Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-18-12IN RE: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS MARGARET B. MASTERS, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Living Person, .ORPHANS' COURT DIVISION No. 21-12-1065 ANSWER TO PETITION TO ALLOW CO-AGENTS UNDER DURABLE POWER OF ATTORNEY TO MAKE ESTATE PLANNING GIFTS ~;. ,- _ a.. --.i^~ e"r-'~ The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, by its Attorney General, Lind: 'I~elly,ca~ ~ :- :. .~ _. .w,., .k -_ pa~~ens~ patriae (Commonwealth), hereby answers, as follows: `--, ;' ~°' -~_~ - 1. Admitted. ``~ ~~ ~ ~ ~-- ~ ~~ `~` - ~, .. ; -- 2. Admitted in part and Denied in part. It is Admitted that Hackett mid ~~`~~' French are acting as agents. The Durable Power of Attorney is a document, which being in writing, speaks for itself and any attempt to misconstrue or misinterpret same is specifically, Denied. 3. Admitted in part and Denied in part. It is Admitted that Hackett and French are named in the Durable Power of Attorney. The Durable Power of Attorney is a document, which being in writing, speaks for itself and any attempt to misconstrue or misinterpret same is specifically, Denied. 4. To the extent that the averments of this numbered Paragraph state a legal conclusion, no response is required. The remaining averments are Denied in that after reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth is without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments. 5. Denied in that after reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth is without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the averment. 6. Denied. The Durable Power of Attorney is a document, which being in writing, speaks for itself and any attempt to misconstrue or misinterpret same is specifically, Denied. 7. The averments of this numbered Paragraph state a legal conclusion to which no response is required. 8. The averments of this numbered Paragraph state a legal conclusion to which no response is required. 9. The averments of this numbered Paragraph state a legal conclusion to which no response is required. 10. Denied in that after reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth is without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the averment. 11. Denied in that after reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth is without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the averment. 12. The averments of this numbered Paragraph state a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed required, the averments are Denied due to the uncertainty of future tax rates. 13. Denied in that after reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth is without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the averment. 14. Denied in that after reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth is without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the averment. 15. Denied in that after reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth is without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the averment. 16. Denied in that after reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth is without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the averment. The averment if further Denied due to the uncertainty of future tax rates and the risk associated with changing tax rates was, in fact, present at the time that the Durable Power of Attorney was drafted. 17. Denied in that after reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth is without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the averment. By way of further response, the Commonwealth has requested but not yet received a copy of the Will. 18. Denied in that after reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth is without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the averment. By way of further response, the Commonwealth has requested but not yet received a copy of the Will. 19. Denied in that after reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth is without suff dent information to form a belief as to the truth of the averment. By way of further response, the Commonwealth has requested but not yet received a copy of the Will. Upon information and belief, the premature loss of the income stream from the gifted assets will have a substantial impact upon the residuary estate. 20. The averments of this numbered Paragraph state a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed required, the averments are Denied due to the uncertainty of future tax rates. 21. The averments of this numbered Paragraph state a legal conclusion to which no response is required. 22. The averments of this numbered Paragraph state a legal conclusion to which no response is required.. 23. The averments of this numbered Paragraph state a legal conclusion and request for judicial relief. To the extent that the averments state a legal conclusion, no response is required. In response to the request for judicial relief,. the Commonwealth objects to the extent that the charitable bequests will be negatively impacted by the premature distribution. 24. Denied in that after reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth is without sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the averment. By way of further response, the Commonwealth has requested but not yet received a copy of the Will and therefore, cannot determine whether all interested parties have been served. WHEREFORE, the Commonwealth objects to the proposed gifts unless and until the impact upon the residuary charities can be assessed and addressed. BY THE COMMONWEALTH: LINDA L. KELLY, Attorney General ,~ ~, Heather Vance-Rittman Senior Deputy Attorney General Mark A. Pacella Chief Deputy Attorney General Office of Attorney General Charitable Trusts and Organizations Section 14t' Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 October 16, 2012 (717) 783-2853 IN RE: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS MARGARET B. MASTERS, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Living Person, ORPHANS' COURT DIVISION No. 21-12-1065 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE NOW, this 16th day of October, 2012, I, Heather J. Vance-Rittman, Senior Deputy Attorney General, caused to be served a true and correct copy of the Attorney General 's Answer in the above-captioned action by placing a true and correct copy of same in the United States First Class Mail, postage prepaid, to the following: Thomas P. Gacki, Esquire Eckert, Seamans, Cherin & Mellott 213 Market Street, 8`" Floor Harrisburg, PA 17108-1248 Bryn Mawr College Development Office, Helfarian 101 N. Merlon Avenue Bryn Mawr, PA 19010-2899 St. Stephens Episcopal School 215 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17101 Theatre Harrisburg through counsel, R. Scott Shearer Keefer, Wood, Allen & Rahal, LLP 210 Walnut Street P.O. Box 11963 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1963 Office of Attorney General Charitable Trusts & Organizations Section 14`'' Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 (717) 783-2853 St. Stephens Episcopal Cathedral through counsel Thomas B. Schmidt, III Pepper Hamilton, LLP 100 Market Street, Suite 200 P.O. Box 1181 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1181 HEATHER J. VANCE-RITTMAN Senior Deputy Attorney General PA. Atty Id. No. 82705