Estate Planning for Military Personnel

Pre-deployment preparations for Pennsylvania Army National Guard units, which were recently given notice for overseas posting, will involve Reservists' execution of personal & estate planning documents.

In this posting on the eve of the Memorial Day weekend, I provide some links to reliable online military resources about estate planning.

This Memorial Day occurs in the midst of announcements regarding continued deployments that will affect many service personnel and their families in Pennsylvania & other states.

On February 29, 2008, The Sentinel (Carlisle, PA) reported in an article entitled "Guard unit alerted for possible deployment", by Joseph Cress, as follows:

About 1,200 more Pennsylvania National Guard troops are being told they may go to Iraq within a year.

Members of the 28th Combat Aviation Brigade, headquartered at Fort Indiantown Gap in Annville, received an alert order a couple months ago, said Lt. Col. Chris Cleaver, a Guard spokesman.

The new call-ups are in addition to 4,000 Pennsylvania soldiers with the 56th Stryker Brigade who were told in October they could be sent to Iraq within a year.

Cleaver said this is only an alert order to step up preparation for possible mobilization. * * *

“Alert orders may never mature to mobilization orders,” Cleaver explained. He added the 28th brigade would likely leave in early 2009, a few months after the Stryker Brigade.

If both forces go, it would be the largest deployment of Pennsylvania National Guard troops into combat since World War II and the first time the entire 28th Brigade would deploy overseas as a whole unit, Cleaver said. Prior to this, elements of the 28th Brigade have deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. * * *

Issuing the alert order now gives 28th Brigade members ample time to work with family and employers to settle matters and prepare for possible deployment, Cleaver said. Guard counselors have already met with families to brief them on what to expect and what services are available. * * *

On May 20, 2008, the Pittsburgh Post-GazetteW. Pa. Guard brigade headed for Iraq -- Moves signal stable troop levels through next year", by Nancy A. Youssef, as follows:

The Defense Department yesterday announced that it will send seven combat brigades to Iraq by the end of the year, suggesting that the Pentagon is planning to maintain its troop levels in Iraq through next year.

The military also alerted four National Guard Army brigades, or roughly 14,000 troops, including one from Western Pennsylvania, to prepare for deployments to Iraq beginning next spring. * * *

The Washington, Pa.-based 2nd Infantry Brigade Combat Team of the 28th Infantry Division, which includes some 2,500 soldiers from Western Pennsylvania and Ohio, previously served in Iraq in a deployment that began in 2005.

The alert was issued this far in advance of their spring 2009 deployment to give the Guard members and their families time to plan. * * *

An essential part of pre-deployment preparation is estate planning.

NCO Matters, an Association of the United States Army, recommends an online "Estate Planning Tool Kit" (10/11/2002) that briefs service personnel about estate planning:

Estate planning produces a plan that may include some or all of these: a will, military testamentary instrument, a trust, life insurance, an advance medical directive, a health care power of attorney, designation of anatomical gifts, and other dispositive documents.

The Army Judge Advocate General's Corps' new Estate Planning Tool Kit for Military & Family Members covers basic tools and techniques many military members use to plan their estates.

That very comprehensive Toolkit reiterates, in its introduction, the basics of personal & estate planning:

Military legal assistance attorneys prepare thousands of wills every year for soldiers and their spouses. This document is usually the center piece of a member's estate plan.

Estate planning is an ongoing, continuous process of coordinating your legal and financial well being to acquire, accumulate, preserve, and dispose of your assets and wealth during your life and at your death.

A well-designed plan provides not only for transfer of your property on death, but also considers authorized benefits, the adequacy and flexibility of life insurance, the need for retirement income, and the contingencies of mental or physical disability.

Effective estate planning may amount to little more than preparing a simple will and reviewing your life insurance beneficiary designations, preparing a power of attorney, an advance medical directive, designating organ donation, or it may be a highly complex plan that includes trusts and other property transfer instruments. * * *

The Military Officers Association of America recognizes that very continuum in estate planning -- from simplicity to complexity -- and notes the effect upon a proper selection of professional advisors qualified to work on appropriate documents:

For basic needs, your installation JAG or legal services office (usually open to retirees in addition to Active Duty) is usually sufficient.

As you accumulate more assets and your situation becomes more complicated, you may need some additional estate planning tools.

Also, special circumstances such as divorce, remarriage, marriage to a non-US Spouse and children with special needs require legal documents specifically tailored to meet your new circumstances.

Additional estate planning tools include: a durable power of attorney; a revocable living trust; an irrevocable life insurance trust; a minor's trust; a special needs trust; and various types of charitable trusts.

These advanced estate planning documents may be outside the scope of the installation legal services office, so you may need to seek the help of a qualified private practice attorney. * * *

Operation Home Front, operated by the Office of the Lieutenant Governor of Illinois, provides generic explanations about various documents involved in military estate planning in its online article "Estate Planning Preparedness Information".

See also: "Estate planning: What you need to know", by Mathew B. Tully, posted by The Army Times.

For a checklist of matters to be considered generally, see: "Estate Planning Checklist -- 25 Things You Can Do To Get Your Estate in Order" (PDF, 3 pages), which addresses: Estate Planning; Insurance Planning; Organizing Financial Records; & Personal Planning.

A link on the website of Ft. Bragg suggests a "Will Preparation Worksheet", in the form of a questionnaire seeking specific data.

In his article posted by the American Bar Association entitled "Estate Planning for the Military" (PDF, 3 pages), Capt. Kevin P. Flood, JAGC, U.S.N.R., Ret., provides a primer for attorneys as to how estate planning for military personnel can differ from the same process for civilians.

Estate planning for members of the military often differs from the model used in a civilian practice. For one thing, the military client requesting a will or other estate-planning document may be much younger than the typical civilian client.

Due to the dangers associated with service, preventive law programs in the military encourage service members to have their affairs in order and to execute wills — more than 550,000 wills were prepared for active duty and reserve service members during the Desert Storm mobilizations.

Very often clients do not have much more that their $250,000 Service member’s Group Life Insurance Policy (SGLI) and other military benefits, and these should be reviewed and coordinated with the will or estate plan. * * *

He recognized that estate planning, which leads into an estate administration process, still relies heavily upon state law:

This article highlights only the areas of main concern in assisting a military member in estate planning, with the understanding that additional issues must be dealt with, such as taxation, probate costs, fiduciary selection, and the like.

Finally, for those more visually inclined, check out the PowerPoint presentation, also prepared by Capt. Kevin P. Flood, JAGC, U.S.N.R., Ret., entitled "Estate Planning for Military Personnel", again posted by the ABA.

"Jewish Law Day" in Philadelphia

On May 15, 2008, an article was posted by the Jewish Exponent entitled "Lawyer and Ethicist to Keynote Jewish Law Day", by Lynn B. Edelman, which highlighted the next Jewish Law Day activities to be held on June 4, 2008, in Philadelphia, featuring keynote speaker Rabbi Elliot N. Dorff.

Jewish Law Day in America appears to be distinctive to Philadelphia only, where that celebratory day has been held annually since 1982.

An announcement for a prior (19th Annual, held in 2001) recognition, noted the importance of Jewish law as a source for American law:

Over the past 4,000 years, the Jewish People have compiled a code of laws, ethics and morals that has served as the cornerstone of modern legal theory and practice throughout the world.

From individual human rights to community responsibility, Jewish law and the scholars who have interpreted it have inspired progressive developments in both Jewish and non-Jewish spheres.

In the United States, such fundamental documents as the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence draw upon the principles that Jews have handed down from generation to generation.

Jewish Law Day was created in 1982 by an ad hoc committee of lawyers and judges together with the Board of Rabbis of Greater Philadelphia in order to establish an annual celebration commemorating the monumental contribution of Jewish Law to the development of American jurisprudence.

The article noted the background of Jewish Law Day:

The Honorable Anne E. Lazarus, a judge on the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, Orphans Court Division, since 1991, explains the origin of Jewish Law Day as "a Jewish response to the annual Red Mass."

"The mass," she explained, "is a religious service celebrated annually in the Roman Catholic Church for judges, prosecutors, attorneys, law school professors, students and government officials on the Sunday before the first Monday in October when the Supreme Court convenes. Celebrants request guidance from God for all who seek justice."

Judge Lazarus was the first Chancellor of the Louis D. Brandeis Law Society, a group for Jewish lawyers and judges.

The society has co-sponsored Jewish Law Day with the Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia and the Vaad: The Board of Rabbis of Greater Philadelphia for the past 26 years. * * *

[The program] is traditionally held immediately prior to Shavuot, when God gave the Ten Commandments to the Jewish people, Lazarus explained. * * * [links added]

This year, the 26th Annual Jewish Law Day will be held on June 4, 2008 at 4:30 p.m. at the Jewish Community Services Building, 2100 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA.

The article noted the guest speaker's credentials and topic:

Rabbi Elliot Dorff, Ph.D., is the rector and professor of philosophy at American Jewish University.

Rabbi Dorff, who has directed the rabbinical and masters programs at AJU for 23 years, will speak on the contributions of Jewish law to Western jurisprudence, a topic taken from his new book, For the Love of God and People: A Philosophy of Jewish Law (Jewish Publication Society, 2007) [which will be available for purchase]. * * *

In his role as chair of the Conservative Movement's Committee on Jewish Law and Standards, he has produced papers that have shaped the movement's stance on such controversial topics as infertility treatments and end-of-life issues. His rabbinic letters on human sexuality and on poverty have become the voice of the Conservative movement on those topics. * * * [links added]

A special aspect of the 26th Annual Jewish Law Day celebration will be the presentation of an honorary award to Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter.

The Jewish Law Day session in Philadelphia will be free of charge and open to the entire community. For lawyers, the program will qualify for one substantive hour of CLE credit.

If interested in attending, you may obtain more information by calling Rabbi David Gutterman, event co-chair (215-832-0865), or Adam Laver (215-569-1764). You can register here online.

I thank Judge Anne E. Lazarus, of the Orphans' Court, of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, PA, for providing this information to post.

Roles vs. Reality in "Right to Die"

The award-winning movie Million Dollar Baby (2004) aired as an AMC television premiere last weekend (May 17th & 18th). That movie deals with hard struggles and choices in living, right up to the end of life.

The network's promotional summary does not give away the ending.

Veteran boxing trainer Frankie Dunn (Clint Eastwood) has devoted his life to the ring but has precious little to show for it.

When Maggie Fitzgerald (Hilary Swank) enters Frankie's gym in search of a trainer, he regards her as a dubious prospect, and isn't afraid to tell her why: She's too old, she lacks experience and technique -- and she’s a woman.

But for Maggie, boxing is the one thing in life that gives her meaning, and she’s not giving it up.

But now, four years after the release on January 28, 2004, of Million Dollar Baby, it is no secret that the plot involves an end-of-life decision affecting one of its central characters who has struggled through life.

Most folks consider that one's "right to die" is a personal issue, and many desire the ability to expedite an end-of-life decision. Still, only half of us have stated our philosophy or decisions in written health care directives, despite our ability under state law to do so.

Health care directive or "living will" statutes in every state (except Oregon), however, do not create -- either in a patient or in an incapacitated patient's designated surrogate -- the ability to make a decision consistent with a "right to die", or authorize "physician-assisted suicide" consistent with such a desire & decision.

This limitation of the law lies at the heart of the movie's climatic crisis of conscience and compassion.

Consider, in this context, the results of a survey released on May 15, 2008, described in an article entitled "Adults Surveyed Favor Doctor-Assisted Suicide", posted by Eldr Magazine (also available in a press release posted by PR Wire here).

ELDR magazine and ELDR.com today released the results of a national survey on the "right to die" issue or what some call "physician-assisted suicide."

It reveals that over 80% of adults say the right to die is a personal decision, not that of government or religion; that two-thirds want physician-assisted right to die legal, as in Oregon; that half of U.S adults could eventually face a right to die caretaker role for a loved one; and that only half of adults over 60 have a living will or health care directive. * * *

The article explained why and how the survey was undertaken.

The survey is in conjunction with ELDR's Summer issue cover article, "Perfect Ending," which tells the story and reflections of a physician who had clandestinely given patients, who were terminally ill and in great physical pain, the means to end their lives. The physician profiled is not identified.

"A painful or prolonged death is something everyone worries about," said Dave Bunnell, editor-in-chief of ELDR. "Yet too few of us plan ahead to be prepared for this possibility. Our survey is telling people if they act now, they can be in charge. You don't have to leave this entirely to fate." * * *

The article summarizes other results from ELDR Magazine's "Right To Die" National Survey:

• Half of American adults (49.1 percent) have parents, close relatives or friends in their senior years for whom they might eventually be considered a guardian caretaker or legal trustee.

• 82 percent want the option, if they were suffering at end-of-life, of being sedated into unconsciousness, even though this might hasten their death.

• 93.6 percent want artificial life support stopped if they were in a persistent vegetative state, where mental functioning had ceased and it was highly unlikely they would regain consciousness.

• Fewer than 25 percent have a living will or advance health care directive which states their wishes if they were incapacitated or in persistent vegetative state. Only half of those over 60 do.

The raw data (questions & responses) is displayed on a separate webpage, "Survey Results: The Right to Die".

The survey's results were cited in a Time magazine article, dated May 16, 2008, entitled "A New Fight to Legalize Euthanasia", by Kathleen Kingsbury.

Should we be allowed to determine when we die? Euthanasia may be an issue long debated in the U.S., but thus far voters in only one state, Oregon, have legalized the practice of physician-assisted suicide. But a popular former governor is determined to make Washington State the second this November.

Booth Gardner, who served as Washington's governor for two terms in the 1980s and '90s, is now leading a ballot initiative that, if approved, would allow doctors to prescribe lethal doses of narcotics to terminally ill patients who want to end their own lives.

The campaign is personal for Gardner. Diagnosed more than a decade ago with Parkinson's disease, a debilitating condition, his first reaction was "how can I take control over this," he says. "Then I realized that there was no way I could. I wanted to change that."

Gardner has repeatedly said he would end his own life if given the tools to do so legally with dignity. "It is my right as a human being to decide for myself," he adds. * * *

If you have not yet experienced the emotions generated in an end-of-life or right-to-die setting, you can watch Million Dollar Baby, which will be rebroadcast by AMC on Tuesday, May 27th, at 8:00 p.m EST, and again on Saturday, June 7th, at 8:00 p.m. & 11:00 p.m.

[Graphic derived from AMC's Million Dollar Baby Gallery Photo #8]

Update: 05/21/08 @ 7:00 pm:

John R. Price, Esq., of the Perkins Coie law firm in Seattle, Washington, sent me an email message in response to this posting, which is thoughtful & insightful: [Links added]

Thanks for your [posting] regarding end-of-life issues and Washington Initiative I-1000.

Earlier this month I helped organize a lunch time presentation on the right-to-die by Kathryn Tucker, Esq., the legal director for Compassion and Choices, Portland, Oregon. Kathryn is also an adjunct professor at the Lewis and Clark Law School in Portland (while she lived in Seattle she held a similar position at the University of Washington School of Law). An article she has written on the history of right-to-die legislation will be published in the June issue of the Michigan Law Review.

As Ms. Tucker points out, the object of the initiative is to assure terminally ill competent adults the right to die peacefully at a time of their own choosing -- it is, I believe, not fairly characterized as "euthanasia", which carries some negative implications.

The data regarding the experience with the Oregon initiative are very reassuring -- and reflect low usage of the process. From what I have read and heard, there have been no complaints that the process has been abused or misused. Indeed, the requirements of the Oregon law and I-1000 are quite stringent in order to provide strong assurance against the process being abused.

The article in Time mentions the earlier, 1991, Washington initiative, but doesn't provide much background about the vote. In fact, up until the time of the vote, it was widely thought that the 1991 initiative would pass. It was narrowly defeated after Dr. Kevorkian "dispatched" two Michigan residents a couple of weeks before the vote -- which received wide publicity in Washington and was thought to have been a major factor in the defeat of the initiative.

Institutionally, the Catholic church opposes I-1000, as it opposed the 1991 initiative, although the position is not shared with many parishioners.

For those who would like to read a thoughtful philosophical piece on the right-to-die, I recommend Ronald Dworkin's book, Life's Dominions [1994, available through Random House, Amazon, among other booksellers]. Dworkin was, and perhaps still is, Professor of Jurisprudence at Oxford and a member of the law faculty at NYU.

See also: Book Review, "Life's Dominion: An Argument About Abortion, Euthanasia, and Individual Freedom", by Richard A. Epstein.

Wilkes' New Dean of Law School Planning Initiative

On May 7, 2008, Wilkes University issued a Press Release, entitled "Wilkes Takes Big Step to Creating New Law School -- Announces Dean of Law School Planning Initiative". The named dean is Loren ("Chip") D. Prescott, Jr., now of Harrisburg, PA.

Wilkes University announces that Loren D. Prescott Jr. has been appointed dean for the Wilkes University Law School Planning Initiative.

Prescott, who has served as vice dean and professor at Widener University School of Law, Harrisburg, Pa., will lead efforts to develop plans for northeastern Pennsylvania’s first law school. Preliminary plans call for enrolling between 80 and 100 first-year students in fall 2010.

As dean, Prescott will also complete an in-depth market analysis of enrollment trends, of the parameters for the law school library, and develop a trailblazing curriculum that answers many of the critiques of legal education today. He is scheduled to submit the final plans for the law school for consideration by the Wilkes Board of Trustees at its April 2009 meeting.

“If feasible, the addition of a law school represents a great opportunity for the revitalization of Wilkes-Barre and the region. Wilkes’ mentoring culture is uniquely suited to training a new generation of attorneys skilled in the practice, not just the theory, of law,” said Tim Gilmour, president of Wilkes University.

“Chip Prescott brings both experience and vision to this initiative. We’re honored to have a leader of his caliber to lead the effort.” * * *

I learned about this appointment in an email message sent by Chip on May 7th. I was surprised, and pleased.

When I first learned about the proposal to create a new law school in the Wilkes-Barre / Scranton area, to join eight existing law schools in Pennsylvania, I was skeptical. See: PA EE&F Law Blog posting New Law School at Wilkes University? (03/06/07).

My concerns were not founded in the ability of Wilkes University to create an academically suitable law school, or the need in Northeastern Pennsylvania for graduate-level education, or the economic benefits that a law school might bring in that region, or even the capability of Wilkes to attract qualified, committed faculty and eager, tuition-paying law students into a new law school.

No, my concern was simple: Where would more law school graduates find jobs once educated?

My updates to that posting reinforced my concerns, to which I urged studied consideration:

The "job market" and the implied promise made to law students when they pay (or borrow) the tuition necessary to attend law school -- that further education will increase their employment opportunities -- should be one of the elements to be considered by those charged with examining a new law school at Wilkes University.

By February of this year, the concept for a new law school, as sketched by the Wilkes University Board of Trustees, was embodied in its search for a designing dean. See: PA EE&F Law Blog posting Proposed Wilkes Law School Seeks Dean (02/06/08).

I was pleasantly surprised by the pragmatic, innovative approach adopted for the proposed new law school, as evidenced by its reliance upon a detailed report, entitled "Educating Lawyers: Preparation for the Profession of Law" (2007), issued by the Carnegie Foundation.

I concluded by noting that, "[w]ithout question, the format for an effective institutional legal education is changing." I became hopeful that such a new law school could, indeed, meet not only the needs of a university, a region, and an economy in Pennsylvania, but also of students who would become prepared, by a legal education, to function productively while paid adequate compensation.

Now I learn that Chip Prescott will be the one to guide this new law school into being.

"Well, bust my buttons! Why didn't you say that in the first place? That's a horse of a different color! Come on in!"

My skepticism had paralleled that of the gatekeeper to the grand, Emerald City in the 1939 movie, The Wizard of Oz:

[Reaching the gate into the Emerald City, Dorothy and her friends ring the bell. A Gateman appears through a porthole.]

Gateman: Who rang that bell?!

All four: We did!

Gateman: Can't you read?!

Scarecrow: Read what?

Gateman: The notice!

All four: What notice?

Gateman: It's on the door, as plain as the nose on my face! It's a [Realizes there is no notice] Oh-- Oh... [Hangs a notice on the door, then disappears]

All Four: [Reading the notice] "Bell out of order. Please knock." [Dorothy knocks on the knocker, and the Gateman reemerges]

Gateman: Well, that's more like it! Now, state your business.

All four: We want to see the Wizard.

Gateman: [Nearly falls out of his porthole from shock] The Wizard?! But nobody can see the Great Oz! Nobody's ever seen the Great Oz! Even I've never seen him!

Dorothy: Well, then — how do you know there is one?

Gateman: Because he, uh... You're wasting my time!

Dorothy: Oh please, please sir. I've got to see the Wizard. The Good Witch of the North sent me.

Gateman: Prove it. * * *

Once Dorothy displays the Ruby Slippers, the Gatekeeper says, "Well, bust my buttons"; and she, with her companions, are ushered into the Emerald City, where they prepare to do their longer & harder work.

Chip Prescott is as special as Dorothy Gale in that movie, The Wizard of Oz.

He does not wear Ruby Slippers (thank goodness), but he radiates personal characteristics that gleam just as brightly. He is honest, intelligent, resourceful, devoted, reliable, sensitive, social, respectful, and funny. He is one of the finest people I've encountered. I am privileged to consider him my friend.

He understands the need for practical legal education, responsive to the changing needs of our citizens and also targeted at graduates' productive employment.

Just as Dorothy possessed the necessary desire and qualities to perform her mission with the support of her companions, which resulted in growth and goodness in the lives of those she touched in that movie's fantasy, Chip Prescott possesses the commitment and character to materialize a new law school with the support of Wilkes University and the host that will join the effort, which will benefit Pennsylvanians in reality.

I congratulate him on his acceptance of this new challenge; and I congratulate the folks at Wilkes University for selecting him.

Scarecrow: What have you learned, Dorothy?

Dorothy: Well, I—I think that it, that it wasn't enough just to want to see Uncle Henry and Auntie Em — and it's that — if I ever go looking for my heart's desire again, I won't look any further than my own backyard. Because if it isn't there, I never really lost it to begin with! Is that right?

Glinda: That's all it is! * * *

...

Glinda: Then close your eyes and tap your heels together three times. And think to yourself, 'There's no place like home'.

"No Standing" for Barnes Foundation Petitioners

On May 15, 2008, the Orphans' Court Division, of the Montgomery County (PA) Court of Common Pleas, per Judge Stanley R. Ott, issued a Memorandum Opinion (8 pages) that denied "standing" to the Friends of the Barnes Foundation and the County of Montgomery in the litigation referenced as The Barnes Foundation -- Petitions to Reopen Proceedings.

And now, this 15th day of May, 2008, upon consideration of the preliminary objections and briefs and argument of counsel, the petitions filed by the Friends of the Barnes Foundation, et alii, and by the County of Montgomery are hereby DISMISSED for lack of standing. Each party to bear its own costs.

The decision was reported in news articles, such as:

• "Judge denies new hearings in Barnes Foundation move", by JoAnn Loviglio, Associated Press, dated May 15, 2008, posted on AOL News.
• "Judge again rejects foes of Barnes move", by Derrick Nunnally, Philadelphia Inquirer, dated May 16, 2008.
• "Barnes Foundation Can Move, Judge Rules", New York Sun, dated May 16, 2008.

For prior postings on this Blog regarding the Petition for Reconsideration filed in the Barnes Foundation relocation matter, providing background, see: Montgomery County PA Joins Barnes Fight (09/14/07); Petition Filed for Reconsideration of Barnes Relocation (08/28/07); and Next Round for the Barnes Foundation (06/11/07).

This was the setting for Judge Ott's ruling on preliminary objections filed by the Barnes Foundation, as stated in the Memorandum Opinion:

On August 27, 2007, a petition was filed on behalf of several individuals and the "Friends of the Barnes Foundation" (referred to collectively herein as "the Friends") seeking, inter alia, to reopen the proceedings which resulted in this Court's December 13, 2004 opinion granting permission to the trustees of The Barnes Foundation to relocate its art gallery at a new location in Philadelphia. See Barnes Foundation, 25 Fiduc. Rep, 2d 39.

On August 31, 2007, the Friends filed a petition to have citations issued to the individual trustees to show cause why the request to reopen the matter should not be granted.

The trustees filed preliminary objections to the petition, which were joined in by the Offlce of the Attorney General, as parens patriae for charities.

On September 12, 2007, Montgomery County filed its own petition to reopen the matter; and the trustees' and the Attorney General again filed preliminary objections.

Thereafter, the parties filed extensive briefs and the undersigned heard argument on the preliminary objections on March 24, 2008. * * *

Judge Ott provided some further background about the controversy presented to that court:

Before addressing the preliminary objections to both of these petitions, we must summarize briefly certain developments in this saga.

At some point after the December 2004 opinion was issued, it came to the Court's and the public's attention that a budget bill, passed by the state legislature and the Governor in 2002, contained a line item for approximately one hundred million dollars for the purpose of building a new facility in Philadelphia to house The Foundation's art collection. This revelation caused a flurry of speculation that The Foundation's trustees had knowledge of the budget item and had actively concealed its existence from the Court during the hearings on the petition for permission to move the gallery and art program from Merion. In the instant petitions, both the Friends and the County urge the Court to reopen the matter on the basis of this new information.

A second reason put forth for reconsidering our earlier decision is the proposal floated in June of 2007 by the Montgomery County Commissioners to purchase The Foundation's land and buildings for approximately $50 million, and to lease the property back to The Foundation. The County suggested that the influx of cash to The Foundation from the sale would permit the art collection to be preserved, an endowment to be established, and the gallery and art education program to remain in Merion. Shortly after receiving this proposal, The Foundation rejected it, stating the decision to move to Philadelphia was irreversible. * * *

But the threshhold issues to be decided, stated Judge Ott, related to the "standing" of the petitioning parties to be in court, requesting reconsideration of the prior decision.

With reference to the role of The Friends of the Barnes Foundation, guidance was offered in a decision rendered by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2006.

The preliminary objections to both petitions now before us raise the question of standing. This Court has addressed this issue in proceedings that relate to The Foundation on several occasions. We conclude that, as many who have gone before, the Friends lack standing because they have no interest beyond that of the general public.

The Friends, in their brief, all but concede as much, however, they claim the question of standing is so "enmeshed" with the merits that the preliminary objections should be overruled and the situation vetted in depth. In support of this argument, the Friends
have cited several decisions from U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal.

As tempting as the possibility of exploring the merits of these petitions might be, we are bound, not by these federal court decisions, but by the recent holding from our Supreme Court in the matter of Milton Hershey School, 590 Pa. 35, 911 A.2d 1258 (2006). There, the Court disavowed an attempt by the Commonwealth Court to rewrite the law on standing. * * *

See: PA EE&F Law Blog posting Milton Hershey School: Trustees Rule (01/02/07).

As to the legal standing of The Friends of the Barnes Foundation to participate, Judge Ott ruled negatively:

In light of the Supreme Court's resounding ratification of these historical precepts, it is clear that the Friends lack standing in this matter. While the "intensity of concern" felt by these petitioners is, no doubt, as "real and commendable" as that of the alumni in the Hershey case, they, like the alumni, lack the requisite "actual interest" in the matter sub judice. * * *

As to the legal standing of Montgomery County, Judge Ott ruled negatively also:

[B]inding precedent instructs us that a "special interest" is required to establish standing.

As the Attorney General and the trustees point out, the County's "special interests" in protecting historical resources and nurturing economic welfare are matters within the purview of the Attorney General's office. That Office as parens patriae protects the general public, and there is no authority for a second sovereign to participate on behalf of a subset of the general public.

On this point, the Commonwealth Court issued a relevant opinion after its Hershey opinion and before the Supreme Court's reversal in Hershey, in the matter of Philadelphia Health Care Trusts, 872 A.2d 258 (Cmwlth. 2005). * * *

We find this holding to be dispositive of the issue before us, and determine that the County has no standing. * * *

Accordingly, Judge Ott dismissed both petitions.

Then he addressed the significant financial issue of counsel fees, as requested by The Barnes Foundation and the Attorney General's Office pursuant to 42 Pa. C.S.A. §2503. However, the Judge found that the petitions had been filed in good faith, on issues of importance, and therefore were not so "vexatious" as to merit the award of fees against the petitioners.

For the reaction by The Friends of the Barnes Foundation to the ruling, see: "Friends of the Barnes Foundation, undaunted by Judge's dismissal of case, decries inaction of Attorney General" (PDF, 5 page), dated May 16, 2008.

Update: 05/21/08:

The Barnes Foundation expressed satisfaction with the ruling in a press release, dated May 15, 2008, entitled "The Barnes Foundation Statement on Montgomery County Orphans Court Decision".

The Barnes Foundation has stated that it is pleased with the ruling of Montgomery County Orphans Court Judge Stanley R. Ott to dismiss the petitions of the Friends of the Barnes Foundation and Montgomery County Commissioners to re-open his December 2004 decision permitting the Foundation to move its art collection to Philadelphia.

Derek Gillman, Executive Director and President of the Barnes Foundation said, "This very clear ruling ends the present distraction and we are forging ahead with plans for the new building." * * *

PBA RPPT Section's 2008 Annual Meeting

On Wednesday, June 4, & Thursday, June 5, 2008, the Real Property, Probate & Trust Law Section of the Pennsylvania Bar Association will hold its Annual Meeting & Retreat, in conjunction with the PBA's Statewide Annual Meeting, at the Hershey Lodge, in Hershey, PA.

The RPPT Section's Annual Meeting & Retreat is explained in detail in a brochure posted online (PDF, 6 pages).

This is the schedule of sessions & events:

Wednesday - June 4th

Time	Probate and Trust	Real Property
9:00-10:00	Recent Developments in Real Property and Probate Kirby Upright, Andrea Geraghty
10:00 -11:00	Wants, Wishes, and Wills- A Medical and Legal Guide to Protecting Yourself and Your Family In Sickness and In Health Wynne A. Whitman
11:00 –11:15	Break
11:15- 12:15	Special Needs Trusts Steve Feldman	Transfer Tax Changes Phil Korb
12:15 – 2:00	Lunch
2:00 – 3:00	Lawyers in the Movies (Ethics) Gordon Zubrod
3:00 – 3:15	Networking break
3:15 – 4:15	Ask the Expert: Top Ten State Tax Issues to Avoid Paul Dibert		Top Tax Tips for Real Estate Lawyers Joe Sedlack
4:15- 5:15	Real Estate Issues for Estate Practitioners Jeff Malak Dave Schwager		Planning for Entities- FLPs, LLCs, etc. Arnie Kogan Chip Mackrides

Thursday - June 5th

Time
8:00- 9:00	Annual Meeting for Members
9:00 –10:00	Vacation Homes: Tax Consequences and Estate Issues Maury Reiter
10:00 – 11:00	Orphans’ Court Rules Update Dean Philips Hon. Anne Lazarus Neil Hendershot	Inside Subprime Mortgages Irv Ackelsberg David Schwager (Moderator) Faith Schwartz

The online brochure also describes the wrap-around social activities planned by the Section's leadership, and explains how you can register & where you can stay.

If you are a Section Member, or a statewide member attending the PBA's Annual Meeting, please consider participating in the social activities and attending the instructive sessions.

Firefighters, First Responders, and Free Wills

On May 11, 2008, the Chambersburg Public Opinion published an article entitled "Firefighters can make free wills", by Rob Luff, describing a pro bono service of the Franklin County Bar Association to provide personal & estate planning documents to firefighters.

This pro bono community program by the Young Lawyers Division, of the FCBA, is described on its website:

Firefighters put their lives on the line every day to protect their communities, yet national statistics show too few of them have taken all the necessary steps to ensure the future of their loved ones should anything happen to them.

A new program by the Young Lawyers Division of the Franklin County Bar Association will help ease that burden.

Through the Florian Project, attorneys will provide basic estate-planning documents -- simple wills, powers of attorney and living wills or medical directives -- to local firefighters at no cost to them.

Firefighters interested in the program should talk with their chief. * * *

The newspaper article noted the creation, and possible expansion, of the local bar association program by lawyers for first responders.

The program already has been implemented in Cumberland County, according to Carolyn Seibert-Drager, executive director of the Franklin County Bar Association.

When the FCBA decided to offer similar services, it chose to act through the Florian Foundation, a nonprofit organization based in Arlington, Va., that specializes in offering legal assistance to public safety workers.

The program has been operating for a month. The response has been positive from fire companies; according to Seibert-Drager, around 20 to 25 individuals have signed. * * *

Seibert-Drager said the plan is to keep the program running throughout 2008.

"We decided to start with firefighters," Seibert-Drager said. "We may look to extend to EMS (Emergency Medical Services professionals) and police officers." * * *

The article concluded with an invitation to that county's firefighters who qualify to benefit from the public service program:

The Florian Project is available to all firefighters in a fire company in Franklin County, as long as their estates do not exceed federal taxable guidelines.

Firefighters interested should talk to their fire chief or contact the FCBA at 717-267-2032 or info@franklinbar.org.

The model, pro bono project of the Cumberland County Bar Association, conducted in cooperation with the Floridan Foundation, was described in a Press Release, dated September 9, 2005, entitled "Cumberland County Bar Association, Board of Commissioners, Partner in Florian Foundation Project to Help" (Word format, 2 pages).

These projects by the FCBA and the CCBA may be new to Pennsylvania. But this idea is not new, nationwide.

Bar associations (either state or local) in at least eleven states already offer such programs in cooperation with the Wills for Heroes Foundation, based in South Carolina.

Wills for Heroes programs provide essential legal documents free of charge to our nation’s first responders, including wills, living wills, and powers of attorney.

By helping first responders plan now, they ensure their family's legal affairs are in order before a tragedy hits. * * *

The roots, rationale, and rewards of the Wills for Heroes public service program were described in a lengthy article published in USA Today on April 21, 2008, entitled "Attorneys lend a hand to emergency workers", by David Unze.

The ABA's Young Lawyers' Division program, offered in conjunction with the Wills for Heroes Foundation, is described on the ABA's website. Listed there are additional "states currently developing templates" -- Connecticut, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Ohio, Oklahoma, & Tennessee. See also: "Giving Back to First Responders --The ABA YLD 2007–08 Public Service Project" (September, 2007), by Daniel McKenna.

The American Bar Association promotes such pro bono projects, as evidenced by a Media Advisory, dated February 4, 2008, entitled "Young Lawyers to Draft Wills for Local First Responders".

The American Bar Association Young Lawyers Division, together with the Wills for Heroes Foundation and the Beverly Hills Bar Association Barristers, will be drafting free wills for about 100 Beverly Hills firefighters and police officers on Saturday from 10 a.m. - 5 p.m. PT at the Beverly Hills Fire Department’s Fire Station 1.

Part of the YLD’s 2007-2008 public service project, Wills for Heroes, this event will be held in conjunction with the ABA Midyear Meeting in Los Angeles, Feb. 6-12.

A creation of the Wills for Heroes Foundation, this unique pro bono program provides free wills and other basic estate planning documents to emergency first responders, their spouses and domestic partners.

To date, the Wills for Heroes Foundation has assisted more than 7,000 emergency first responders in several states including Alabama, Arizona, California, Georgia, Illinois, Minnesota, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia.

If there are any other such programs operating or organizing in Pennsylvania, in conjunction with either of these two coordinating foundations, I would be interested to know details for posting here.

Your Life Expectancy, Calculated Online

A blog entry, dated May 12, 2008, entitled "I'm going to live to be 97: How about you?", by Rita R. Robison, posted on the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, highlighted a Life Expectancy Calculator available on The Spirit of Now website, hosted by Peter Russell.

It calculates your current virtual age, which will differ from your current actual age, and then projects your remaining life expectancy.

Your Virtual Age is a reflection of your health and vitality. The lower your Virtual Age the better shape you are in.

It is used to calculate the Life Expectancy of someone of your current physical age.

In her blog posting, Rita announced that she would live to the age of 97. I used it too, but I am less pleased with the results.

Russell's Life Expectancy Calculator asks 34 questions, beginning with your actual age. Then you identify your gender (checking "male" immediately increased my virtual age by one year), your race, your weight/build, your educational level, personal habits, medical conditions, hereditary conditions, personal attitudes, and other risk factors.

After the interview, it calculated that I would live 10,500 more days, that is, to the age of 85.

But I wanted some confirmation about this. So I checked a second Life Expectancy Calculator (one provided by MSN-Money), which is text based. I didn't like it as much -- mainly because it gave me a life expectancy of 81 instead -- only four years over average.

So then I checked a third Life Expectancy Calculator, one provided by Living to 100. Its data entry questions were more detailed, asking, for example, whether I often eat charred barbecued food, whether I floss every day, and how often I move a stool (all of which seem to be related in some way, I think). Although embarrassed by some of the questions