HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-04-07
. ,
.'
II
Todd F. Truntz, Esquire
Identification No. 83302
KEEFER WOOD ALLEN
& RAHAL, LLP
635 North 12th Street, Suite 400
Lemoyne, P A 17043
Attorneys for Respondent
CATHERINE A. MCKINNEY, Settlor of
The Patricia M. Kilkenny Family
Irrevocable Trust, and PATRICIA M.
KILKENNY,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, .....,
PENNSYLVANIA ~o 5
--- -:0 <-
Q2-o :I>
;;~~~ ~
.,.....' (..) '~:) -0
~::,OC'il __
()C
~ ::0
::,p-i
........
ORPHANS' COURT DNISION
Petitioners,
VS.
NO. 21-06-553
COMMUNITY TRUST COMPANY,
Respondent.
RESPONDENT'S STATEMENT OF POSITION
AND NOW, comes Respondent, Community Trust Company, (hereinafter "Respondent")
by and through its attorneys, Keefer Wood Allen & Rahal, LLP, to file the following
Respondent's Statement of Position with respect to the Hearing in the matter set forth above:
Backe:round and Procedural Historv
This matter began on June 20, 2006 with the filing of a Petition for Termination of Trust
by Petitioners Catherine A. McKinney and Patricia M. Kilkenny (hereinafter "Petitioners").
Pursuant to a Rule to Show Cause issued by the Court on June 28, 2006, Respondent filed its
Response on July 24,2006. Upon an August 6, 2006 Order of this Court, Respondent filed its
First and Final Account on September 5,2006. Petitioners' Objections to Respondent's First and
Final Account were filed on October 9,2006.
r
.'
w
:-::0
1.1
C)
C)
::::0
-- l?~
,-)
~;.,
-"
("'')
... r'n
C)
>'1
.-
-.J
A hearing was held before the Court on November 29,2006, during which the parties
placed a Stipulation on the record regarding an error that was discovered in the calculation of
monthly trustee fees claimed by Respondent. This Stipulation required Respondent to
recalculate its claimed monthly trustee fees and present the results in a fashion that would
accurately set forth Respondent's claim to the Court. During Respondent's recalculation, it
became apparent that the recalculated monthly fees had a corresponding effect upon the balance
of the corpus of the The Patricia M. Kilkenny Family Irrevocable Trust (hereinafter the "Trust")
that could not be adequately explained by a simple statement representing the total excess fees
erroneously collected by Respondent. Instead, Respondent desired to provide the Court with a
complete Summary of Account and a Restated Proposed Schedule of Distribution that would
provide a more clear and comprehensive analysis.
Respondent presents this Statement of Position for the Court's consideration since
Petitioners would not agree to the inclusion of a Summary of Account and a Restated Proposed
Schedule of Distribution as part of the Stipulation to be presented to the Court, as well as the
presentation of additional legal fees claimed by Respondent.
Statement in Regard to Trust Termination, Trustee
Compensation and Termination Fee
Since the parties are in agreement that the Trust should be terminated, the issues in this
matter are reduced to whether Respondent is entitled to a termination fee for Petitioner's
requested termination of the Trust and the amount thereof, the amount to which Respondent is
2
entitled as compensation for its services as trustee, 1 whether the legal costs incurred by the
Respondent in defending Petitioners' claim is properly chargeable to the Trust, and whether
Respondent should be charged Petitioners' legal fees if Petitioners are successful in this action.
The Respondent contends that Petitioners' claim is in reality a breach of contract action
regarding the fees to which Respondent is entitled under the Trust Agreement, the agreement that
governs the Trust. See In the Matter of Indenture Agreement of Lawson, 414 Pa. Super. 550,
553,607 A.2d 803,805 (1992) citing In re Kennedy Trust, 364 Pa. 310, 72 A.2d 124 (1950).
Petitioners assert that they were not aware of the fees that Respondent would charge as trustee of
the Trust, that Respondent charged excessive fees for the work it performed for the Trust and
that Respondent had no right to payment of a termination fee since Petitioners were merely
exercising a "power of appointment" that was not in fact a termination.
Respondent, while acknowledging that every agreement of trust has unique aspects, also
contends that every agreement of trust contains substantially similar common provisions as those
that govern the Trust. The payment of compensation to the trustee is one such common
provision, to which a trustee is clearly entitled. In re Ischy Trust, 490 Pa. 71, 80, 415 A.2d 37,
42 (1980).
As the Court is aware, the Pennsylvania Legislature recently enacted the Uniform Trust
Act, 20 Pa.C.S.A. ~ 7701 et seq., (the "UTA"), which went into effect on November 6,2006 and
1 At the advice of and with the consent of its legal counsel, Community Trust Company suspended taking its
fees beginning in August 2006 in an effort to preserve the status quo until litigation involving the Trust could be
resolved by the Court. Accordingly, the monthly fees that are charged from the date of suspension are currently
in arrears. In August 2006, when Community Trust Company suspended taking its fees, the fee for the month of
July 2006 had not been charged to the Trust and collected.
3
.
<<
applies to trusts created prior to the effective date. Prior to November 6, 2006, the Trust was
subject to Chapter 71,20 Pa.C.S.A. ~ 7101 et seq. of Pennsylvania's Probate, Estates and
Fiduciary Code (hereinafter "Chapter 71 "). Since the facts surrounding this litigation occurred
before November 6, 2006, and this litigation was instituted in June of 2006, it is suggested that
Chapter 71 applies to the Trust prior to November 6, 2006, and that the UTA applies thereafter.
Both the UTA and Chapter 71 provide for trustee compensation at 20 Pa.C.S.A. ~ 7768
and 20 Pa.C.S.A. ~ 7185, respectively. Pertinent to the instant matter is 20 Pa.C.S.A. ~ 7185(c),
which provides the following:
Where the compensation of a fiduciary is expressly prescribed either by
provisions of a will or deed of trust or other instrument under which he is acting
or by provisions of an agreement between him and the creator of a trust, nothing
in this section shall change in any way the rights of any parting in interest or of
the fiduciary.
(Emphasis added.) Here, the compensation provision is expressly prescribed in Article
IX of the Trust Agreement, under "Compensation of Trustee and Appointment of
Successor Trustee," Paragraph 9.01 Compensation, which reads as follows:
The Trustee shall receive as its compensation for the services performed
hereunder that sum of money which the Trustee normally and customarily charges
for performing similar services during the time which it performs these services.
Respondent states that it has always been in full compliance with the above compensation
provision. As established at the Hearing, the "sum of money which the Trustee normally and
customarily charges for performing similar services" is in fact represented in Respondent's Fee
Schedule as provided in Respondent's Exhibit "R-l," with such fees being normally and
4
.
.
customarily charged by Respondent to all other irrevocable and revocable trusts for which it
serves as trustee.
It was proven at the Hearing that Petitioners were presented Respondent's Fee Schedule
as set forth in R-1, which contained the applicable fees for the services they had requested and
were part of the terms of the Trust Agreement. It was clear from the testimony of each of the
Petitioners that they fully expected that the Trust would be charged fees for the services provided
by Respondent. More importantly, however, Susan A. Russell, President and CEO of
Respondent, testified that she was present at the meeting with Petitioners and their counsel at the
execution of the Trust Agreement, explained the Fee Schedule to Petitioners and provided them
with a copy. In addition, Ms. Russell testified that it is her established practice to provide a copy
of Respondent's Fee Schedule to anyone entering an agreement of trust with Respondent and to
answer any questions about the Fee Schedule whenever she attends a meeting where an
agreement of trust is signed. Ms. Russell also testified that the fees charged by Respondent are
comparable to those charged by similar trustees in the local marketplace.
Along with providing the amount of monthly trustee's fees, the. Fee Schedule also clearly
provides for a termination fee that would be charged in conjunction with a request to terminate
the Trust. The termination fee is found within Respondent's Fee Schedule under "OTHER
FEES" and provides:
Account Termination Fee: Equ~l to the average fee charged over the prior 12
months, annualized. (If account open less than 12 months, average of total fees
charged, annualized.)
5
.
.
The Respondent normally and customarily has charged a termination fee, calculated in
the above manner, to all terminating trusts, whether revocable or irrevocable. The termination
fee is intended to cover the expenses incurred in the termination of an agreement of trust, which
may include employee involvement in transferring the assets in accordance with the Schedule of
Distribution; the costs attendant to the transfer of cash and securities through third party
agencies; the cost of electronic account maintenance until distribution is complete; the cost of
postage and the costs of photocopYing, and other items. A trust termination fee is common in the
industry and supported by Pennsylvania case law. See In the Matter of Indenture Agreement of
Lawson, supra, 414 Pa. Super. at 554, 607 A.2d at 805 citing In re Williamson Estate, 368 Pa.
343,82 A.2d 49 (1951). Contract termination fees also prevail in other industries and are found
in many common contracts such as cell phone service, auto leases and annuity contracts.
In this matter, Petitioners attempted to withdraw the Trust assets through exercise of a
power of appointment and a subsequent partial power of appointment in an effort to avoid
payment of fees to which Respondent is entitled under such a de facto termination of the Trust.
Finally, there has been no breach of Respondent's fiduciary responsibility to the
Petitioners that may arise from charging and collecting fees from the Trust or from seeking a
termination fee from Petitioners. As previously stated, the monthly fees charged to the Trust and
the termination fee requested by Respondent are the same fees that it would and does charge to
any other revocable or irrevocable trust with the same market value as the Trust. Petitioners
have offered no evidence of any breach of fiduciary duty by Respondents. By charging monthly
fees and a termination fee to the Trust pursuant to its published Fee Schedule, Respondents are
6
simply acting in accordance with the terms of the Trust Agreement that Petitioners voluntarily
entered under the advice and consent of their estate planning legal counsel.
Statement with Respect to Approval and Confirmation of
ResDondents' First and Final Account of the Trust
Respondent's First and Final Account should be approved and confirmed, and
distribution should be ordered in accordance with the Restated Proposed Schedule of
Distribution as set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto. Respondent's First and Final Account is
in full compliance with Rule 6.1(g) and with the Appendix to the Supreme Court Orphans' Court
Rules.
As is customary, Respondent filed its First and Final Account as ". . . the statement
prepared by a fiduciary at the close of his administration of a fund. .. to reflect transactions that
have occurred and to be presented to the parties in interest as part of a process whereby the
fiduciary seeks discharge from liability for the events disclosed." (See, Appendix to the Supreme
Court Orphans' Court Rules, Report of Fiduciary Accounting Standards Committee, Scope of the
Project.) For the Respondent's First and Final Account to attain the level of a statement
prepared by a fiduciary at the close of his administration of a fund, the Respondent, as
accountant, must prepare and submit an appropriate update of its account to this Court and to
other interested parties.
Updating the pending First and Final Account is particularly appropriate where, as here,
the account covers a period that ended on August 31, 2006 which date is more than four months
previous. During the intervening period, Respondent remained in its capacity as trustee and
7
transactions of substance have occurred during those four months that should be presented to this
Court and to the other interested parties. Updating of the Account is also necessitated by the
Stipulation previously made in open court by the respective counsel for the Respondents and for
the Petitioners, to the effect that an error had occurred in the calculation of monthly fees that had
been charged to the trust corpus. A second facet of that Stipulation was the Respondent's
agreement to recalculate its fees and restore any excess fees to the Trust corpus.
Specifically, Respondent recalculated the fees that were charged and collected between
October 2002 and June 2006. Those fees were recalculated at the appropriate rate of 1.1 % rather
than at the rate of 1.3% that had been erroneously applied. Consequently, Respondent
determined that excess fees in the amount of $2,164.00 were to be restored to the trust corpus.
Petitioners are in agreement with this amount of excess fees, and statements reflecting this
amount were sent to the Court under cover of a letter dated December 22, 2006.
Although the impact of the fees restored to the Trust corpus affects the entire First and
Final Account, Petitioners were unwilling to stipulate to Respondent's restatement of the
Summary of Account and Restated Proposed Schedule of Distribution when the same were
proffered as part of a proposed written stipulation to be filed with the Court representing the fee
recalculation. The restated Summary of Account and the Restated Proposed Schedule of
Distribution contained only the changes directly arising from the fee recalculation. Ironically,
many of the recalculations contained within these documents are favorable to the Petitioners.
For example, the portion of the fee restored to income increases the total Income Receipts and
8
the Income Balance on Hand. Similarly, the portion of the fee restored to principal increases the
total Principal Receipts and the Principal Balance on Hand.
For the Respondent to present a complete and accurate account to this Court and to the
other interested parties, it has prepared and attached hereto, as Exhibit "A," a Summary of
Account for the Period of September 6, 2002 through December 31, 2006. During that period,
the Respondent restored the excess fees to the trust corpus and made a discretionary distribution,
from the trust corpus, to Petitioner, Patricia M. Kilkenny. To make the approved discretionary
distribution to Patricia M. Kilkenny, Respondent withdrew the sum of$13,223.62 from the
Metropolitan Life Variable Annuity # 550008217. That discretionary distribution was made
with the consent and approval of Petitioners' and Respondent's respective legal councitl
The recalculation of the fee, previously charged and collected, directly caused several
changes to entries in the Proposed Schedule of Distribution. One such change occurred in the
Respondent's requested termination fee. Calculating the termination fee, by using the corrected
actual fees, the termination fee is reduced from $4,242.50 to $3,628.01. Similarly, the estimated
fee for the Trustee's services for the months of August through October 2006 has become the
Trustee's actual fees for the months of July through November 2006. (Please see footnote 1 on
page three.)
2 At the advice and with the consent of its legal counsel, Petitioners' legal counsel and upon the written request
of Patricia M. Kilkenny for a discretionary distribution from the trust, Community Trust Company made a
partial withdrawal of$13,223.62 from Metropolitan Life Variable Annuity # 550008217. That partial
withdrawal was expended by distributing $11,120.00 to Patricia M. Kilkenny for various expenses that were to
be incurred by her subsequent to August 31, 2006 and by applying the balance of the partial withdrawal,
$2,103.62, to payment of the 2006-2007 School Real Estate Tax due September 30,2006 on 603 Fairway Drive
Camp Hill, Pennsylvania.
9
The passage of time has also caused other corrections to be made in the Proposed
Schedule of Distribution. When originally prepared, the Respondent's anticipated total legal fees
were expressed as its actual legal fees, accrued to August 31, 2006, plus an estimated reserve.
Presently, Respondent can include its actual legal fees accrued to date.
Consequently, Respondent has prepared and attached hereto, as Exhibit "B," a Restated
Proposed Schedule of Distribution that reflects the aforementioned changes as well as the
changes which arose from recalculation of the trustee's fees from October 2002 through June
2006. The Restated Proposed Schedule of Distribution retains all of its original entries. Those
entries, which have changed, have received a strikethrough, and the updated entry, as of January
4,2007, appears immediately below.
Statement Regarding Legal Fees Incurred by the Trust
That Were Unavailable on the Dav of the Hearin2
Respondent has incurred substantial legal fees in defending this action instituted by
Petitioners, the totality of which cannot be quantified until this litigation is concluded. As
explained above, Respondent's original Proposed Schedule of Distribution contains legal fees
and disbursements made up to August 31,2006, and included a reserve of $7,000.00 for
additional legal expenses. In establishing this reserve, Respondent underestimated its
prospective legal expenses, and additional legal fees were entered into evidence as Respondent's
Exhibit 16 ("R-16"), which represented fees up to and including November 18,2006. At the
time R-16 was presented, testimony was also offered, stating that R-16 was not the final legal
10
bill, inasmuch as it did not include further charges for preparation for and representation at the
Hearing, and that further legal fees would be part of Respondent's claim.
In order to resolve the issue of additional unavailable fees at the Hearing, counsel for
both of the parties, in the presence of the Petitioners, verbally agreed to the post-Hearing
submission of Respondent's additional legal fees at counsel table during a recess at the Hearing.
Following the Hearing, counsel for both parties agreed that Respondent's additional legal fees
would be submitted to the Court as an addendum to R-16, which was communicated to the Court
by way of a letter dated December 4, 2006. Petitioners were in agreement with the contents of
the letter and were consulted for input and approval prior to the letter's dispatch to the Court as
evidenced by the electronic mail exchange set forth in Exhibit "C," attached hereto. After
receiving a copy of the December 4, 2006 letter to the Court, Petitioners voiced no exceptions to
its contents.
Thereafter, Respondent received a telephone call from the Court indicating that any
addendum to R-16 required a stipulation between the parties. Respondent suggested to
Petitioner's counsel that the issue regarding the additional legal fees be incorporated into a
broader stipulation that would include the on-the-record Stipulation of fee recalculations.
However, notwithstanding their prior agreement to allow Respondent to present its additional
legal fees to the Court, Petitioners, through their counsel, now refuse to enter a stipulation to
allow Respondent to present its additional claimed legal fees to the Court for consideration.
The Trust Agreement specifically provides for the employment of legal counsel in
defense of a claim at Article VI, "Powers of Trustee":
11
6.01. General Powers. In addition to such other powers and duties as may have
been granted elsewhere in this Trust, but subject to any limitations contained
elsewhere in this Trust, the Trustee shall have the following powers and duties:
(A) In the management, care and disposition of this Trust, the Trustee shall have the
power to do all things and to execute such deeds, mortgages, instruments and documents
as may be deemed necessary and proper, including the following powers, all of which
may be exercised without any order of or report to any court:
*
*
*
(5) To use lawyers, real estate brokers, accountants and other
agents, if such employment is deemed necessary or desirable, and
to pay reasonable compensation for their services.
As set forth above, the foregoing is a clear term of the Trust Agreement, a contract that
was drafted by, and voluntarily executed by Petitioners under the advice and direction of, their
estate planning counsel. In addition, Pennsylvania courts have provided trustees are entitled to
payment of legal fees-from the corpus of the trust-incurred by the trustee in defending claims
against the trust. See In re Fishel Land Co., 3 Pa. D.& C. 3d, 231 (Allegheny C.C.C.P. 1976),
Darreff Estate, 64 Pa. D.& C. 2d 650 (Phila. C.C.C.P. 1973). Accordingly, Respondents have
updated their claim for legal fees as set forth in Respondent's Restated Proposed Schedule of
Distribution, which also include additional fees for the preparation of this Statement of Position
and other related matters, which Respondent deemed necessary to file with the Court in light of
Petitioners' unwillingness to stipulate to the presentation of additional, necessary information to
this Court.
(Signature Page Follows.)
12
--
(Continued from Page 12 of Respondent's Statement of Position.)
Respectfully submitted,
KEEFER WOOD ALLEN & RAHAL, LLP
--,.-.
By: ~ ~,
Date: January 4,2007
Todd F. Truntz, Esquire
Identification No. 83302
635 North 12th Street, Suite 400
Lemoyne, P A 17043
(717) 612-5800
Attorneys for Respondent
Community Trust Company
13
. BXHIBIT A
INRE:
PATRICIA M. KILKENNY
FAMILY IRREVOCABLE
TRUST
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: ORPHANS' COURT DIVISION
: No. 21-06-553
SUMMARY OF ACCOUNT
For the Period of SeDtember 6. 2002 through August 31. 2006
Reflecting Accounting Changes from August 31,2006 to December 31,2006
Gross Receipts of Income 19,218.28
Gross Receipts of Principal 345.493.42
Total Receipts 364.711.70
Market Book
Page Value Value
Income
Receipts 2 to4 19,218.28 19,218.28
Receipts from August 31 , 2006 to
December 31 , 2006 9.55 9.55
Refund of Income Fees 1,504.54 1,504.54
Disbursements 4 to 7 (19,192.36) (19,192.36)
Disbursements from August 31,2006
to December 31,2006 (44.00) (44.00)
Information Schedule - Income 7A
Income Balance on Hand 1 496 01 1 496 01
Principal
Receipts In Kind 1 303,538.27 266,383.24
Receipts 8 to 10 41,955.15 41,955.15
Refund of Principal Fees 659.46 659.46
Subtotal 346,152.88 308,997.85
Net Gain or ( Loss) on Sales
or other Disposition 0.00 0.00
General Disbursements 10 to 13 (18,234.72) (18,234.72)
Fees 10&11 (5,167.97) (5,167.97)
Filing Fee for Account (280.00) (280.00)
Balance Before Distributions 322,470.19 285,315.16
Distribution to Beneficiary 11 (20,000.00) (20,000.00)
Distribution to Beneficiary
on September 12, 2006 (11.120.00) (11.120.00)
Information Schedule - Principal
Principal Balance on Hand
Income Balance on Hand
Combined Balance on Hand
Reserved for Expenses
13A
291,350.19
1.496.01
292,846.20
(30.246.37)
262 599 83
254,195.16
1.496.01
255,691 .17
(30.246.37)
225 444 80
. EX-lllBll B
\
INRE:
PATRICIAM. KILKENNY
FAMILY IRREVOCABLE
TRUST
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: ORPHANS' COURT DIVISION
: No.21-06-553
RESTATED PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF DISTRIBUTION
(Reflecting Accounting Changes from August 31,2006 to January 4, 2007)
The Trustee / Accountant proposes the following schedule of distribution:
I.
RESERVED FOR THE ACCOUNT
TO: COMMUNITY TRUST COMPANY
1. Trustee's Monthly Commission for the months
of August 2006 through October 2006 (Estimated)
(a) Trustee's Actual Fees for July through November 2006
Trustee's Monthly Commission for the months of
December 2006 through February 2007 (Estimated)
2. Trustee's Termination Fee
(Calculated on the 12 months of August 2005 through July 2006)
Restated Termination Fee
3. Fiduciary Income Tax Preparation Fee for Tax Year 2006
Fiduciary Income Tax Preparation Fee for Tax Year 2007
TO: THE LAW FIRM OF KEEFER WOOD ALLEN & RAHAL, LLP
Market Value
$ (1,950.99)
$ (1,464.49)
$ (865.02)
$ (4,242.59)
$ (3,628.01)
$ (275.00)
$ (275.00)
1. Legal Fees accrued to August 31, 2006 $ (<1,(;<11.99)
2. Disbursements made to August 31,2006 $ (~)
3. Reserve for preparation of the Petition for Approval of the First and Final
Account, attendance at Audit and at Hearing Scheduled for November 29,
2006, response to Objections, if any to the First and Final Account and for
all other legal matters that may be germane to this proceeding. $ (7,009.99)
4. Legal fees and disbursements accrued to November 30,2006 $ (20,513.85)
5. Legal fees accrued January 2,2007 to January 4,2007 $ (2,100.00)
TO: THE LAW FIRM OF GATES BALBRUNER & HATCH, P.C.
1. Preparation of Fiduciary Warranty Deed in connection
with Settlement discussions between the parties
TO: MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND EXPENSES
1. Fee for filing First and Final Account
2. Miscellaneous Fees and expenses, including, without limitation
preparation and recording of Deed (b)
3. Any excess remaining in this fund will be
distributed to Patricia M. Kilkenny. Subtotal
Restated Subtotal
$ (125.00)
$ (280.00)
$ 020.00)
$ (18,398.89)
$ (30,246.3 7)
.
II. TO: PATRICIA M. KILKENNY Market Value Book Value
1. Metropolitan Life Variable Annuity # 550008217
as of August 31, 2006 $ 40,244.97 32,405.74
(c) Less Partial Annuity Withdrawal
on September 6, 2006 $ 03.223.62) (13.223.62)
$ 27,021.35 19,182.12
2. Metropolitan Life Variable Annuity # 550008223
as of August 31, 2006 $ 87 .293.30 71.822.00
Current Annuity Totals $114,314.65 91,004.12
Reserve for Expenses $ (18,398.&9) (1&,39&.89)
Restated Reserve for Expenses $ (30.246.3 7) (30.246.3 7)
Net Annuity Total $ 84,068.28 60,757.75
3. Balance Income Cash [at 8/31/06] $ ~ ~
Balance Income Cash [at 12/31/06] $ 13.47 13.47
Refund of Income Fees $ 1,504.54 1,504.54
4. Balance of Principal Cash [at 8/31/06] $ 999-:G+ 999-:G+
Balance of Principal Cash [at 12/31/06] $ 354.08 354.08
Refund of Principal Fees $ 659.46 659.46
Subtotal $ 199,&(i4.49 &(i,553.87
Restated Subtotal $ 86,599.83 63,289.30
4. Improved Real Estate mown and numbered
as 603 Fairway Drive, Camp Hill, P A 17011 $ 176.000.00 $162.155.50
Net Distribution to Patricia M. Kilkenny $ 285,8(;4. 49 $248,79937
Restated Net Distribution to Patricia M. Kilkenny $ 262.599.83 $225.444.80
(a) At the advice of and with the consent of its legal counsel, Community Trust Company suspended
taking its fees beginning in August 2006 in an effort to preserve the status quo until litigation
involving the Trust could be resolved by the Court. Accordingly, the monthly fees that are charged
from the date of suspension are currently in arrears. In August 2006, when Community Trust
Company suspended taking its fees, the fee for the month of July 2006 had not been charged to the
Trust and collected.
(b) Conformed to Respondent's response to Interrogatory # 4 of Petitioners' First Set of
Interrogatories to Respondent.
(c) At the advice and with the consent of its legal counsel, Petitioners' legal counsel and upon the
written request of Patricia M. Kilkenny for a discretion distribution from the trust, Community
Trust Company made a partial withdrawal of $13,223 .62 from Metropolitan Life Variable Annuity
# 550008217. That partial withdrawal was expended by distributing $11,120.00 to Patricia M.
Kilkenny for various expenses that were to be incurred by her subsequent to August 31, 2006 and
by applying the balance of the partial withdrawal, $2,103.62, to payment of the 2006-2007 School
Real Estate Tax due September 30.2006 on 603 Fairway Drive Camp Hill, Pennsylvania.
B)(lllBl'T C
Page 1 of2
2t
Todd F. Truntz
<~~_'""_~.,.,___~__,,____"""""""'''''''_~____,,_...._.,,_'''''~..-_''~~''___'~~_....~"~,_._~_<,~~~...._.,.......,_,~.,~",,.....'M_~~_""~"""""~""""~""<'"''''''''''''''''''___''''___~'_"'''_'''''_____'_~''''~~~'_''''''''''''''''.'-'''''''---.......-""'-"-----~,,',,....
From: Bangs Law [mikebangs@verizon.net]
Sent: Monday, December 04,200612:20 PM
To: Todd F. Truntz
Subject: FW: CTC/Kilkenny
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Bangs [mailto:mikebangs2@verizon.net]
Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 11:02 AM
To: mikebangs@verizon.net
Subject: RE: erC/Kilkenny
Todd: Looks fine to me. Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Bangs Law [mailto:mikebangs@verizon.net]
Sent: Monday, December 04,2006 10:19 AM
To: mikebangs2@verizon.net
Subject: FW: erC/Kilkenny
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd F. Truntz [mailto:ttruntz@keeferwood.com]
Sent: Monday, December 04,20069:54 AM
To: mikebangs@verizon.net
Subject: erC/Kilkenny
Mike-
I'm attaching a draft of my letter to Judge Oler, which I'm hoping you'll take a look at. I
want you to have an opportunity to review it before I send it to the Judge to make sure it looks
okay from your perspective. Please let me know if this looks alright to you.
I've also attached a copy of our last bill reference in the letter.
Thanks Mike.
Todd F. Truntz
KEEFER WOOD ALLEN & RAHAL, LLP
635 North 12th Street, 4th Floor
Lemoyne, P A 17043
Telephone: 717-612-5807
Facsimile: 717-612-5805
Email: ttruntz@keeferwood.com
http://www.keeferwood.com
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE PERSON TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSSED, AND MAY CONTAIN
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL, AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE
LAW. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY
DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED
12/21/2006
Page 2 0[2
THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY ME IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY OR BY TFLEP,HdNE AT 717-612-
5807 AND IMMEDIATELY DELETE THIS MESSAGE AND ALL OF ITS ATTACHMENTS. It
IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED BY THE u.s. INTERNAL
REVENUE SERVICE, WE INFORM YOU THAT ANY TAX ADVICE CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION (INCLUDING ANY
A TTACHMENTS) WAS NOT INTENDED OR WRITTEN TO BE USED, AND CANNOT BE USED, BY ANY T AXP A YER FOR THE
PURPOSE OF (I) AVOIDING TAX-RELATED PENALTIES UNDER THE U.S. INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OR (2) PROMOTING,
MARKETING OR RECOMMENDING TO ANOTHER PARTY ANY TAX-RELATED MATTERS ADDRESSED HEREIN.
12/21/2006
. " .
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Todd F. Truntz, Esquire, of KEEFER WOOD ALLEN & RAHAL, LLP, certify that I
this day caused a copy of the foregoing STATEMENT OF POSITION to be served upon the
person( s) indicated below by hand delivery addressed as follows:
Michael L. Bangs, Esquire
Bangs Law Office
429 South 18th Street
Camp Hill, P A 17011
KEEFER WOOD ALLEN & RAHAL, LLP
Date: January 4, 2007
~--
By:
~~.
Todd F. Truntz, Esquire ~~~-
Identification No. 83302
635 North 1ih Street, Suite 400
Lemoyne, P A 17043
(717) 612-5800
Attorneys for Respondent
Community Trust Company
14
CHARLES W. RUBENDALL II
ROBERT L. WELDON
EUGENE E. PEPINSKY. ..JR.
..JOHN H. ENOS m
GARY E. FRENCH
DONNA S. WELDON
BRADFORD DORRANCE
..JEFFREY S. STOKES
ROBERT R. CHURCH
STEPHEN L. GROSE
R. SCOTT SHEARER
ELYSE E. ROGERS
CRAIG A. LONGYEAR
..JOHN A. FEICHTEL
DONALD M. LEWIS m
STEPHANIE KLEINFELTER
ERIC R. AUGUSTINE
TODD F. TRUNTZ
CAROL L. VERISH
KEEFER WOOD ALLEN & RAHAL,
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
635 NORTH 12TH STREET, 4TH FLOOR
LEMOYNE, PA 17043
LLP
ESTABLISHED IN 1878
OF COUNSEL:
HEATH L. ALLEN
N. DAVID RAHAL
SAMUEL C. HARRY
PHONE 717-612-5800
FAX 717-612-5805
EIN No. 23-0716135
www.keeferwood.com
HARRISBURG OFFICE:
210 WALNUT STREET
HARRISBURG. PA 17101
PHONE 717-255-8000
January 4, 2007
717-612-5807
ttruntz@keeferwood.com
VIA HAND DELIVERY
Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas
Orphans' Court Division
One Courthouse Square
Carlisle, PA 17013
RE: McKinney, et ale v. Community Trust Company
Orphans' Court of Cumberland County No. 21-06-553
Dear Madam or Sir:
Enclosed for filing please find an original and four (4) copies of Respondent's Statement
of Position in the above-referenced matter. Please file the original and return the time-stamped
copies to our messenger. As noted below, a copy is being served on Respondent's counsel.
If you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call. Thank you.
Sincerely yours,
....
Todd F. Truntz
Enclosures
cc: Michael L. Bangs, Esquire (w/enclosure)
James E. White, Esquire, Community Trust Company (w/enclosure)