Once Removed Episode 19: The Step-Transaction Doctrine and the Case of Smaldino
Once Removed Episode 18: The Reciprocal Trust Doctrine
Charitable Planning With Guest Stephanie Hood: Navigating Complex Rules and Traps for the Unwary
Once Removed Episode 16: Gift and Estate Tax, Inflation Adjustments for 2024
Once Removed Episode 17: Annual Gifting to Individuals: Options, Opportunities and Pitfalls
Once Removed Episode 12: SLATs and the Case of McKim vs. McKim
Once Removed Episode 11: Spousal Lifetime Access Trusts, or SLATs
Once Removed Episode 10: Trustee Removal and Case Update on Leo Kahn Revocable Trust
(A)ESOP's Fables - The Income and Estate Tax-Free ESOP
The Renoir Spelling Bee
Taking the Sting Out of Death Taxes with Dylan Metzner, Jones & Keller
RETURN TO FOREVER - What Game Shall We Play Today?
To Give or Not to Give: Considerations for Year-End Gifting
INTRODUCING MALTA SPLIT DOLLAR
THE PAPER CHASE
With a Little Help from My Friends
The Greatest Gift: Your Individual + Family Estate Plan
In recent guidance, the Department of Treasury and the IRS issued proposed rules that clarify under the Internal Revenue Code (Code) that the terms “spouse” and “husband” and “wife” refer to individuals who are lawfully...more
The United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015) on June 26, 2015. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment requires a State to license a marriage...more
The US Supreme Court has ruled that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defined marriage for federal law purposes to mean opposite-sex marriage, is unconstitutional (United States v. Windsor, 2013 WL...more
Two controversial cases involving same-sex marriage were decided on June 26, 2013 by the United States Supreme Court. ...more
Signed into law in 1996, the Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA, defined “marriage” for purposes of federal law as a union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and “spouse” as a person of the opposite sex....more
Although the decision of the United States Supreme Court in United States v. Windsor invalidating much of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) affects at most approximately 20% of the population of the United States, it has...more
On June 26, 2013, the United States Supreme Court issued its decisions in Windsor v. United States and Hollingsworth, et. al. v. Perry et. al., thus ending a four year "fast-track" judicial expedition of the validity of the...more
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week that the Defense of Marriage Act’s (DOMA) definition of marriage is unconstitutional. The Court's decision and the decisions allowing same-sex marriage to resume in California will have...more
On June 26, 2013, the US Supreme Court (the “Supreme Court”) struck down Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) as unconstitutional in the case of United States v. Windsor (“Windsor”). In a related case, the...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Windsor will forever change many facets of the lives of same-sex couples....more
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013, the US Supreme Court ruled that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”), which limits the definition of “marriage” to “a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife” and...more
On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA") in Windsor v. United States. Prior to the Supreme Court's decision, Section 3 of DOMA, a federal law, had...more
The U. S. Supreme Court has declared unconstitutional a portion of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which had established a federal definition of marriage as a legal union only between one man and one woman....more
In a 5-4 decision, the United States Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) in its landmark decision, United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. __ (2013). ...more
What an exciting week! I’m pleased to share the following alert regarding DOMA that my colleagues Lisa Cukier, Christine Fletcher and Peter Zupcofska put together today for clients and friends of our firm. As we celebrate...more
On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decisions in two same-sex marriage cases. In Hollingsworth v. Perry, No. 12-144, the Court ruled that the proponents of a popular voter initiative that reversed...more
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 vote that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional. The decision in United States v. Windsor means that same-sex couples who are married under state law...more
In a closely watched and eagerly anticipated decision, the Supreme Court, in United States v. Windsor, __ U.S. ___ (June 26, 2013) has overturned Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which limited the definition of...more
The Supreme Court has held that the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) is unconstitutional. DOMA defined “marriage” and “spouse” to the exclusion of same-sex partners for purposes of federal law....more
This morning, the Supreme Court issued two historic rulings on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage. The first ruling, in a 5-4 decision, struck down as unconstitutional a key provision of the federal Defense of...more
On June 26 the United States Supreme Court held the Federal Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA") unconstitutional. The Defense of Marriage Act prevented a marriage between two individuals of the same sex from being recognized for...more
On June 26, 2013, the United States Supreme Court issued a pair of opinions favorable to the gay rights movement, ruling that married same-sex couples are entitled to federal benefits and, by declining to decide a case from...more
Now that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in U.S. v. Windsor that the federal Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) is an unconstitutional “deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment of...more
Today’s Supreme Court decisions will have a major impact upon business entities, employers and individuals in New York, New Jersey, and several other states including California, due to the change of the definitions of...more