Planning Potpourri

■
Ruff
Decision.

Divorce can become a dog fight, literally! Doreen claimed she and
Eric had an oral agreement that the pooch was hers. The trial judge, clearly
not a pet lover, held that pets are personal property but “lack the unique
value essential to an award of specific performance.” The Animal Legal Defense
Fund submitted a brief amicus curiae urging the court to consider the
best interests of the animal in making decisions. Fido was registered with the
American Kennel Club as owned by both. On appeal the court considered the “special
subjective value of personal property” and that specific performance is an
appropriate remedy for personalty for which there is “strong sentimental
attachment,” and awarded Fido to Doreen. Houseman v. Dare, Sup. Ct NJ
App. Div. Docket No. A-2415-07T2 3/10/09.

■
Rainy
Day Fund Oversights.

Everyone needs a reserve; a rainy year+ fund is
optimal. Mom told you to have one, but many folks seemed to have overlooked
this basic. It is also interesting that many investors focused on asset
allocation models and most of the discussions of asset allocation in the press
never mentioned emergency cash funds. Having a separate pool of cash/near cash
investments is really a critical component to appropriately determining an
asset allocation model. Many investors are learning this concept the hard way.
That cash reserve is proving essential for investors to be able to whether the
storm of market decline and retain investments intact for that hoped for
recovery. The rich need emergency liquid savings as much as anyone else,
perhaps more so, because of the high cost of their lifestyles. Others relied on
home equity lines and other borrowing capabilities in lieu of maintaining that
emergency day fund. Those lines may no longer be available. When recovery
occurs (Bill assured me it will) don’t forget planning basics.

■
The
Issue with Issue.

Jim (Father Knows Best) and Margaret Anderson are
becoming the rare family model. CNN recently reported that: “Nearly 40 percent
of babies born in the United States in 2007 were delivered by unwed mothers.”
So when your will leaves assets to “issue”, who are issue? If your power of
attorney permits gifts to “heirs,” who are heirs? While most folks don’t like
to delve into these definitional issues of issue, failing to do so will lead to
growing confusion, problems and litigation. How should a child born out of
wedlock be treated under your documents? Do you have personal, religious, moral
or other preferences?