€would€exist€after€a€guardian€was€discharged€under€the€proposal.ÏUnder€the€current€section,€a€guardian€of€the€estate€can€be€discharged,€but€only€when€there€isÏanother€court„appointed€fiduciary€available€to€monitor€the€trustee.€€If€there€is€no€guardian€of€theÏperson,€then€the€guardian€of€the€estate€remains€on€board€to€monitor€thee€trustee.€€Thus,€there€isÏsomeone€with€a€fiduciary€duty€to€the€person€whose€property€rights€have€been€interfered€with€byÏthe€state,€in€a€position€to€monitor€the€trustee€during€the€course€of€the€year.€€The€guardian€of€theÏperson€or€guardian€of€the€estate€will€maintain€ties€to€the€ward€and€keep€the€court€informedÏthrough€their€accountings€or€reports€of€the€person.€€Maintaining€their€fiduciary€position€is€not€tooÏmuch€to€ask€of€someone€who€wants€another's€property€to€be€managed€by€someone€else.€€TheÏstatutory€probate€judges€would€like€to€keep€this€safeguard€in€place.ÌÌò òðð869C€Jurisdiction€Over€Trust€Mattersó óÐ @ ÐÌÓ  ÓThe€Statutory€Probate€Judges€have€no€position€on€this€proposal€other€than€we€find€it€unnecessary€inÏlight€of€our€opposition€to€changes€in€the€existing€court„created€management€trust€laws.ÌÌÓ  ÓÔ€XŒmX XXf¢Ôò òñéñ?ñéññêñððñêñÔ€Xf¢ XXXŒmÔ745€Closing€Guardianship€of€the€Estateó óñëñÐ ¾ ÐñëñÌÓ  ÓThe€Statutory€Probate€Judges€are€not€opposed€to€this€provision€as€written€as€it€responds€to€anÏoversight€by€the€statutory€probate€judges€in€working€with€Representative€Thompson€in€making€theÏmanagement€of€smaller€estates€less€costly.ÌÌò òTRUST€CODE€PROPOSALSó óñìñÐ 2$‚# ÐñìñÌThe€Statutory€Probate€Judges€have€no€position€on€these€proposals.ÌÌÓ  Óò òFAMILY€CODE€PROPOSALS:€ñíñó óñíñCONVERSIONS€TO€COMMUNITYñíñó óñíññîñÐ Ê'#' ÐñîñÌThe€Statutory€Probate€Judges€have€no€position€on€these€proposals.€ñïñ€ñïñHowever,€many€of€theÏstatutory€probate€judges€question€the€practical€effect€of€creating€this€Ô_ÔsubchapterÔ_Ô.€ñðñ€ñðñAlthough€thereÏmay€be€some€equitable€justification€in€creating€such€a€statute€to€complement€current€family€codeÏstatutes€authorizing€reverse€conversions€of€community€property€to€separate€property,€someÏñññ0ññññòñsñòñtatutory€probate€judges€feel€this€current€proposal€needs€a€more€thorough€examination€as€to€theÐ .-~(- Ðeffects€of€the€proposal.€ñóñ€ñóñMany€believe€this€proposal€guarantees€litigation€in€both€probate€andÏfamily€law€courts.ñôñ€€ñôññõñ€ñõñIt€is€probable€that€such€conversions€would€be€challenged€in€the€probate€courtsÏon€many€of€the€same€grounds€used€to€challenge€the€probating€of€wills,€e.g.,€undue€influence,Ïduress,€capacity,€etc.ÌÌñöñà  àñöññ÷ñ€€€€ñ÷ñI€hope€the€statutory€probate€judges'€comments€will€be€of€some€use€to€you.€ñøñ€ñøñPlease€do€notñúñÏñúññùñÌÐ   d ÐÓÓñùñhesitate€to€contact€me€if€I€can€be€of€further€assistance€or€provide€further€clarification.ñûñÌÌñûññüñ€ñüñSincerely,ÌñýñÌ/s/ÌÌGuy€Herman,€Ô_ÔñýñÔ_ÔÔ_ÔñþñÌñþññùñÓÓñùñÔ_ÔÔ_Ôñþñà ` àñþñÔ_ÔÔ_Ôñþñà ` àñþñÔ_ÔÔ_Ôñþñ€ñþñÔ_ÔÔ_Ôñþñ€ñþñÔ_ÔÔ_Ôñþñ€ñþñÔ_ÔÔ_Ôñþñ€ñþñPresidingÔ_Ô€JudgeÌStatutory€Probate€Courts€of€TexasÌ