We Make The Law Work For You!
   CALL TOLL FREE TODAY!  1-844-560-7885
California Law Partners, APC
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Client Success Stories
    • Blog
  • Our Team
    • Wendy P Campbell
    • Lory Fisher
  • Practice Areas
    • Estate Planning
    • Business/Startup
    • Divorce/Family
    • Asset Protection
    • Intellectual Property
    • Real Estate
    • Entertainment
    • Litigation Consulting
  • News/Events
    • Past Events
    • Articles
  • Contact
  • My Law Club

Recent Articles 

San Diego Asian Journal

Picture

July 10, 2015 

How to Win Your Case In Court Using Expert Witnesses
BY: GERARD PIZARRO, ESQ. 
SENIOR ATTORNEY, CALIFORNIA LAW PARTNERS, APC

                Like a game of chess, preparing a case for trial involves strategy, since it is the end of the road for a dispute that cannot be resolved through settlement or other out-of-court negotiation. Trial litigation can be costly, time-consuming, and unpredictable in the hands of a jury. One of the most powerful strategic tools for trial is the use of expert witnesses. A person is qualified to testify as an expert if he has special knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education sufficient to qualify him as an expert on the subject to which his testimony relates. Expert witnesses are used primarily in jury trials to prove the amount of damages a plaintiff can recover for his injuries. Securing the aid of a qualified expert in negotiations for settlement can also avoid costly litigation. Therefore, choosing qualified witnesses is crucial to a favorable outcome for your case.

               In a civil trial in Superior Court, a jury randomly selected from the public usually determines the amount of damages to award a plaintiff. In a personal injury case, for example, general damages stem from physical injuries and mental anguish. Special damages are out-of-pocket expenses that can be determined by adding together all the plaintiff's quantifiable financial losses, such as past and future medical expenses. The difficulty for the jury lies in assigning an exact dollar amount to a subjective injury. The damage award can range from minimal to substantial depending on the severity of an injury, the skill of the attorneys, and the sensitivities of the jury. Given this subjectivity, it is crucial to choose qualified expert witnesses.

               Some important considerations when choosing an expert include the expert’s capacity to organize ideas, express them readily, and interpret them are significant stepping-stones to success. The value and strength or weakness of an expert opinion is in proportion to the character of the expert, his learning, his experience with and study of the matter involved, and his freedom from bias against plaintiff or defendant (e.g., watch “The Verdict” starring Paul Newman relating to the importance of expert witnesses at trial). Moreover, there are other variables to be considered in determining whether or not to use a particular expert as a witness. Among these are availability, cost of services, experience, and reputation. Since his testimony may be central to the establishment of facts, his integrity and actual ability (as distinguished from his technical knowledge) may be of great consequence.

             The most commonly sought-after expert today is the medical expert. A great percentage of judgments obtained in personal injury litigation depend purely on medical testimony rather than on legal arguments. One must assess the type of doctor necessary, success rates in previous cases as a witness, and hourly fees.

             The key is to help a jury understand and explain how these injuries specifically relate to the plaintiff’s general damages of pain and suffering and special damages of past and future medical expenses. For example, the expert witness, “Dr. Neurologist,” would explain the MRI, CT and various scans and medical reports to the court and members of the jury to prove the existence of a skull fracture, brain injury and its severity.

            In cases involving traumatic injury, a psychologist or neuropsychologist would be an ideal expert witness to assess damages. The expert could explain risk factors associated with brain injury, including memory loss, mood, behavior and deterioration in performance in school and work. Moreover, a psychologist could explain the effects the traumatic injury causing significant discomfort psychologically and emotionally. Psychologist expert witnesses analyze how their patients became extremely nervous, agitated and emotionally upset due to the physical pain, physical disfigurement, and psychological trauma as a result of their injuries. This testimony would aid the jury in determining general damages for pain and suffering and mental anguish. A psychologist would also help the jury and court in their determination of special damages for future medical expenses should the plaintiff require physical therapy or psychological counseling in the future.  Special damages are derived from the personality disorders and deteriorated academic performance that necessitates ongoing psychological counseling caused by the injury.

            The weight given to the expert's opinion may depend on how impressive his background and experience. The good expert witness must understand the natural laws relating to his field and be capable of applying common sense to their interpretation and application. Generally, the more formal education and practical experience a person has had, the better he will be as an expert witness. A person of extensive education and experience may greatly impress a juror and will eradicate any idea that the opinion of the expert will be biased.

            The fact that an expert has written books or has had articles published may be an important factor in his selection. The reputation of the school from which the expert received his academic degrees may also be significant. In addition to education and experience, a person's reputation among other experts in the same field is important. Even more significant may be his reputation among lay people— a person not well thought of by his peers may be very highly esteemed by the general public.

             In addition to background and experience, there are many personal factors that should be considered. Thus, an expert’s appearance and general demeanor, age, personality, honesty, intelligence, and speaking ability should be weighed. Often, it is the personality rather than the testimony of the expert that the jury remembers. If a jury has the impression that an expert is being patronizing or snide, they may completely disregard his opinion. Similarly, the selection of an overly shy person as an expert witness should be avoided, as the jury may not credit his authority.

             Furthermore, the value of an expert depends upon how thoroughly he can demonstrate what he knows to the jury. He or she should be chosen with a view to how he may impress the jury in matters of speech and tone of voice. He should be able to command the attention of the court and the jury, and he should express himself in language that the average juror can easily comprehend.  Generally, he should have the ability to answer briefly and to the point without volunteering excessive information. If the case is to be tried before a judge alone, the expert need not be required to express himself in such simple language as would be required before a jury; most judges have considerable experience in hearing technical aspects of cases.

            Ultimately, the final determination of experts will depend on your budget and the expectations of the settlement or jury award. But the addition of credible experts could make a difference in not only winning your case, but also receiving the maximum amount of damages.

 
About Gerard Pizarro: Gerard serves as a Senior Attorney at California Law Partners, APC, and specializes in head trauma personal injuries, employment/corporate litigation, and government contracting. To contact Gerard for questions or comments, info@californialawpartners.com or call (619) 320-6065. 

June 26, 2015 

TItle Transfers of your home to your heirs

BY: WENDY PIZARRO CAMPBELL
SENIOR ATTORNEY, CALIFORNIA LAW PARTNERS, APC


              Homeownership remains an important symbol of achieving the American dream. Hardworking folks celebrate the fruits of their labor by saving for a down payment and investing in real estate for themselves and their family. The family home becomes a safe haven for shelter, security and special memories. As we grow older and our children progress into adulthood, we are faced with the issue of passing down our assets.

             One of the most common questions that we receive are: 1) How do I pass down my primary home to my children or grand-children, and 2) What is the best way to do this legally with minimal tax consequences and costs?

             This article discusses four common ways of passing down a home to your heirs: 1) Re-titling property to an adult child’s name; 2) Joint Tenancy with a Right of Survivorship; 3) Tenancy in Common (interest in property only) and 4) Revocable Living trust (our recommended solution).

          One method for a homeowner is to re-title the property outright in the name of his adult child by way of a deed. Often times, real property is reassessed at market value, and if it is sold or transferred, then the property taxes can increase dramatically.

            Fortunately, in California, it is tax-free to transfer title of a primary residence from a parent to a child, or from grandparents to their grandchildren. Pursuant to Proposition 58, a property transfer between a parent and child is excluded from tax reassessments. Proposition 193 applies the same exemption for property transfers between grandparents to a grandchild. Such transfers subject to the exception are: 1) a homeowner’s primary residence and/or 2) transfers of up to $1 million of real property other than the primary residence.

           For example, Father re-titled his primary home by deed to Adult Son. As the new owner, Adult’s Son’s taxes are calculated based on the original base year value, instead of the current market value when he received title to the home. 

            One disadvantage to this parent-to-child transfer method, is that you forfeit control of the property. Should you want to remain in the driver’s seat, it is recommended that you re-title the property via Revocable Living Trust. The same tax-free exemption is also applied to transfers into a trust for estate planning purposes as discussed below.

            Secondly, another solution for passing down property is through a Joint Tenancy with Rights of Survivorship. This transfer method, commonly used by married couples, provides an equal undivided ownership interest to each joint tenant. In a Joint Tenancy, when one of the joint tenant dies, the remainder is transferred to the surviving joint tenant(s). For example, Harry and Wilma acquire their home by deed in National City as Joint Tenants with language that clearly states “a Right of Survivorship”. Upon Harry’s death, Harry’s interest in their home will transfer automatically to Wilma. Accordingly, Wilma will acquire Harry’s interest and own their home outright.

            Moreover, another solution for passing down property is through a Tenancy in Common. Each Tenant in Common has an undivided ownership interest in the property with equal right to possess the property, even though the tenants may have unequal ownership interests. Each co-tenant has the right to transfer his or her ownership interest by deed, will, or other conveyance. Unlike a Joint Tenancy, a Tenancy in Common does not have a Right of Survivorship.

          When one co-tenant dies, his or her interest does not automatically pass to the other co-tenants. For example, three Cousins, Ana, Ben and Cate, own equal interests (1/3 each) in a vacation home as Tenants in Common. If Cate dies, then her 1/3 interest passes to her child, Dave, and  consequently, Ana, Ben and their nephew, Dave, will then each own 1/3 interest in the vacation home as Tenants in Common.

         As a fourth and we believe the best solution for a homeowner, is the re-titling of the home in the name of a Revocable Living Trust. This can be done by executing and notarizing a trust agreement, preparing a quit claim deed, and recording the deed with the County Recorder’s office. For example, Mark and Myra Santos, a married couple, prepare an estate plan with a Revocable Living Trust called “Santos Family Trust”. In order to ensure that their Chula Vista residence would be distributed to their children as beneficiaries, they prepared and recorded a quit claim deed in the downtown San Diego County Recorder’s office to properly re-title the home in the name of “Santos Family Trust”.

         This will be a tax-free transfer, and property taxes will be calculated based on the Prop.13 base value instead of the current market value and with annual increases capped at 2%. Furthermore, in addition to the advantageous tax benefits, the main benefit of a Living Trust transfer, is your ability to exercise control over the property and dispose of it during your lifetime. A living trust allows you to remain in the driver’s seat while you are alive, and allows you to make changes only to your Living Trust so that you can just re-title the property once into the name of the Trust.

          Ultimately, there are various transfer methods available for transferring real property to your heirs. However, re-titling property via a Revocable Living Trust, provides the best solution for estate planning purposes to ensure your next generation is left with security, shelter, and loving sentiments.

About Wendy Pizarro Campbell: Wendy serves as a Senior Attorney at California Law Partners, APC and specializes in estate planning and asset protection. For any questions or comments, please contact info@californialawpartners.com or (619) 320-6065. This article is for general, informational purposes only and does not establish an attorney-client relationship.

June 15, 2015

Managing Your trust property 101
by: wendy pizarro campbell
senior attorney, california law partners, APC

A Living Trust is an integral part of an Estate Plan that helps to ensure the protection of your house, family and future. In this article, I have included a list of questions frequently posed by clients in the hope that it will help highlight tips for effectively managing your trust property: 

How do I put my home in a living trust?
If you own real estate property (e.g., your home) in California, the transfer process begins with drafting a quit claim deed for the property. Secondly, your property should be retitled in the name of the family living Trust; for example, “Smith Family Trust”. To transfer real property into your Trust, a new deed reflecting the name of the Trust must be executed, notarized and recorded with the County Recorder in the County where the property is located. To avoid probate issues, the description must match the exact legal description in the current deed.

Furthermore, it is essential to list the real estate in a schedule attached to your living trust along with retitling the property using the quit claim deed process as described above.

If I pass my home to my children through my Trust, will this affect its property taxes?
By placing your home in a living trust, the transfer of your home to your children, will not be considered a “change in ownership” that would trigger a reassessment of the then-current property tax value. In 1978, California legislature implemented Proposition 13 which capped property taxes at 1% of the assessed value at the time the property was acquired and limited annual increases to 2%. Therefore, a Trust provides the advantage for your children to inherit your property tax rate since a parent-to-child transfer is an exception under Prop. 13’s reassessment procedure.

Is it necessary to put my Savings Accounts in my Trust?
It is not necessary to hold your regular day-to-day checking account in the name of the Trust; however, there is no harm in doing so. Generally, it is an easy process to transfer bank accounts, such as Money Market Accounts, Savings Accounts and Timed Deposits into your Trust. All you need to do is provide your bank with a copy of The Certificate of Trust and sign new signature cards as Trustee of your Trust.

The Certificate of Trust contains signatures by the trustees or grantors with a short summary of details regarding your Trust. Producing the short Certificate of Trust to the bank or financial institution in lieu of the entire Living Trust is preferable to preserve confidentiality.

I have life insurance and retirement accounts, is it necessary to place them in my Trust?
Life insurances are assets that may or may not need to be placed in Trust because the proceeds transfer automatically via contract to the named beneficiary and, therefore, already avoid probate. It is recommend that you appoint your spouse as the primary beneficiary. Moreover, for contingent beneficiaries you may either 1) name your children as contingent beneficiaries, or 2) name the Trust as the contingent beneficiary if there are lots of beneficiaries or if you plan to change the allocation of distribution in the future.

An IRA, 401(k) plan, Keogh’s, SEPs, or Corporate Pensions, Profit-Sharing Plans, or ESOPs/ETC, should remain in the owner’s name and Social Security number. Between Husband and Wife, the surviving spouse is usually named the primary beneficiary, and the children or other individual beneficiaries designated in the Trust may be named the contingent beneficiaries.

What steps must I take after my home is transferred into the Trust?
After your home has been re-titled in the name of your Trust, you should notify the insurance company (or agent) of the transfer and ask whether any change in the policy is required, for both casualty and liability insurance. It is advised that your insurance policy indicate that the Trust is an additional insured. 

What happens if I want to refinance (or borrow against) my home once it is placed in the Trust?
A Trust will not hinder your ability to borrow against your home. However, the lender/title company may require that the property be transferred out of your Trust and into your name as an individual. Should this happen, it is important that you ask the lender/title company to prepare and record a deed transferring the property back into the Trust when the refinancing is complete. The consequences of not doing so could result in the probate of the property.

Can I put my Business Interests, such as a sole proprietorship, in a Trust? 
Yes. A business interest or sole proprietorship can be transferred into the Trust by an “Assignment of Business Interest” document. This document assigns all property/assets owned in the name of the business to your Trust. For example, the name of the bank account should also be the name of your Trust; for example, “Smith Family Trust, dba Smith Trucking Services.” Legal and tax advice is recommended prior to transferring any business interest to avoid issues that could arise with licenses or permits.

How do I transfer Personal Property into my Trust?
Personal property, such as furniture, household items, art work, jewelry, etc. can be transferred to the Trust through an “Assignment of Personal Property” document. The document assigns all personal property you currently own and any additional personal property acquired up to the date of death.

Ultimately, “funding your trust” during your lifetime is essential for the effective management of your Trust assets. The assets and their description to be included in the Trust must 1) be included in the Trust Schedule and 2) re-titled correctly so that the items listed mirror the exact description of the respective assets. An itemized list of assets are insufficient  For more information about understanding the benefits of Estate Planning, please refer to my previously published article “Estate Planning 101” in San Diego Asian Journal’s May 15 issue.

June 09, 2015

Not Just Fun and Games –Liability for Kids’ Injuries in Sports
By: Lisa Morgan, Esq.
Associate Attorney, California Law Partners APC

            The morning of the big swim meet against Pleasanton High School, fourteen-year-old Kelly was nervous.  This was her very first year on the team, and Kelly had no experience as a competitive swimmer.  She had always loved to swim; she loved to swim in her backyard pool every summer with her friends.  She felt at home in the water.  But today was different – the bleachers lining the pool were packed with people, all watching and waiting for a great performance from all of the kids.  Judges sat waiting to score kids on their performance, and all of Kelly’s friends were there.  To top it all off, Kelly had a deep-seated fear of diving into the pool head-first, but she needed to learn to do so to be a truly great competitor.  But it wouldn’t be that bad – no one expected Kelly to make a dive off the deck, since she was new and inexperienced.  Or, so she thought.

            One of Kelly’s high school coaches beckoned “You’re up, Kelly!  We need you to dive off of the deck!”  Kelly looked at the coach in shock.  “But I don’t know how!”  Coach protested.  “I’ve seen you do a few practice dives, you can do this.  I believe in you, Kelly!” 

            The movie version of this story ends with Kelly overcoming her fears and winning the big meet.  The real-life version of this story ends in tragedy with Kelly breaking her neck and becoming paralyzed for the rest of her young life.

            In tragic situations like these, civil disputes and litigation are common, and everyone – students, parents, teammates, teachers, and coaches alike – simply wish it would never happen.  There must have been something someone could have done, right?  Are some accidents simply an inevitable part of life?  Are some sports injuries simply a risk we are all willing to take – much less our kids?

            In the state of California, the answers to these questions are relatively clear.  In traditional sports law, one “assumes the risk” of getting an injury typical of the kind players receive in the sport.  For example, players in full-contact sports like football or boxing assume a great deal of risk when it comes to injuries considered as a typical price paid for participating in the sport.  Football players know they might get tackled every time they walk onto the field.  Boxers know they might get knocked out every time they step into the ring. 

However, on the flip side of the same coin are “light” or “no-contact” sports like Golf.  Flying golf balls are expected when one is on the course; the traditional yelling of “fore!” supports this notion.  Yet, unlike football or boxing, no golfer expects another player to attack her with a punch, a tackle, or an attack with a golf club.  Such an attack would be outside the scope of what one expects from the game of golf.  Swimmers expect to get overuse injuries from practice, but in Kelly’s case, do swimmers and their parents assume the risk that the swimmer might hit her head on a dive and become paralyzed?

            Consequently, all of these examples support the general legal standard that kids and parents alike accept certain risks said to be “inherent in the sport” when one participates in the sport.  Therefore, Courts have ruled for many years that coaches and schools are only on the hook to protect kids from injuries outside the scope of the sport – a golf coach needs to protect golfers from punching each other, a football coach needs to protect players from smashing each other with blunt objects during half time, etc.  Coaches teach kids the rules of the game, how to follow them, and the rest is up to the kids.  Safety standards exist to minimize injury risks, but California embraces the idea that overprotecting players by allowing coaches and schools to be liable for all injuries would “chill competition” in the sports and ruin the essence of such competitions.  We are, after all, a society that readily embraces the idea of “healthy competition.”

            However, in Kelly’s case, the answer is more complex.  Sure, hitting your head on the bottom of the pool is something one might expect to do when learning how to do competition dives.  But everyone also expects her coaches to teach her how to properly dive into the pool, instead of throwing her into a situation where she is likely to hurt herself.  While we embrace the idea of competition, we also embrace the idea of holding accountable the coaches as gatekeepers of safety standards.  As you can imagine, the Court in Kelly’s case ruled in favor of Kelly and against her coach on the basis of the coach’s failure and negligence to teach her how to dive properly before rushing her into a dangerous and high-risk maneuver in a shallow pool.

            Ultimately, some may disagree with liability as a safeguard against sports injury.  Yet, safety standards by their very design need coaches and schools to enforce them to be effective.  After all, what good would football helmets be if coaches didn’t require their players to wear them? 

Lisa serves as an Associate Attorney at California Law Partners, APC and specializes in sports & entertainment law, health law, and civil litigation.  For any questions or comments, please contact us on the web at www.californialawpartners.com or at info@californialawpartners.com and (619) 320-6065.

 

May 22, 2015

Protect your Kids' Futures with a Will and Trust

By Wendy Pizarro Campbell, Esq.

Senior Attorney, California Law Partners, APC


Preparing an estate plan, including a will and living trust, is important  for newlyweds, new parents or any parent with a minor child. Parents can ensure that their children are taken care of financially in the event of their unexpected passing. Parents can also have peace of mind that they have designated legal guardians to maintain stability for the children and to avoid future conflicts between family members.

One common question by parents is- whether there are any separate legal documents required for minors in particular? The answer is- No, protective provisions for your minor children can be inserted into your will and living trust without requiring any additional paperwork.

In a living trust or will, you can designate your children as beneficiaries of your property and assets. However, if they are minors at the time of the property transfer, then their monies can be held in trust and managed by their designated guardian and/or another responsible trustee that you appoint until they reach at least 18 years old. In essence, you can create a “trust” within a trust, specifically for minor children.

Here is an example of how this works: Holly and Roger have two minor children, Jackson, age 12, and Christy, age 8. On the way home from a dinner party, Holly and Roger were in a tragic and fatal car accident involving a drunk driver in the East County. Luckily, they had just completed an update of their estate plan less than a year ago.

In their separate wills, both parents designated Roger’s only sibling, Kathy, to be the children’s sole guardian since she does not have a family of her own and remains unmarried. By doing this and being coordinated in their decision making, there were no hurt feelings by Holly’s brothers and sisters who also would have taken the children into their homes. The family understood clearly their intentions and reasoning for this decision which allowed both sides of their families to grieve together and to stay close during this profound time of sadness and shock.

Although Holly and Roger have two separate wills, because they are married with a net worth of over $100,000 USD and in an effort to avoid probate fees/taxes, they placed the bulk of their marital estate, which is their primary home in Tierrasanta, their time share in Hawaii and other stock accounts in Charles Schwab, in the name of their family living trust. Jackson and Christy, as the only two children, are the sole beneficiaries sharing in the assets equally with a provision that the successor trustee can distribute the property to them when they each turn 25 years old. Holly and Roger chose 25 and not 18 years old as the age to inherit, because they were concerned about the kids’ maturity levels to manage a lump sum amount of money and property.

Until Jackson and Christy each turn 25, Kathy, as the children’s guardian, is a co-trustee and holds the property in trust for the children and will only use the funds for the kids’ life necessities, such as food, housing, education, extra-curricular activities and general living expenses. Holly and Roger knew that Kathy is very loving but not the best at managing money, so they also assigned Holly’s oldest brother, Kurt, a college graduate and small business owner, as a co-trustee of the children’s minor trusts along with Kathy. This has proven to be a wise decision to serve as a check and balance of the funds’ usage for and on behalf of the children, and this also protects Kathy from other family members questioning her decision making.

Ultimately, a will and trust allows you the benefit of staying in the driver’s seat. From the onset of the document drafting, you can control- at what age the children receive your assets, who should parent them in the event you cannot, and who will assist in disbursing their living expenses until they can inherit the funds outright. For new families or parents with minor children, a will and trust is an important type of insurance policy that can protect your kids’ futures in case of extreme emergencies. 


May 15, 2015

ESTATE PLANNING 101

By Wendy Pizarro Campbell, Esq.

Senior Attorney, California Law Partners, APC


Most of our clients have heard of “estate planning,” but are not really sure what it is or how it applies to them.   As an attorney in the estate planning field, I think it is critically important for every individual to understand what estate planning is and what benefits it offers.  In this article, I have included a list of the most common general questions I get asked about this topic in the hope that it will help you obtain a better understanding of estate planning benefits.  

What is estate planning?

Estate planning is a process for the easy and efficient distribution and transfer of your home, property and possessions, which encompass your “estate”, after your death, done through legal documents known as a will and living trust. Estate planning also includes a process of planning for personal emergencies in the event of your health and mental incapacity.

What is the goal of estate planning?

The main goal is to ensure that your property will go to the people you want, the way you want, and when you want. You stay in the driver’s seat, and you stay in control as opposed to having a judge decide after your death. Also, it allows you and your loved ones to save as much as possible on taxes, court costs and attorneys' fees upon your death.  Lastly, it helps in minimizing conflict and family drama between your loved ones over money, your possessions as well as other important decisions, such as your memorial service or burial.

Who needs estate planning?

●        Any person who has a minor child or dependent

If something happens to you and you did not appoint a guardian, a judge will determine who is best fit to take care of your minor child.  This process is expensive, it takes time during which your child is left in limbo, and the chosen guardian may not be the person you would have wanted.  This can all be avoided if you name a guardian in your will.    

 

●        Any person who owns a home or real property

 A living trust bypasses probate court, which is often a lengthy, public and expensive process, and passes the real estate down to your chosen beneficiary.  Contrary to popular belief, real estate does not pass down to your heirs automatically.

 

●        Any person at all who would like to leave a legacy, keep peace between their family in the future and ensure that the right person receives their personal property and items with sentimental value (rings, awards, diaries)

 

What is probate?

Probate is a legal process in which a special court administers a deceased person’s estate.  During probate, the court resolves any claims against the estate and interprets the deceased person’s will, if there is one, or intentions, if there is no will.  Probate generally takes between 15-18 months and costs 3-7% of the total value of your estate. 

The only way to avoid probate is to have a living trust in place in addition to a will.

What is the difference between a will and a living trust?

            A will is subject to probate court, but a living trust is not.

Does my will or living trust need to be recorded?

No. However, any property put into your living trust must be transferred into the trust name.  The real estate property deeds need to be recorded.

If I put my property into a living trust, how is it affected?

 As the trustee of your trust, you control the trust property during your lifetime, so you can sell it, refinance it or remove it from your trust altogether. Again, you stay in the driver’s seat, so you derive the benefits of planning ahead without tying up your property during your lifetime.

What happens if I don’t have a will or living trust?

Your property will be transferred according to the laws of California.  This process will be time consuming and expensive and again may not follow what you really want.

 
May 8, 2015

FAMILY WARS: HOW A WILL CAN KEEP THE PEACE

By Wendy Pizarro Campbell, Esq.

Senior Attorney, California Law Partners, APC


Many folks who come to me wonder why they need a will when they have a fixed income, limited amount of property or uncomplicated types of assets. A will is a vitally important document in a larger bundle of documents referred to as an "estate plan."  There is a common misconception that an estate plan is only for the rich. However, that is not the case at all, since family wars can break out between family members over seemingly trivial matters.

Tracy, one of my clients and a good friend, always had a close relationship with her mother, Ellie, since Tracy is an only child and her father had passed away when she was very young. As a result, they were a close-knit, mother-daughter team facing the world together. In late 2013, Ellie was diagnosed with Stage 4 cancer which rapidly spread throughout her internal organs. Ellie lived in a rent-controlled building in Manhattan, never drove a car, had a single bank and retirement account, a life insurance policy, and other miscellaneous personal possessions. Because Ellie had minimal assets, she never saw the importance of drafting a will.  

Consequently, Ellie assumed that it would not be a problem, because upon Ellie's death all her assets would pass to her only child, Tracy. She also did not think a will would be helpful in her situation where there would be no other beneficiaries to be named to split any of her estate. She just did not think it was necessary to write anything down in a will memorializing her wishes, since her estate seemed simple and straightforward.

In November 2014, Ellie passed away after a courageous fight against cancer. During the year before her death, she spent as much time as possible with her close friends and family, even reconnecting with her only brother, Howard, from whom she was distanced from for many years. This was a special time for Ellie allowing her to stay positive and to focus on quality relationships.

Upon her death and without a will expressly stating Ellie’s wishes and desires, Tracy planned the cremation and intimate memorial service at Ellie’s local parish where she frequented during the last years of her life. However, her Uncle Howard, Ellie’s brother, vigorously disagreed with Tracy’s plan and instead decided to plan a memorial service at their childhood parish in a different part of New York City.

The two different memorials caused chaos and confusion among Ellie’s family members and friends. The separate invitations from Uncle Howard and from Tracy demonstrated the lack of unity between the two relatives who both felt that they knew what Ellie’s desired wishes were for her memorial service.

In the end, Uncle Howard canceled his service after receiving pressure to do so from the family who sided with Tracy, but this family war over what Ellie’s last wishes were created a lasting rift among them.

What would have been the simple solution? If Ellie had outlined her wishes regarding her memorial service and other details in a will, this would have prevented a family war pitting her loved ones against each other.

In another instance, Kelly, a close friend of mine, recently called me to let me know that her father, John, passed away without a will. As a result, she and her step-mother are now in a battle over a few of his personal items, such as his school diplomas and class ring, with little monetary value but high sentimental value. Both claim that John told each of them in private conversations that those items would pass to them, but without a will, who can be sure?

In the state of California, a will is valid if drafted while you are in sound mind and not under undue influence with two neutral, adult witnesses, who are not your beneficiaries.  Or, you can draft a holographic will, which must be completely handwritten by you and signed and dated with legible instructions. Holographic wills do not require witnesses or a notarized signature.

Comprehensive wills should outline the following: 1) full names of your beneficiaries and their relationships to you; 2) division of property and assets to your beneficiaries; 3) any specific bequests or gifts to any person or charity; 4) appointment of guardians if you have minor children; 5) name of an executor who will administer your will; and 6) any other requests or wishes upon your death, such as cremation; and 7) burial and memorial service details.    

Furthermore, your property in a will up to $100,000 is subject to a state law exemption, so no probate fees or costs are assessed. In order for your beneficiaries or heirs to avoid these expensive probate fees, it is typically recommended for you to have a living trust in addition to a will for your estate over $100,000.

Ultimately, drafting a proper will can give you not only peace of mind but can help keep the peace between your loved ones and prevent any family wars. It can ensure that there is no ambiguity regarding your wishes and allows you to control your legacy with minimal conflict.



May 1, 2015

PACQUIAO VS. MAYWEATHER: STORY OF GREED, GUTS AND GLORY

By Lisa J. Morgan, Esq.

Associate Attorney


Tomorrow, May 2nd, boxing fans and Filipinos around the world are about to witness the most highly-anticipated moment in Boxing History: Pacquiao vs. Mayweather.  It's one of those moments where all of stars have aligned in order for the Sport of Boxing to see a fight we’ve all wanted. In 2015, with both fighters very near their late thirties, it looked like the sun would set on their careers and both would move into retirement without ever having faced each other in the ring. 

Then, it happened; the two accidentally met face-to-face at a Miami Heat basketball game last January.  The two prized fighters stared each other down knowing that a fight between the two would define their careers and their legacies: a fight to the finish for the two gladiators. What was it all about? Greed? Guts? Or, Glory? Intense negotiations began with the two warring camps with larger-than-life egos. However Pacquiao, caring more about making the fight itself happen than the terms of the bout contract, agreed to take second billing in the promotional materials and a lower payout. The Mayweather name is listed first, and Mayweather will walk out to the ring in the all-too-dramatic second spot.  Mayweather will choose which corner of the ring is his, and Mayweather will choose which locker room at the venue he prefers.  In short, Pacquiao is letting Mayweather run his own media circus and take home more bacon to ensure this fight happens.

Since the announcement made earlier this year of a signed deal between the two camps and a set date of May 2, the sports world has collectively chewed the fat over every plausible aspect of the upcoming bout.  But this Saturday, the white noise of speculative chatter will stop.  It's time for the two to stop the talk and walk the walk; the constant speculating in the news stream about promoter negotiations, sponsorship deals, and fighter paychecks will finally culminate with the two legends stepping into a brightly-lit boxing ring and physical action will replace the endless chatter.  This Saturday, what Bob Arum and sports analysts alike have dubbed the "Superbowl of Boxing" will go down at the MGM Grand Garden Arena in Las Vegas.    

In a battle of wills with millions of dollars on the line, this fight contract was still unsigned a mere ten days out from the fight itself.  Last week, the two promotions behind the fighters found themselves in a last-minute dispute regarding contract terms about who could sign the agreement.  This kind of timeline for an unsigned contract in this kind of deal is unprecedented; tickets for the fight had not gone on sale until less than ten days out from the fight.  So what exactly was so vital that the two fighter's camps had to hold up ticket sales and raise a contract dispute at this eleventh hour?  Specifically, Mayweather Promotions wanted to back out on its apparent promise to make Top Rank (Pacquiao's promotion) a signatory on the $400 million Mega-Fight contract.  In contract law, a signatory is a person or entity that signs a document, personally or through an agent.  By signing the contract, the signatory becomes a party to the contract.  What does all of this mean?  It means that Mayweather's camp was dragging its feet on routine matters in business contract finalization.  Whether or not Top Rank, Pacquiao's promotion agent, would be a "party" to the fighters' contract is a no-brainer.  From a business law perspective, asking whether Top Rank should be a signatory is like asking if the fighters will use gloves or bare fists; the answer is all-too-obvious and not something to hold up ticket sales over. However, by trying to shut out Top Rank, Mayweather Promotions attempted to assert control of the “purse” prior to the disbursement of any monies to Pacquiao’s Top Rank group.

Yet, as of April 21st, the camps of the two fighters mediated and finalized the contract, and tickets went on sale.  Not that you can still buy a seat at the MGM Grand Garden Arena in Las Vegas for this Saturday - even if you're an A-list celebrity.  Because of the unprecedented demand for tickets, the promoters have told media that no free tickets or "comps" to celebrities will happen for this fight.  For those of us not attending the event live, we can still watch the Pay Per View at the price of $89 for regular quality and $99 for high-definition.

For the fighters, this headlining bout is quickly becoming known for being the "richest boxing match in history."  In a fight expected to bring in more than $400 million in revenue, largely from Pay Per View profits, the fighters will split approximately $300 million.  Mayweather will receive the lion's share of the profits in this fight at a total of sixty percent, regardless of who wins.  Manny Pacquiao will receive forty percent.  Bob Arum, Manny Pacquiao's promoter, has promised to wire transfer Manny a $50 million check the very next business day after the fight.  The IRS will take a humble thirty percent of this wire transfer, or about $16.6 million. 

However, after all of the taxes are taken out and other deductions done, each fighter is expected to take home over $100 million dollars, nearly doubling the current record for the biggest payout to fighters from a boxing main event.   HBO and Showtime, two rival networks co-producing and co-distributing the pay-per-view for the fight, have come to a rare agreement in order to logistically handle all of the money pouring in.  HBO and Showtime will use a central accounting system to handle all of the money.  According to Bob Arum, the central accounting system co-run by HBO and Showtime will "distribute the revenue in accordance with the contracts of the two fighters, so that there is no side money.  We felt that this was the most reasonable way to go.  It's the way we've done it to prevent the accusations that we usually get, that this promoter is stealing from that promoter."

While money is on the minds of many following the drama surrounding this upcoming bout, it's not on everyone's mind.  True to form, when asked about how he will spend the money, Manny Pacquiao told the press, "I don't know yet...right now I'm just focusing on the fight, how I get in shape, one hundred percent." 

The pre-fight contractual negotiations seem to predict what may be in the heart and soul of each fighter: Mayweather demonstrating his greed and Pacquiao, his quest for glory. No matter what happens in the ring, one thing is certain: the long-awaited fight is here with each having the guts to fight to the finish. No more talk, no more negotiations. It is simply time to listen for the first bell of the first round to ring. “Let’s get ready to rumble!”


About Lisa Morgan: Lisa serves as an Associate Attorney at California Law Partners, APC, with an interest and passion for contracts and sports law, especially protecting the rights of mixed martial arts fighters. For questions or comments, email: info@californialawpartners.com or call (619) 320-6065. Copyright  ©  2015. California Law Partners, APC. May be reprinted or linked with original source material crediting.


April 24, 2015

Sex and Scandal in Silicon Valley, The Gender Bias Case of Ellen Pao vs. Kleiner Perkins

By Gerard Pizarro, Esq.

Senior Attorney, California Law Partners, APC
 

Like Manny Pacquiao, venture capitalist Ellen Pao packed a powerful punch, in the form of a civil lawsuit, against the most successful and most powerful venture capital firm in Silicon Valley. Kleiner Perkins funded and helped grow multi-billion dollar corporations such as Amazon, Genentech, and Google. Ellen Pao alleged she was the victim of gender bias and was wrongfully terminated from her position as a junior partner in the firm. While the trial did not result in a knockout win for Pao, the lawsuit exposed the secrets of a traditionally white, male-dominated culture and created scandal in Silicon Valley.

In March 2015, I spent four days in the courtroom mesmerized by the most critical parts of the five-week civil jury trial in San Francisco. On the first day, seated in the front row, I observed plaintiff’s counsel as he opened the trial by exposing Ellen Pao’s annual salary- $350,000. The look on the faces of all twelve jurors depicted the shocking sentiment that filled the courtroom, all of whom were raking in only $11/day in upholding their civic jury duty.

Subsequently, Ellen Pao took the witness stand. She testified that on a business trip to Germany, she’d been hit by a taxicab while attempting to cross the street. It was at this time, while injured and in shock, that Ajit Nazre, her co-worker, made sexual comments and gestures towards her.

            “Did you do anything to stop it?” Lynn Hermle, Kleiner’s lawyer asked on cross-examination.

            “What?” Pao replied.

            “His sexual advances?” asked the lawyer.

            “I’d just been hit by a cab!” Pao exclaimed. 

In the world of high stakes venture capital with million-dollar start-up valuations and billion-dollar initial public offerings, the face of humanity revealed itself in that very moment. Pao had been preyed upon in a moment of physical vulnerability. I wondered if this was the great metaphor of the case. The jury seemed to be on Pao’s side at that moment, because they sympathized with her portrayal as a victim of predatory behavior.

On my second day of the trial, Pao, who was single at the time, conceded she’d had an affair with Ajit Nazre (the same man who had hit on her in Germany), months later. She’d tried to fend him off but he was relentless in his pursuit of her, so she began a secret affair and sexual relationship with him, convinced by him that he was separated from his wife.

However, once Pao discovered that Nazre had not left his wife, Pao immediately broke it off. The affair was later revealed to the senior partners of Kleiner, and Nazre would go on to become a general partner of the firm but Pao would not be promoted. Nazre’s true character was revealed, as he would eventually be fired after he duped Trae Vassallo, another female member of the firm, to attend a business dinner in New York with him. In actuality, there was no business, Nazre cornered Vassallo alone. After dinner that night, Nazre surprised Vassallo’s hotel room wearing only a robe and carrying a bottle of wine in an attempt to seduce her.

As the trial progressed, circumstances of gender bias in the corporate culture of Kleiner Perkins continued to unfold. In one instance, Pao testified about an all-male discussion onboard a private plane regarding porn stars, the Playboy Mansion, and the “hotness” of Marissa Meyer, the current CEO of Yahoo!. Pao was the only female on the plane. On another occasion, at an annual investing conference, Pao testified that Ray Lane, a senior member of the firm and the former President of Oracle, instructed her and Trae Vassallo, the only women in attendance, to take notes like a secretary and did not make the same instructions to their male counterparts.

Ellen Pao argued her gender was a “substantial motivating factor” in 1) not being promoted to general or senior partner, and 2) being terminated from the firm.

On my third day of the trial, Kleiner Perkins presented their defense. It was revealed that Ellen Pao had created a “resentment chart” of people in the firm she disliked or resented. She went on to complain about several members of the firm. The more she went on about what was wrong about “the other person,” the more the jury seemed to collectively lean back in disbelief. Pao’s performance reviews, which the jury later heavily relied upon, showed a pattern of arrogance toward her fellow co-workers, an unwillingness to get along with others, and an insistence on always being right.

On my final day of the trial, during closing arguments, the tide had turned against plaintiff, Ellen Pao. The defense was relentless over the five-week trial showing that it was Ellen Pao’s performance, not her gender, that was the substantial motivating factor not to promote her and to ultimately terminate her.  

Ellen Pao should have sued Kleiner Perkins for retaliation only, arguing that her termination was a result of her actions as a whistleblower, rather than her actions as a woman. That was Pao’s strongest claim. Indeed, John Doerr said it best in an email shortly before Pao was fired (and I’m summarizing here) when he said, “I have concerns about how partnership decisions are being made…Pao had one of the best years ever for a junior partner.” If that was the case, then why her sudden termination? Because she filed suit for gender discrimination?

Ultimately, Pao needed at least nine jurors to side with her. She lost on all claims—the jury did not believe that her gender was a substantial motivating factor when Kleiner Perkins made their decisions relating to her promotion or her termination.

It appeared that Ellen Pao sued Kleiner Perkins because the man with whom she had an affair with was promoted, while she was not. That scorned rage coursed through her veins for years culminating in this lawsuit. The testimony was salacious and riveting filled with sexual innuendo and misconduct. Corporate empires were made and personal reputations destroyed, but it was a broken heart that jerked open the secretive world of Silicon Valley. As this case shows, a legal strategy premised on sex and scandal, while powerful in the realm of public opinion, is a weak tactic in the legal arena.


About Gerard Pizarro: Gerard serves as a Senior Attorney at California Law Partners, APC, and specializes in personal injury, employment law, corporate litigation, and government contracting. To contact Gerard for questions or comments, email: info@californialawpartners.com or call (619) 320-6065. Copyright  ©  2015. California Law Partners, APC. May be reprinted or linked with original source material crediting. 


- HABLAMOS ESPANOL -   - MAG SALITA TAYO TAGALOG -

CALL US NOW TOLL-FREE AT 1-844-560-7885



Copyright © 2016 California Law Partners, APC. Legal Notice.
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture



San Francisco

649 Mission Street, Suite 5th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Tel: (415) 813-4371
Fax: (415) 992-5254
info@californialawpartners.com

SAN DIEGO - CORPORATE OFFICE

3869 Clairemont Drive
San Diego, CA 92117
Tel: (619) 320-6065
Fax: (619) 399-7079
info@californialawpartners.com

los angeles

9350 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 203
​Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Tel: (323) 300-5125
Fax: (323) 472-6465
info@californialawpartners.com