The decedent, Keith R. O’Malley, was the father of two children from two different relationships. His minor son, E.L., resided with E.L.’s mother in New York, although O’Malley was a New Jersey resident. O’Malley, who was financially successful, died unexpectedly at the age of 36.
In 2008, O’Malley and E.L.’s mother had entered into a child support agreement. It obligated O’Malley to pay $3,000 per month in child support until E.L. reached age 21, as well as E.L.’s childcare and unreimbursed medical expenses, and an annual contribution into a college account. The agreement was incorporated into a New York Child Support Order in March 2008.
Earlier that same month, O’Malley had executed a Last Will and Testament in which he specifically disinherited his minor son, instead leaving his estate to his minor daughter, his dog, and in trust for other family members.
Following his death, E.L.’s mother filed an Order to Show Cause seeking to invalidate the will and to enforce the child support agreement. She asserted the following causes of action:
(1) Protective Arrangement pursuant to N.J.S.A. 3B:12-1; (2) Mistake; (3) Lack of Capacity; (4) Undue Influence; (5) Probable Intent; and (6) Breach of Contract.
The probate judge had dismissed the claims raised by E.L.’s mother, concluding,
No matter how unfortunate these circumstances are, I find I cannot invalidate the [w]ill…. I find that there is nothing in the paper[s] that would allow me to do that, that would allow me to enter into a protective arrangement or enforce the child support agreement because that is a New York agreement. Perhaps there may be something in New York. But New York law states that they cannot be enforced after death.
Following the dismissal, E.L.’s mother appealed the dismissal of the probable intent and mistake claims, claiming that factual issues precluded the dismissal. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of these claims, finding that the probate court had properly exercised its broad discretion in determining that a plenary hearing was not warranted.
On the breach of contract claim, however, the Appellate Division reversed the dismissal and remanded the claim. The appeals court focused on the child support agreement, rather than the will, and whether the disinherited son should be considered a creditor, rather than a beneficiary, of his father’s estate. Although the lower court had concluded that New York law does not allow support orders to survive death, the Appellate Division found that New York case law might permit the support obligation to survive the father’s death in this case. To make a determination on this issue, it found that the child support order had to be examined to ascertain whether the parties intended the obligation to survive death. It left to the probate judge the decision as to whether discovery or a plenary hearing would be needed to resolve the issue. In the event that the probate court finds that the support order survived O’Malley’s death, “the court may then fashion an appropriate remedy to ensure the future payment of the support obligations.”
A copy of In re Estate of O’Malley can be found here – In re Estate of O’Malley
For additional information concerning estate planning and administration, visit: https://vanarellilaw.com/estate-planning-administration/
For additional information concerning New Jersey divorce law, visit: https://vanarellilaw.com/family-law-services/#sdpnj
Categories
- Affordable Care Act
- Alzheimer's Disease
- Arbitration
- Attorney Ethics
- Attorneys Fees
- Beneficiary Designations
- Blog Roundup and Highlights
- Blogs and Blogging
- Care Facilities
- Caregivers
- Cemetery
- Collaborative Family Law
- Conservatorships
- Consumer Fraud
- Contempt
- Contracts
- Defamation
- Developmental Disabilities
- Discovery
- Discrimination Laws
- Doctrine of Probable Intent
- Domestic Violence
- Elder Abuse
- Elder Law
- Elective Share
- End-of-Life Decisions
- Estate Administration
- Estate Litigation
- Estate Planning
- Events
- Family Law
- Fiduciary
- Financial Exploitation of the Elderly
- Funeral
- Future of the Legal Profession
- Geriatric Care Managers
- Governmental or Public Benefit Programs
- Guardianship
- Health Issues
- Housing for the Elderly and Disabled
- In Remembrance
- Insolvent Estates
- Institutional Liens
- Insurance
- Interesting New Cases
- Intestacy
- Law Firm News
- Law Firm Videos
- Law Practice Management / Development
- Lawyers and Lawyering
- Legal Capacity or Competancy
- Legal Malpractice
- Legal Rights of the Disabled
- Liens
- Litigation
- Mediation
- Medicaid Appeals
- Medicaid Applications
- Medicaid Planning
- Annuities
- Care Contracts
- Divorce
- Estate Recovery
- Family Part Non-Dissolution Support Orders
- Gifts
- Life Estates
- Loan repayments
- MMMNA
- Promissory Notes
- Qualified Income Trusts
- Spousal Refusal
- Transfers For Reasons Other Than To Qualify For Medicaid
- Transfers to "Caregiver" Child(ren)
- Transfers to Disabled Adult Children
- Trusts
- Undue Hardship Provision
- Multiple-Party Deposit Account Act
- New Cases
- New Laws
- News Briefs
- Newsletters
- Non-Probate Assets
- Nursing Facility Litigation
- Personal Achievements and Awards
- Personal Injury Lawsuits
- Probate
- Punitive Damages
- Reconsideration
- Retirement Benefits
- Reverse Mortgages
- Section 8 Housing
- Settlement of Litigation
- Social Media
- Special Education
- Special Needs Planning
- Surrogate Decision-Making
- Taxation
- Technology
- Texting
- Top Ten
- Trials
- Trustees
- Uncategorized
- Veterans Benefits
- Web Sites and the Internet
- Webinar
- Writing Intended To Be A Will
Vanarelli & Li, LLC on Social Media