The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08-26-14 (2) Shaun E. O'Toole ra Attorney I.D.#44797 � � � r'�t'i ° � 220 Pine Street � Q � � n � � � � � a � -. Harrisburg,Pennsylvania 17101 � � � `_ Attorney for, Petitioner, Rofiert M. Mumma, 11 � � � � �` �n � c� �,.-�rn � � � � ��° � �T. . u'- :, ° �?`-��c' - IN THE COURT OF COMMN PLEAS OF ? �c--> �,-� � �-,��-�+��t =p CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA '�' "'� 4 `� �=`�� ORPHANS' COURT DIVISION � � �c�rnocv .. r-�a � ��., IN RE: MARITAL TRUST UNDER ' NO. 21-86-398 � WILL OF ROBERT M. MUMMA, • . Deceased • OBJECTIONS TO ACCOUNT OF THE MARITA�, TRUST UNDER THE WILL OF ROBERT M. MUMMA DECEASED AND NOW comes Robert M. Mumma, II,by and through his attorney, Shaun E. O'Toole, and objects to the Account of the Marital Trust Under the Wi!1 of Robert M. Mumma, Deceased for the period of January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013 ("Account"), and sets forth the following: 1. Objector is Robert M. Mumma, II the son of Decedent, Robert M. Mumma. 2. Objector is the beneficiary of the Marital Trust Under the Will of Robert M. Mumma, Deceased ("Trust") and is entitled to a distribution of twenty-five (25%) of the Trust upon the death of Decedent's wife which occurred over four (4) years ago on July 17, 20•10. 3. The Trustees of the Trust have previously filed seven (7) Interim Accounts covering the administration of the Trust through December 31, 2013 and Objector has filed Objections to these Interim Accounts. 4. Many of the Objections filed by Objector to the previous Interim Accounts have not been fully adjudicated and are currently on appeal to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania. 5. The Objections to the previous Interim Accounts impact the current Account and Objector hereby incorporates and restates the pending objections to the previous Interim 1 � Accounts, especially the objections pertaining to the Trust and the Residual Trust listin� as assets of such trust assets that should not have been probated as part of Decedent's estate since neither Decedent, at the time of his death, nor his estate after Decedent's death, owned a valid interest in such assets, including,but not limited to, stock or any ownership interests in the following: Lebanon Rock, Inc., Pennsy Supply Inc.Nine Ninety-Nine, Inc., Bobali Corp., G-A-T Distribution and D-E Distribution. 6. The $15,447.58 in legal fees paid by the Marital Trust are excessive and unreasonable in light of the fact that they were incurred due to the Trustee administering the Trust in a manner that is contrary to the intent of Decedent and in a manner that promotes disharmony between the Trustee and the beneficiaries, as evident by the fact that the Trust was to be terminated and its assets distributed to the beneficiaries upon the death of Decedent's wife which occurred on July 17, 2010. 7. Although Objector believes the legal fees charged against the Trust are excessive and unreasonable, Objector believes the legal fees Trustee charged against the Residual Trust in the account for such trust filed contemporaneously with this Account, although also excessive and unreasonable, should be charged against Marital Trust on this Account since such fees were incurred in matters related to the Marital Trust as well as the Residual Trust. 8. The $57,800.00 in trustee commissions paid by the Maxital Trust to the Trustee are excessive in light of the fees paid to other service providers such as property managers, attorneys, and accountants to whom much of Trustee's responsibilities was delegated. 9. The $57,800.00 in trustee commissions paid by the Trust to the Trustee are excessive in light of the fact that they were incurred due to the Trustee administering the Trust in a manner that is contrary to the intent of Decedent and in a manner that promotes disharmony 2 between the Trustee and the beneficiaries, as evident by the fact that the Trust was to be terminated and its assets distributed to the beneficiaries upon the death of Decedent's wife which occurred on July 17, 2010. 10. Many of the assets are valued at historical values, a few (DE Distribution Corp. and G-A-T Distribution Corp.) appear to be valued at 1993 values, which, in addition to not providing the beneficiaries with an accurate assessment of the value of the Trust, is contrary to Cumberland County Orphans' Court Rule 6.1 (b)(3) which requires that the accountant provide a separate schedule of the change in holdings of the trust. 11. The Account values the Trust's ownership interest in other assets, namely DE Distribution Corp., G-A-T Distribution Corp., and Union Quarries at values that are woefully below the current fair market value of these assets thus preventing the beneficiaries from properly assessing the value of the Trust. Moreover, failing to provide the current market value of these assets violates Cumberland County Orphans' Court Rule 6.1 (b)(3) which requires that the accountant provide a separate schedule of the change in holdings of the trust. 12. The Trustee has improperly claimed a receivable from the Residual Trust in the amount of$2,939,49910 which, in addition to being improperly allocated, directly benefits the Trustee personally as the beneficiary of the residuary estate of Decedent's wife and adversely impacts the interests of the other beneficiaries. 13. The Trustee has refused to distribute the assets of the Trast upon the death of Decedent's wife, as directed to do under the terms of the Trust docume_�t. 14. By refusing to distribute the assets of the Trust upon the death of Decedent's wife as directed to do under the terms of the Trust document, Trustee is denying the beneficiaries of their right to take possession of the Trust assets while continuing to incur unnecessary expenses 3 which would be avoided if the assets of the Trust had been timely distributed as directed by the Trust document. 15. By refusing to distribute the assets of the Trust, in-kind, upon the death of Decedent's wife, Trustee violated paragraph 13 of Decedent's will which provided that it was Decedent's desire that the businesses which Decedent had personally directed during his lifetime be continued for the benefit of and under the management and control of his immediate family. 16. By failing to file a statement of proposed distribution for Decedent's estate, Trustee, who also served as one of the two executrices of Decedent's estate, violated Rule 6.9 of the Orphans' Court Rules and has made it impossible to determine exactly how and when many of the assets now purported to be owned by the Trust were conveyed to the Trust. Wherefore, Petitioner requests that this Court to schedule an evidentiary hearing to address the administration of the Trust; order the distribution of the Trust assets in accordance with the terms of the Trust document; surcharge the Trustee for the Trust's excessive and improper expenditures; and grant such other relief which the Court deems appropriate. Respectfully submitted: � Dated: �I2G I 14 - aun E. O'Toole Attorney I.D. #44797 220 Pine Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101 Attorney for Petitioner 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that on this date a true and correct copy of the foregoing Brief was faxed to each of the following attorneys and served by first class United State�mail, postage prepaid, upon the following: Ivo V. Otto, III, Esquire . Martson Law Offices 10 East High Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (and by facsimile 171-243-1850); Brady L. Green, Esquire Wilbraham, Lawler& Buba 1818 Market Street, 31S`Floor Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; and Richard F. Rinaldo, Esquire Williams Coulson LLC One Gateway Center, 16th Floor Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222. � � Date: 06�2�� I 4 ' aun E. O'Toole Attorney Registration��To. 44797 220 Pine Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101 (717) 695-0389 Attorney for Objector, Robert M. Mumma, II