Legal News & Updates
Happy National Dog Day
What Happens to Your Pet When You Die? Your pet may be part of the family, but the law considers pets property. So, you can’t leave money directly to your pet.
Why a Trust? You don’t want your pet to end up at a shelter. A traditional trust gives you the most latitude in financially planning for your pet’s care. You can spell out the important details — from type of food, to how often he should see the vet, daily exercise routine, etc.
Traditional Trust: You can set up a traditional trust for a pet. You can provide instructions for the pet’s care, appoint a caregiver and name a trustee to manage the money.
Statutory Pet Trust: With a statutory pet trust, you can put a simple direction in your will, such as “I leave $5,000 in trust for the care of Buddy.” The probate court will fill in the gaps, appointing people to provide care and oversee the money.
Things to Consider When Setting Up A Pet Trust.
- Talk to the people you want to care for your pet to make sure they’re willing to do it.
- Choose a trustee who is different from the pet caregiver. This provides a system of checks and balances.
- Name successors for the trustee and caregiver in case either is unable to perform the role.
- Be reasonable with the amount you set aside for your pet, so the trust doesn’t become a target for disgruntled relatives.
- Designate where the remainder of the money in the trust will go when the pet dies.
- Provide detailed instructions. Don’t assume your caregiver and trustee will know how your pet should be taken care of.
Landmark Ruling From The Supreme Court This Week
In its first decision since 2018 involving LGBT rights, the Supreme Court ruled in a landmark decision on Monday, June 15, 2020, that title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which among other things bans employment discrimination on the basis of sex, also applies to sexual orientation and gender identity.
The ruling folds together two different cases brought by three different plaintiffs, two gay men and one transgender woman. Gerald Bostok of Georgia was fired from his job as a child welfare services coordinator in 2013 after joining a gay softball league. See Bostock v Clayton County Georgia, 590 US (2020). Donald Zarda was fired from his job as a skydiving instructor in New York in 2010 after making a joke about his sexual orientation to a client. Altitude Express v Donald Zarda, 590 US (2020). And Aimee Stephens, a funeral director in suburban Detroit, was fired after telling her boss that she would come to work presenting as a woman. R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v EEOC, 590 US (2020). Of the three plaintiffs, only Bostok is still alive to see the decision.
Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, who wrote the majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., used standard methods of textual analysis to reach this result. “By discriminating against homosexuals, the employer intentionally penalizes men for being attracted to men and women for being attracted to women, …. By discriminating against transgender persons, the employer unavoidably discriminates against persons with one sex identified at birth and another today. Any way you slice it, the employer intentionally refuses to hire applicants in part because of the affected individuals’ sex.”
In Gorsuch’s conception, the breadth of the statutory language made this outcome inevitable: “The limits of the drafters’ imagination supply no reason to ignore the law’s demands. . . . Only the written word is law, and all persons are entitled to its benefit.”
The broad and immediate impact across the country of this ruling will be seen for years to come as judges and law makers alike navigate its intersection with religious freedom and employers rights.
 Moira Donegan. “The US supreme court has given LGBTQ Americans a rare bit of good news” theguardian.com, June 16, 2020.
COVID-19 Laws in Plain English
Realizing that the state of the law is very fluid and rapidly evolving creature, here is a quick look at the federal legislation that is either already in place, or about to be enacted to address the novel coronavirus outbreak in the United States. The President and Congress have put forth several legislative packages attempting to ease the impact of COVID-19 on the health care system and the broader economy.
Estate Planning Alert
The SECURE Act was passed in the House of Representatives by a vote of 297 to 120 on December 17, 2019 and by a vote of 71 to 23 by the Senate on December 19, 2019. The Act’s prevailing goal is to encourage employers who may have previously resisted offering tax-advantageous retirement plans, due to their expense and administrative requirements, to increase access to their employees..