• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About pg1067

  • Rank
    Platinum Contributor
  1. It can't; deeds don't get changed. But you can record a new deed that changes everything (and you'd only need to do it at the property records office). No. You own the property, so you would be deeding the property from yourselves (using your former name(s) and statuses) to yourselves (using your current name(s) and statuses) FWIW, this sort of things is generally unnecessary. Is there any particular reason why you want to do this?
  2. I read your entire post. It's not particularly intelligible. GIGO.
  3. Just as nothing you have told us indicates the brother should receive anything more than he previously received, nor does anything you have told us indicate he should receive anything less. Absent additional information, nothing you have posted suggests that the brother's position should be altered in any way.
  4. No way to know for sure without reading the contract and knowing which state's laws apply. However, based solely on what you wrote in your post, it sounds like the answer is no. As a general rule, if a contract says that a party may, without restriction, do X, then courts won't entertain arguments about "fairness" or equity. Because the employer could always terminate without cause if a physician employees provides notice of his or her intention to "retire" which then calls into question the usefulness of such ability by the employee. The without cause termination renders the retirement termination moot. Why have it in the contract if you can't use it? I agree with your line of thinking, and your question is a good one for the doctor/employee to direct toward the attorney who represented him in the negotiation of the employment contract. Of, if the doctor/employee wasn't represented by counsel, then he might reasonably ask himself, "why did you agree to that? That was pretty foolish."
  5. I am thinking of investing in rental property.  If I buy the property and get a mortgage in my name, but have an LLC collect all the rent and pay for all operations on the property in a separate bank account, can the tennant still go after my personal assets in a lawsuit involving the property?


    Heart of the question is:  What asset protection do i have in this scenario and what would i gain if instead the LLC borrowed the money for teh property with a commercial loan?

    1. pg1067


      I will not respond to private inquiries of this sort.  Please post your questions on the appropriate public board.

  6. Isn't your ultimate question whether the sister's sale of her interest to the mining company/lessee results in the brother receiving 100% of the royalties (whereas previously he only received 50% of the royalties)? If so, the answer is almost certainly no, unless the lease contains some unusual provision that says otherwise. Nothing you have told us indicates the brother should receive anything more than he previously received.
  7. There's some rather odd typos in your two follow up posts that make it difficult to understand (I'm guessing you may be using some sort of speak-to-type program and not bothering to proofread). That said, if the sister had sold her interest to her cousin, then the royalties would presumably be paid 1/2 to the brother and 1/2 to the cousin. Since the sister sold to the lessee, then, in theory, the royalties should be paid 1/2 to the brother and 1/2 to the mining company (and, since the mining company isn't likely to pay itself, it will simply pay 1/2 of the royalties to the brother). Of course, this assumes the lease doesn't contain unusual language that says otherwise. Since I assume the lease was drafted by the mining company, I assume it has no unfavorable provisions of that sort.
  8. No. Any reason you think he might be?
  9. I don't know what this question means, but "physical touching" is what "continguous" means. Who are "them"? What does "recognize my homestead property" mean? If not what? Who says that such a response "can't . . . be issued"? What does a "Tax Appraisal District" have to do with a homestead exemption? Not obligated to do what? Whether or not lots are contiguous depends entirely on whether or not they border each other. You might want to look up the meaning of the word "contiguous" in a dictionary. "Contiguous" and "abutting" are more-or-less synonymous.
  10. Just making up numbers here: If the trust has assets of $100k net of all expenses other than the trustee fee, and all concerned agree that the trustee is to receive $20k, then the trustee will receive $20k, and the remaining $80k will split between the beneficiaries.
  11. No such requirement exists unless the court orders it. How is it that you think you "know" this?
  12. Whether or not probate is required has nothing to do with whether the deceased did or didn't have a will. Some form of probate is required if the value of the estate is greater than $150k or if transfers of title are needed. See
  13. Using normal sentence structure would make it easier for us to understand what you write. Huh? If you've had no other spouses, what does "death of second spouse" refer to? What does the reference to "split[ting] [your] children" mean? I don't know what your question means, and your facts are anything but clear. All you've done is describe a bunch of assets that apparently will pass outside your estate and made a vague reference to Part 4 of Division 5 (starting with section 5600) of the California Probate Code (which will be automatically repealed as of 1/1/2021, unless the Legislature renews it). Asking anonymous strangers on the internet to endorse your vaguely described estate plan is foolish (or, at least, acting on such endorsements would be).
  14. Well...which is it? Is your friend the trustee or is his brother the trustee? Or are they co-trustees?
  15. Do you own the mobile home and are a tenant of the mobile home park? Or are you renting the mobile home from its owner? Note that generally applicable landlord-tenant laws might not apply to mobile home rentals. I suggest googling "florida mobile home tenant laws."