President’s Page .................................................................... Thomas V. Monahan 2 Drafting for the Optimum Marital Deduction ...................... ]. Rodney Johnson 3 Virginia Family Law .................................................................. Dulcey B. Fowler 7 Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity ...................................... Tristram T. Hyde, IV 12 Law Reform ............................................................................ Thomas R. Watkins 17 19 Book Review .................................................................................... B. ]. Brabham 23 24 39 THE VIRGINIA BAR ASSOCIATION OFFICERS AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE President Past President ¯ Thomas V. Monahan W. Gibson Harris P.O. Box 844 1400 Ross Building Winchester, Virginia 22601 Richmond, Virginia 23219 President-Elect Secretary-Treasurer William B. Spong, Jr. A. Ward Sims P.O. Drawer 10 Office of Development Portsmouth, Virginia 23704 University of Virginia Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 Chairman, Young Lawyers Section John W. Pearsall, III 1005 United Virginia Bank Building Richmond, Virginia 23219 Executive Committee (Other than ex Officio Members) A. Hugo Blankingship, Jr., Chairman Edward R. Slaughter, Jr. P.O. Box 338 P.O. Box 1191 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 B. Purnell Eggleston Frank O. Meade P.O. Box 2887 P.O. Box 720 Roanoke, Virginia 24001 Danville, Virginia 24541 Richard B. Spindle, III Jack E. Greer 1800 Virginia National Bank Bldg. 1700 Virginia National Bank Bldg. Norfolk, Virginia 23510 Norfolk, Virginia 23514 R. Harvey Chappell, Jr. William E. Wharton 1200 Mutual Building 90 North Main Street Richmond, Virginia 23219. Harrisonburg, Virginia 22801 Jesse B. Wilson, III 4069 Chain Bridge Road Fairfax, Virginia 22030 V rginia Bar./lssociatio Nour al Volume I July 1975 Number 3 EDITORIAL BOARD President’s Page .................................................................................. 2 Thon~as V. Monahan Appointed Members E. Waller Dudley Drafting for the Opdmum Marital Deduction ...................... Alexandria ]. Rodney Johnson Vernon M. Geddy, Jr. Virginia Family Law: The ~Effect of ’the Williamsburg General Assembly~s 1975 Revisions ........................... ....... ...... ’ ....... 7 Dulcey B. Fowler Edward S. Graves Lynchburg Not- Guilty by Reason of Insanity: A Critical o Examination of Code Secti0h 19:1-239 :. ..................... .-12 David W. Parrish, Jr. Tristram T. [-lyde, IV’ Charlottesville Law Reforin Ex-Officio Members Association!s Judicial Nominations Bill Defeated ~in General Assembly ................... Thomas V. Monahan Thomas R~ Watkins President Winchester Judicial Page ...................................................................................... 19 William B. Spong, Jr. Book Review President-Elect How to Collect a Money Judgment by Sidney Sherwin .......... 23 Portsmouth B. ]. Brabham A. Ward Sims Young Lawyers Section Secretary-Treasurer In This Issue .............................. 24 Charlottesville Representing the Professional Athlete: A Legal Tussle with Muscle .............................................. 24 John W. Pearsall, III Committee Reports ................................................................ 36 Chairman, Young Lawyers Section Ba.r Association Proceedings Richmond Program for the Summer Meeting.. ...................................... 39 Proposed Constitutionals Amendment ....... 42 Editorial Staff Memorials ............................................................. ’. .................. 43 Charles E. Friend Editor Susan E. Waterman The Virginia Bar Association Journal is published quarterly by The Virginia Editorial Assistant Bar Association as a service to the profession. Contributions are welcome, but the right is reserved to select material to be published. Publication of any article or Charles F. Midkiff statement is not to be deemed an endorsement of the views expressed therein by Young Lawyers Section the Association. The office of publication is located at The T. C. Williams School Editor of Law, University of Richmond, Virginia 23173. Edward D. Barnes Membership dues include; the cost of one subscription to each member of the Association. Subscription price to others, $6.00 per year; single copies $2.00. Young Lawyers Section Appl, ication to mail at second-class postage is pending at University, of Richmond, Associate Editor Virginia 23173. ’~7"ITH the publication of this issue of the Journal, Similarly, I urge you to schedule your time so that T ~ the summer meeting of the Virginia Bar As- you will be able to attend the Friday evening and sociation is only weeks away. The registrations and Saturday mo.rning programs. The three pro~ams, reservations already made indicate that we will have that covering aspects of the workings of the C.I.A. on a full house and a successful meeting. In view of the Friday evening, and those dealing with energy prob- recreational facilities available at The Greenbrier, it lems as related to the consumer and problems arLsing is inevitable, I suppose, that for many this meeting from scientific and other advances in regard to birth, emphasizes the social, a~s distinguished from the work- are desi~ned to be of interest not only to lawyers, ing, side of our Association. Recognizing the part but to their spouses. Especially attractive and knowl- that the social aspect of our Association plays in its edgeable panels have been assembled, and your continuing existence, however, leads to two further Executive Committee urges you, and urges you to considerations. urge your friends and your spouses, to be present. First and obviously, the officers of your Associa- Having stated the foregoing concerning the busi- tion sincerely hope that every member of the Associa- ness aspect of the summer meeting, let me return to a tion present at the summer meeting will participate consideration of its social aspects. In this regard, too in the working sessions of the Association. You will often the importance of such social contacts in estab- find the entire program printed in this issue of the lishing and maintaining the high standards and honor- Journal. The business and program activities have able conduct expected of lawyers is overlooked. So- been designed to leave a substantial amount of time ciety is defined in my dictionary a~s "any portion of to enjoy the pleasures of The Greenbrier, whether they a community regarded as a unit distinguishable by be tennis, golf, sauna or something else. particular aims or standards of living or conduct." In However, we urge each of you to take advantage this sense, the social contacts established and main- of the opportunity Friday morning to sit as not only tained through your Bar Association are of utmost a spectator, but a participant, in the committee meet- importance to you, to the legal profession, and to the ing dealing with the work of the Association in your public as a whole. particular field of interest. Too much cannot be said Writing in the Spring, 1975, issue of "Barrister," about the time spent and devotion to duty shown by the publication of the Young Lawyers Section of the most committee members. The committees will wel- come your presence and participation. (Continued on pa.ge 22) j. RODNEY JOHNSON Drafting for the Ol)timtm Marital Deduction HILE the marital deduction provided for by deduction, as an end unto itself, may be suffering from W federal estate tax law may not necessarily be a form of estate planner’s myopia. They are taking the controlling factor in planning the will of a married the position that instead of focusing on the maximum permn, it is certainly one of the most important factors amount that can be transferred tax-free to the wife, because of the sheer magnitude of this deduction-- counsel should recognize that the proper ambit of up to 50% of the adjusted gross estate) A direct his task in the typical cause is to maximize the amount consequence of this importance is reflected in the fact of his client’s estate that wil! end up in the hands of that the marital deduction has become the most the ultimate beneficiaries (usually the children), after written-about topic in the estate planning area. Most having insured that the wife is adequately provided of what has been written about this subject can be for during her life and has the degree of control over divided into the two following categories: (1) an the ultimate disposition of the assets that is cor~sistent explanation of the operation of the marital deduction with the husband’s plan. What counsel should be seek- or one of its facets; or (2) a discussion of how to obtain the maximum marital deduction through the use of one of several competing formula clauses. The Maximum vs. The Optimum Deduction Some estate plannel.’s are beginning to suggest that those of their brethren who find themselves regularly focusing on this latter goal of maximizing the marital- 1 IRC 2056. EDITOR’S NOTE: This is Professor Johnson’s second contri- bution to the Journal. It is offered as a companion piece to the article entitled "Simplifying the Marital Deduction Will" which appeared in the January, 1975 issue. J. Rodney Johnson taught at the William and Mary Law School before joining the faculty of the University of Richmond Law School. He received a J.D. from William and Mary School of Law and an LL.M. from New York Uni- versity School of Law. He is the author of a number of articles in the fields of estate plan- ning and fiduciary administration. 3 ing then