|
Posted by Stuart A. Bronstein on November 7, 2007, 2:46 am
Please log in for more thread options
>> These a codicals, not protocols.
> Not according to my lawyer. I don't know the precise
> definition of a codicil and haven't talked to him about it,
> but I know he definitely is against codicils and used the
> term "protocols" for anything I wanted to write about the
> specifc asset disposition approach that I wanted followed,
> and pets were included under that category.
I suspect your lawyer isn't being honest with you. My guess
is that your lawyer thinks what you propose would not be
legally enforceable, so wants you to do something that will
satisfy you, but won't have people laughing at him for doing
something he might consider silly.
Some states allow leaving property for pets, others don't.
Stu
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap