Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

statuteprobatetrustwill
pleatrustwilldeclaratory judgment

Related Cases

Melican v. Parker, 283 Ga. 253, 657 S.E.2d 234, 08 FCDR 423
View Case »
In re Estate of Treloar, 151 N.H. 460, 859 A.2d 1162
View Case »
Keith v. Lulofs, 283 Va. 768, 724 S.E.2d 695
View Case »
In re Estate of Cammack, Not Reported in S.W.3d, 2000 WL 1679492
View Case »
Clark v. Campbell, 82 N.H. 281, 133 A. 166, 45 A.L.R. 1433
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

In re Trust Under Deed of David P. Kulig Dated January 12, 2001, 644 Pa. 187, 175 A.3d 222

Facts

David Kulig executed a revocable trust while married to Joanne Kulig, naming himself as trustee and designating his wife and children as beneficiaries. After Joanne's death, David married Mary Jo Kulig and died shortly thereafter, leaving behind a trust valued at over $3 million and a probate estate valued at over $2 million. The children from David's first marriage contested whether Mary Jo, as a pretermitted spouse, was entitled to a share of the trust assets, arguing that the trust should not be included in the intestate estate for calculating her share.

On January 12, 2001, while married to Joanne Kulig (“Joanne”), David Kulig (“Decedent”) executed a revocable trust (the “Trust”) naming himself as trustee. The named beneficiaries of the Trust upon Decedent's death were his then-wife Joanne, and the children born to Decedent and Joanne.

Issue

Whether the revocable inter vivos trust should be included in the decedent's estate for purposes of determining the pretermitted spouse's statutory entitlement under Pennsylvania law.

The parties disputed whether the Trust may be considered part of the intestate estate for purposes of calculating the pretermitted spousal share or is instead available to Wife only in the event that she chooses to claim her elective share pursuant to Section 2203 of the Code.

Rule

Under Pennsylvania law, a pretermitted spouse is entitled to a share of the estate as if the decedent had died intestate, which includes assets not effectively disposed of by will or otherwise, unless specifically excluded by statute.

First, if the parties marry after the operative will has been executed, Subsection 2507(3) of the Code entitles the excluded spouse (referred to as a “pretermitted spouse”) to take the share of the estate to which she would have been entitled had the decedent died intestate, i.e., without a will.

Analysis

The court analyzed the statutory provisions regarding pretermitted spouses and the treatment of inter vivos trusts. It concluded that the enactment of Section 7710.2 of the Probate, Estates and Fiduciaries Code extended the protections afforded to pretermitted spouses to include revocable inter vivos trusts, thereby allowing the wife to claim a share of the trust assets as part of her intestate share.

The Orphans' Court interpreted Section 7710.2 as directing courts to assume the same intent not only with regard to the intestate estate incorporated by reference in Subsection 2507(3), but also as to revocable inter vivos trusts.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court reversed the Superior Court's ruling, determining that the revocable inter vivos trust should be included in the estate for the purpose of calculating the pretermitted spouse's share.

The court concluded that, in enacting Section 7710.2, the General Assembly intended the rule of construction employed to ascertain a decedent's intent in connection to a pretermitted spouse be applied to inter vivos trusts.

Who won?

Mary Jo Kulig prevailed in the case because the court found that the revocable inter vivos trust was part of the estate for determining her entitlement as a pretermitted spouse.

Children filed a petition for declaratory judgment before the Orphans' Division of the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas (hereinafter the “Orphans' Court”), seeking a declaration that the Trust was excluded from Wife's pretermitted spousal share.

You must be