
James F. McDonough
Of Counsel
732-568-8360 jmcdonough@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: James F. McDonough
Date: July 17, 2013

Of Counsel
732-568-8360 jmcdonough@sh-law.comOccasionally, cases present fact patterns that were unanticipated at the time I was in law school. Today, however, a person’s ability to anticipate these situations is guided by the dramatic changes in medicine and reproductive technology. In Burnett v. Burnett, a guardian filed a divorce action on behalf of the ward for the primary purpose of Medicaid planning. The Michigan court was faced with two non-traditional trust issues raised by the Guardian.
The facts are that a traditional couple was married in the 1980s. One spouse underwent gender reassignment surgery in 2003. The State of Michigan did not recognize same-sex marriages in 2003, so a question arose as to whether the reassignment surgery operated to end the marriage. The Court held that the sexual reassignment did not invalidate the marriage. The reason the action was filed was to obtain a divorce in order to preserve assets. The court held that the Guardian had the authority to file an action for divorce and that Medicaid planning was a valid reason.
One issue that was not part of the case before the Michigan court was whether the reassigned partner could remain a beneficiary of a hypothetical trust. Most trusts that are funded and operating today were probably drafted before advances in reproductive and reassignment. Most trusts provide for children, grandchildren and occasionally for their spouses. Many trusts require that the in-law remain legally married to the descendant to continue as an eligible beneficiary. Suppose the sexually reassigned partner was a son-in-law or daughter-in-law. Would customary language exclude this person as a beneficiary because the marriage is no longer recognized under state law?
What does a trustee do when presented with these facts? Does the trustee seek to limit its liability from claims of other beneficiaries by taking the position that the couple is no longer married under the terms of the trust or state law? What would the outcome be if the couple and the trust resided in different states with the law of each jurisdiction being different?
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!