DOCSLIB.ORG

Probate and Property (35:01)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Probate and Property (35:01) THE COVID-19 ISSUE EFFECT OF THE COVID-19 REMOTE INK NOTARIZATION EVICTIONS AND THE VOL 35, NO 1 VIRUS ON COMMERCIAL LEASE AND REMOTE WITNESSING COVID-19 PANDEMIC JAN/FEB 2021 TRANSACTIONS DURING THE PANDEMIC A PUBLICATION OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | REAL PROPERTY, TRUST AND ESTATE LAW SECTION SO MANY HAVE DIED COVID-19 in America’s Nursing Homes The Section is excited to announce the RPTE Book Club. The RPTE Book Club is a lecture and Q&A Series with the authors. Each series will be a different book title within the legal field. THE COLOR OF LAW A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America Join RPTE along with author Richard Rothstein as he discusses how segregation in America is the byproduct of explicit government policies at the local, state, and federal levels along with a Q&A session. Wednesday, February 24, 2021 12-1 PM CT The first 100 registrants will receive a copy of the book with their registration fee. Register at ambar.org/rptebookclub PROFESSORS’ CORNER PROFESSORS’ CORNER A monthly webinar featuring a panel of professors addressing recent cases or issues of relevance to A monthlypractitioners webinar and featuring scholars ofa panel real estate of professors or trusts addressing and estates. recent FREE cases for RPTE or issues Section of relevance members to! practitioners and scholars of real estate or trusts and estates. FREE for RPTE Section members! Register for each webinar at http://ambar.org/ProfessorsCornerRegister for each webinar at http://ambar.org/ProfessorsCorner WILLS IN THE 21ST CENTURY: TOWARDS THE SECURE ACT: RETIREMENT PLANNING SENSIBLE APPLICATION OF FORMALITIES AND MONETARY EXPECTATIONS THE LEGACIES OF RACIAL RESTRICTIVE MOORE ON POWELL AND I.R.C. § 2043 Tuesday, July 14, 2020 COVENANTS Tuesday, AugustFebruary 14, 9, 2020 2021 12:30-1:30 pm ET 12:30-1:30 pm ET 12:30-1:30 pm ET Tuesday, January 12, 2021 12:30-1:30 pm ET ELAINE H. GAGLIARDI, Alexander Blewett III School of Law at BRIDGET CRAWFORD, Elisabeth Haub School of Law CHRIS HOYT, University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law SHELLEY ROSS SAXER, Pepperdine University, Caruso School of Law University of Montana NAOMI CAHN, George Washington Law School Moderator:J. MARTIN BURKE AMY ,M. Alexander HESS, BlewettUniversity III ofSchool Tennessee of Law College at of Law KARENCAROL M.J. SNEDDON, ROSE, Yale LawMercer School University School of Law CHRIS MYERS ASCH, Colby College University of Montana Moderator: AMY M. HESS, University of Tennessee College of Law Moderator: AMY M. HESS, University of Tennessee Moderator: SHELBY D. GREEN, Elisabeth Haub School of Law SPONSORSHIP & ADVERTISING OPPORTUNITIES CONTACT CHRIS MARTIN Vice President, Sales Sales Solutions & Services 410.584.1905 | [email protected] BRYAN LAMBERT Associate Director | Marketing | Business Development Real Property, Trust and Estate Law 312.835.8978 (cell) | [email protected] (contact for law fi rm sponsorship opportunities) americanbar.org/groups/real_property_trust_estate/sponsorshipwww.abarpte-mediaplanner.com Published in Probate & Property, Volume 35, No 1 © 2021 by the American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be JULYcopied/AUGUST or disseminated 2020 in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval 1 system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association. JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2021 1 PP_v034n04_JulyAug20-CC20.indd 1 6/15/20 12:51 PM THE COVID-19 ISSUE CONTENTS January/February 2021 • Vol. 35 No. 1 12 Features 12 So Many Have Died: COVID-19 in 24 America’s Nursing Homes By David English 24 A COVID-19 Heavyweight Bout: Departments Tenant Safety Versus Discrimination By Alex J. Schnepf 4 Section News 34 The Impacts of the Coronavirus Pandemic on Real Estate Contracts: Force Majeure, 6 Young Lawyers Network Frustration of Purpose, and Impossibility By George P. Bernhardt and Jack Fersko 8 Uniform Laws Update 42 Evictions and the COVID-19 Pandemic 18 Keeping Current—Property By Cashauna M. Hill 30 Keeping Current—Probate 46 The Effect of COVID-19 on Commercial Lease Transactions 60 Technology—Property By Alan M. DiSciullo 64 The Last Word 53 RPTE Advocates for Remote Ink Notarization and Remote Witnessing During the Pandemic By Jo-Ann Marzullo 55 ABA Resolution 10H: Placating Landlords, Protecting Tenants By Jo-Ann Marzullo, Orlando Lucero, and Jo Ann Engelhardt Published in Probate & Property, Volume 35, No 1 © 2021 by the American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association. 2 JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2021 A Publication of the Real Property, Trust and Estate Law Section | American Bar Association EDITORIAL BOARD ABA PUBLISHING Editor Director Edward T. Brading Donna Gollmer 208 Sunset Drive, Suite 409 Managing Editor Johnson City, TN 37604 Erin Johnson Remotigue Articles Editor, Art Director Real Property Andrew O. Alcala Brent C. Shaffer Young Conaway Stargatt & Manager, Production Services Taylor, LLP Marisa L’Heureux Rodney Square Production Coordinator 1000 N. King Street Scott Lesniak Wilmington, DE 19801 Articles Editor, ADVERTISING SALES AND Trust and Estate MEDIA KITS Michael A. Sneeringer Chris Martin Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP 410.584.1905 9132 Strada Place, 3rd Floor [email protected] Naples, FL 34108 Senior Associate Cover Articles Editors iStockphoto Departments Thomas M. Featherston Jr. Michael J. Glazerman Associate Articles Editors All correspondence and 4 Section News Travis A. Beaton manuscripts should be sent to Kevin G. Bender the editors of Probate & Property. Emma L. Osborne 6 Young Lawyers Network Kathleen K. Law Alice M. Noble-Allgire 8 Uniform Laws Update Amber K. Quintal Aaron Schwabach Bruce A. Tannahill 18 Keeping Current—Property Departments Editor James C. Smith 30 Keeping Current—Probate Associate Departments Editor Soo Yeon Lee Editorial Policy: Probate & Property is designed to assist lawyers practicing Probate & Property (ISSN: 0164-0372) is published six times a year (in January/February, March/ 60 Technology—Property in the areas of real estate, wills, trusts, and estates by providing articles and April, May/June, July/August, September/October, and November/December) as a service to editorial matter written in a readable and informative style. The articles, other its members by the American Bar Association Section of Real Property, Trust and Estate Law. editorial content, and advertisements are intended to give up-to-date, practical Editorial, advertising, subscription, and circulation offices: 321 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL information that will aid lawyers in giving their clients accurate, prompt, and 60654-7598. 64 The Last Word efficient service. The price of an annual subscription for members of the Section of Real Property, Trust and Estate The materials contained herein represent the opinions of the authors and Law ($20) is included in their dues and is not deductible therefrom. Any member of the ABA may editors and should not be construed to be those of either the American Bar become a member of the Section of Real Property, Trust and Estate Law by sending annual dues Association or the Section of Real Property, Trust and Estate Law unless of $70 and an application addressed to the Section; ABA membership is a prerequisite to Section adopted pursuant to the bylaws of the Association. Nothing contained herein membership. Individuals and institutions not eligible for ABA membership may subscribe to is to be considered the rendering of legal or ethical advice for specific cases, Probate & Property for $150 per year. Single copies are $7 plus $3.95 for postage and handling. and readers are responsible for obtaining such advice from their own legal Requests for subscriptions or back issues should be addressed to: ABA Service Center, American counsel. These materials and any forms and agreements herein are intended Bar Association, 321 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-7598, (800) 285-2221, fax (312) 988-5528, for educational and informational purposes only. or email [email protected]. © 2021 American Bar Association. All rights reserved. No part of this publica- Periodicals rate postage paid at Chicago, Illinois, and additional mailing offices. Changes of tion may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form address must reach the magazine office 10 weeks before the next issue date.POSTMASTER: or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, Send change of address notices to Probate & Property, c/o Member Services, American Bar without the prior written permission of the publisher. Contact ABA Copyrights Association, ABA Service Center, 321 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-7598. & Contracts, at https://www.americanbar.org/about_the_aba/reprint or via fax at (312) 988-6030, for permission. Printed in the U.S.A. Published in Probate & Property, Volume 35, No 1 © 2021 by the American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association. JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2021 3 2020 EXCELLENCE IN WRITING AWARDS The editors
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4.08 “Open Door” Evidence (1) a Party
    4.08 “Open Door” Evidence (1) A party may “open the door” to the introduction by an opposing party of evidence that would otherwise be inadmissible when in the presentation of argument, cross-examination of a witness, or other presentation of evidence the party has given an incomplete and misleading impression on an issue. (2) A trial court must exercise its discretion to decide whether a party has “opened the door” to otherwise inadmissible evidence. In so doing, the trial court should consider whether, and to what extent, the evidence or argument claimed to “open the door” is incomplete and misleading and what, if any, otherwise inadmissible evidence is reasonably necessary to explain, clarify, or otherwise correct an incomplete and misleading impression. (3) To assure the proper exercise of the court’s discretion and avoid the introduction of otherwise inadmissible evidence, the recommended practice is for a party to apply to the trial court for a ruling on whether the door has been opened before proceeding forward, and the court should so advise the parties before taking evidence. Note Subdivisions (1) and (2) recite the long-settled “open door” principle in New York, as primarily explained in People v Melendez (55 NY2d 445 [1982]); People v Rojas (97 NY2d 32, 34 [2001]); People v Massie (2 NY3d 179 [2004]); and People v Reid (19 NY3d 382 [2012]). Melendez dealt with the issue of whether the defense had opened the door to permit the prosecutor to explore an aspect of the investigation that would not otherwise have been admissible. The Court began by noting that, when an “opposing party ‘opens the door’ on cross-examination to matters not touched upon during the direct examination, a party has the right on redirect to explain, clarify and fully elicit [the] question only partially examined on cross-examination.” (Melendez at 451 1 [internal quotation marks and citation omitted].) Argument to the jury or other presentation of evidence also may open the door to the admission of otherwise inadmissible evidence.
    [Show full text]
  • Uniform Probate Code Article Ii Intestacy, Wills, and Donative Transfers
    UNIFORM PROBATE CODE ARTICLE II INTESTACY, WILLS, AND DONATIVE TRANSFERS [Sections to be Revised in Bold] Table of Sections PART 1 INTESTATE SUCCESSION § 2-101. Intestate Estate. § 2-102. Share of Spouse. § 2-102A. Share of Spouse. § 2-103. Share of Heirs Other Than Surviving Spouse. § 2-104. Requirement That Heir Survive Decedent for 120 Hours. § 2-105. No Taker. § 2-106. Representation. § 2-107. Kindred of Half Blood. § 2-108. Afterborn Heirs. § 2-109. Advancements. § 2-110. Debts to Decedent. § 2-111. Alienage. § 2-112. Dower and Curtesy Abolished. § 2-113. Individuals Related to Decedent Through Two Lines. § 2-114. Parent and Child Relationship. § 2-101. Intestate Estate. (a) Any part of a decedent’s estate not effectively disposed of by will passes by intestate succession to the decedent’s heirs as prescribed in this Code, except as modified by the decedent’s will. (b) A decedent by will may expressly exclude or limit the right of an individual or class to succeed to property of the decedent passing by intestate succession. If that individual or a member of that class survives the decedent, the share of the decedent’s intestate estate to which that individual or class would have succeeded passes as if that individual or each member of that class had disclaimed his [or her] intestate share. § 2-102. Share of Spouse. The intestate share of a decedent’s surviving spouse is: (1) the entire intestate estate if: (i) no descendant or parent of the decedent survives the decedent; or (ii) all of the decedent’s surviving descendants are also
    [Show full text]
  • Testamentary Trusts
    TESTAMENTARY TRUSTS Trusts that are created pursuant to the terms of a probated Last Will and Testament are commonly referred to as “testamentary trusts.” 1. Applicable Law. The applicable law for these Trusts is the Kansas Probate Code (not the Kansas Trust Code). The authority of the probate court as to testamentary trusts is set forth at K.S.A. 59-103(7), as follows: to supervise the administration of trusts and powers created by wills admitted to probate, and trusts and powers created by written instruments other than by wills in favor of persons subject to conservatorship; to appoint and remove trustees for such trusts, to make all necessary orders relating to such trust estates, to direct and control the official acts of such trustees, and to settle their accounts. K.S.A. 59-103(a) Docket Fee for Trusteeship $69.50 [Rev. Ch. 80, Sec. 17, 2017 Sess. Laws] 2. Obtaining Appointment of Testamentary Trustee. Based upon the statutory grant of Court authority under K.S.A. 59-103(7), it appears necessary for a nominated testamentary trustee to be formally appointed by the Court. As a practical matter, the judicial grant of Letters of Trusteeship may be necessary to obtain delivery of the trust’s share of probate assets, to deal with banks and financial institutions (such as to open accounts), or to later sell assets. It is also appropriate to establish the formal commencement of the new fiduciary relationship and the Trustee’s formal acceptance of the obligation as fiduciary for the newly established testamentary trust.
    [Show full text]
  • Answering Your Legal Questions About Revocable Living Trusts Who May Create, Manage, and Benefit from a Revocable Living Trust?
    Answering your legal questions about revocable living trusts Who may create, manage, and benefit from a revocable living trust? If you were to die or become disabled, you’d want your This pamphlet, which dependents to be financially secure. And you’d want some- is based on Wisconsin one to manage or distribute your assets just as you would yourself, if you could. The only way to assure these out- law, is issued to inform comes is to do estate planning. and not to advise. No A revocable living trust is one of several estate-plan- person should ever ning tools. You can read about others in the State Bar of apply or interpret any Wisconsin’s pamphlet, “Wills/Estate Planning: Answering Your Legal Questions.” law without the aid Should a revocable living trust be part of your estate of a trained expert plan? No simple guidelines exist to answer that question. who knows the facts, People with various levels of wealth and in different cir- because the facts may cumstances may, or may not, find a revocable living trust useful. change the application Your legal or financial adviser can help you of the law. Last revised: decide whether this option is right for you. This pam- 10/2013 phlet answers several questions to provide you basic information. Who can be the trustee? What is a revocable living trust? Any competent adult may be a trustee. Usually, you name yourself, or you and your spouse, as the trustee because A trust is a written document that names someone to you want full control of the property while you’re alive.
    [Show full text]
  • The Australian Priest-Penitent Privilege: Are They Protected?
    Journal of Politics and Law; Vol. 6, No. 4; 2013 ISSN 1913-9047 E-ISSN 1913-9055 Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education The Australian Priest-Penitent Privilege: Are They Protected? Patrick van Esch1 & Linda Jean van Esch2 1 School of Law, Charles Darwin University, Northern Territory, Australia 2 Western Australian School of Mines, Faculty of Science & Engineering, Curtin University, Perth, Australia Correspondence: Patrick van Esch, School of Law, Charles Darwin University, Ellengowan Drive, Casuarina, NT 0810, Australia. Tel: 61-8-8946-6666. E-mail: [email protected] Received: August 5, 2013 Accepted: August 23, 2013 Online Published: November 29, 2013 doi:10.5539/jpl.v6n4p90 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jpl.v6n4p90 Abstract In Australia, the extent of the priest-penitent privilege has received much attention recently due to the appointment of a Royal commission into institutional responses to child sexual abuse in 2012. At present, only five (5) Australian jurisdictions provide statutes for some form of privilege to protect certain types of communications between clerics and individuals. The other jurisdictions rely on case law where it is deemed that the priest-penitent privilege does not apply, but this belief is yet to be tested. In an attempt to abide by their religious laws, and depending on the their particular denomination, clerics may be entitled, not obliged to refuse divulging subject matter from religious confessions, even if a confession was made or not. Keywords: priest-penitent privilege, the evidence acts, religious law, professional communications privilege, case law, state law, cleric 1. Introduction With the sanctity of the confessional being challenged in an increasingly secular world, it is becoming more likely that a religious cleric may be called to give evidence in a court of law; irrespective of any understanding towards the cleric’s ethical and religious obligations.
    [Show full text]
  • Ademption by Extinction: Smiting Lord Thurlow's Ghost
    ADEMPTION BY EXTINCTION: SMITING LORD THURLOW'S GHOST John C. Paulus* INTRODUCTION Testator (T)properly executes a will giving his farm, Blackacre, to his daughter (D), and the rest of his property to his son (S). T lives with D on Blackacre. Three years later T sells Blackacre and buys Whiteacre. T and D live together on Whiteacre until T's death four years later. From numerous utterances and acts it is very evident that T wants D to have Whiteacre for her own after his death. Will Whiteacre go to D or S? In most (maybe all) of the states, the answer would be, "S." The identity rule enunciated by Lord Thurlow in 1786 is followed.' As indicated by its application to T, D, and S, the dominating philosophy can bring forth some unsatisfactory results. Lord Thurlow's opinion calls for the application of a simple test in determining whether or not a specific devise adeems: If the asset identified as the exclusive subject of the devise is not held by the testator at his death, the devise fails.' Ademption by extinction, as this problem area is uniformly called, is reduced to a matter of identifying, if possible, the devised item in the estate.' The most often quoted statement by Lord Thurlow is: "And I do * Professor of Law, Willamette University. Visiting Professor of Law, Texas Tech University 1970-71. 1. Ashburner v. Macguire, 29 Eng. Rep. 62 (Ch. 1786). This hypothetical is similar to the facts in Ashburner in that the testator sells the devised asset (Blackacre). Three years later in Stanley v.
    [Show full text]
  • 26. Uniform Disclaimer of Property Interests Act
    CHAPTER 8.1 26. UNIFORM DISCLAIMER OF PROPERTY INTERESTS ACT. Drafting note: Existing Chapter 8.1 has been relocated to proposed Subtitle V due to its applicability to both probate and nonprobate transfers. Existing Chapter 8.1 is based on the Uniform Disclaimer of Property Interests Act promulgated by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in 1999 as both a stand-alone act and a part of the Uniform Probate Code. Virginia enacted the Act in 2003. There is little variation between the language of the Act as promulgated and as adopted in Virginia. § 64.1-196.1 64.2-2600. Definitions. In As used in this chapter: "Disclaimant" means the person to whom a disclaimed interest or power would have passed had the disclaimer not been made. "Disclaimed interest" means the interest that would have passed to the disclaimant had the disclaimer not been made. "Disclaimer" means the refusal to accept an interest in or power over property. "Fiduciary" means a personal representative, trustee, agent acting under a power of attorney, or other person authorized to act as a fiduciary with respect to the property of another person. "Jointly held property" means property held in the name of two of more persons under an arrangement in which all holders have concurrent interests and under which the last surviving holder is entitled to the whole of the property and includes, without limitation, property held as tenants by the entirety. "Person" means an individual, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, limited liability company, association, joint venture, government, governmental subdivision, agency or instrumentality, public corporation, or any other legal or commercial entity.
    [Show full text]
  • Is a Living Trust For
    Living Trust More Certainty as to Property Distribution also be lost by the use of joint tenancy and other probate This pamphlet is based on Kansas law and is published at Death avoidance devices. to provide general public information, not specific legal advice. The facts involved in a specific case determine By ensuring that all property is properly titled in Increased Paperwork the application of the law. a living trust, there is greater assurance that all of A trust may involve more paperwork than when proper- your property will be governed by its terms. Since ty is owned individually. For instance, if you are not the Lawyer Referral Service wills only govern probate assets, assets that pass out- trustee of your own trust, the trust may be required to Is a (800) 928-3111 side the probate process, such as those held in joint file a separate tax return, although no additional income Contact the Kansas Bar Association (KBA) Lawyer tenancy or under beneficiary designations, are often taxes would be owed. The trustee is usually directed to overlooked. Referral Service for the name and contact information of account to the grantor or beneficiaries. In addition, or- a lawyer with experience in a particular area. Living Trust dinarily extra documents must be prepared to transfer What are the disadvantages of title to the trust. Ask-a-Lawyer a living trust? (800) 928-3111 for Drafting Expenses Do you give up control of your Ask-a-Lawyer will connect you with an attorney who can Your attorney will charge a fee to draft your trust.
    [Show full text]
  • Probating a Will That Is Not Notarized
    PROBATING A WHAT IS A WILL WILL THAT IS THAT IS NOT NOTARIZED? NOT NOTARIZED When a person dies leaving a will that is What must be done if a person dies The law recognizes two types of wills that are The probate procedure required by the law is intended to: not notarized: not notarized, you must verify its validity. leaving a will that is not notarized? + Confirm that the person is deceased. 1. The holograph will YOU MUST VERIFY ITS VALIDITY! + Ascertain that the will is his own and that on first In order to qualify as a “holograph will”, the will must be sight it appears to be his last. entirely written and signed by the person himself, without Consult your + Verify that the will meets the legal conditions notary! using a computer or other technical device. It is generally required to be valid. hand written, but if a person cannot use his hands, he may write with his mouth or his feet. The probate procedure also allows those who are settling the succession, as well as the heirs named in the will, to 2. The will before two witnesses consult it. The notary or the clerk may provide them with To qualify as a “will before two witnesses”, the will must be true copies or excerpts of the will. signed by the person in front of two witnesses. It may be written out by the person himself or by another person. It Are you questioning the validity of a will? may also be drafted on a computer or otherwise (by filling out a form, for example).
    [Show full text]
  • General Statutes
    THE GENERAL STATUTES OF TUE STATE OF MINNESOTA, As Amended, by Subsequent Legislation. PREPARED BY 'GEORGE B. YOUNG. EDITED AND PUBLISHED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF CHAPTER 67 OF THE LAWS OF 1878, AND CHAPTER 67 OF THE LAWS OF 1879. FOURTH EDITION. WITH SUPPLEMENTS, ' CONTAINING ALL THE GENERAL LAWS IN FORCE UP TO THE END OF THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION OF 1883. SAINT PAUL: WEST PUBLISHING COMPANT. 1883. MINNESOTA STATUTES 1878 47.] TVILLS. 567 of that value in the division and distribution of the estate; otherwise it shall be estimated according to its value when given, as nearly as the same can be ascertained. , §13. (SEC. 10.) Advancement—death of child, etc., before the intestate. If any child or other lineal descendant so advanced dies before the intestate, leaving issue, the advancement shall be taken into consideration in the division and distribution of the estate, and the amount thereof shall be allowed accordingly by the rep­ resentatives of the heirs so advanced, in like manner as if the advancement had been made directly to them. §14. (SEC. 11.) Construction of this chapter. Nothing in this chapter shall affect the title of a husband as tenant by the curtesy, nor that of a widow as tenant in dower; nor shall the same affect any limitation of an estate, by deed or will. See ante. §§ 3 and 4. § 15. (SEC. 12.) Bight of representation—posthumous children. Inheritance or succes­ sion, ''by right of representation,"" takes place when the descendants of any deceased heir take the same share or right in the estate of another person that their parent would have taken, if living.
    [Show full text]
  • Cour Internationale International Criminal Court
    ICC-01/04-02/06-1159 09-02-2016 1/15 EK T Cour Pénale i^/_I_7v>^| Internationale m* International Criminal Court Original: English No.: ICC-01/04-02/06 Date: 9 February 2016 TRIAL CHAMBER VI Before: Judge Robert Fremr, Presiding Judge Judge Kuniko Ozaki Judge Chang-ho Chung SITUATION IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO IN THE CASE OF THE PROSECUTOR v. BOSCO NTAG AND A Public Decision on Defence preliminary challenges to Prosecution's expert witnesses No. ICC-01/04-02/06 1/15 9 February 2016 ICC-01/04-02/06-1159 09-02-2016 2/15 EK T Decision to be notified, in accordance with Regulation 31 of the Regulations of the Court, to: The Office of the Prosecutor Counsel for Bosco Ntaganda Ms Fatou Bensouda Mr Stéphane Bourgon Mr James Stewart Mr Luc Boutin Ms Nicole Samson Legal Representatives of Victims Legal Representatives of Applicants Ms Sarah Pellet Mr Dmytro Suprun Unrepresented Victims Unrepresented Applicants for Participation/Reparation The Office of Public Counsel for The Office of Public Counsel for the Victims Defence Ms Paolina Massidda States' Representatives Amicus Curiae REGISTRY Registrar Counsel Support Section Mr Herman von Hebel Victims and Witnesses Unit Detention Section Mr Nigel Verrill Victims Participation and Reparations Others Section No. ICC-01/04-02/06 2/15 9 February 2016 ICC-01/04-02/06-1159 09-02-2016 3/15 EK T Trial Chamber VI ('Chamber') of the International Criminal Court ('Court'), in the case of The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, having regard to Articles 64 and 69 of the Rome Statute ('Statute') and Regulation 44 of the Regulations of the Court, issues this 'Decision on Defence preliminary challenges to Prosecution's expert witnesses'.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Owns a Decedent's E-Mails: Inheritable Probate
    \\server05\productn\N\NYL\10-2\NYL201.txt unknown Seq: 1 3-OCT-07 14:08 WHO OWNS A DECEDENT’S E-MAILS: INHERITABLE PROBATE ASSETS OR PROPERTY OF THE NETWORK? Jonathan J. Darrow* and Gerald R. Ferrera** “E-mail is ‘comparable in principle to sending a first class letter . .’.” —People v. Lipsitz1 I. INTRODUCTION In early 2005, military dad John Ellsworth made national news through his seemingly innocuous request to be allowed access to his deceased son’s e-mail account.2 His twenty-year-old marine son, Jus- tin, was killed in Fallujah on November 13, 2004, by a roadside bomb.3 Mr. Ellsworth wanted to collect e-mails that his son wrote and received while in Iraq to create a memorial in his son’s honor.4 Were his e-mails similar to “sending a first-class letter,” with all of the at- tendant implications for ownership and inheritability, or is the com- parison mentioned in Lipsitz inaccurate? Yahoo!, Justin’s e-mail service provider, complied with Mr. Ells- worth’s request, but only after receiving an order from a Michigan probate court.5 Yahoo! stated that, in the absence of a court order, * Assistant Professor of Business Law, Plymouth State University; Duke Univer- sity (J.D.), Boston College (M.B.A.), Cornell University (B.S.) ** Gregory H. Adamian Professor of Law, Bentley College; Executive Director, Bentley Global CyberLaw Center; New England School of Law (J.D.), Bentley Col- lege (M.S. Taxation), Boston College (B.S.) 1. People v. Lipsitz, 663 N.Y.S.2d 468, 473 (Sup.
    [Show full text]