Wednesday, July 11, 2007


They say the devil's in the details. Why are "they" always right.

I'm trying to cap off, so to speak, the subjects I feel good about so I can narrow the field of critical subjects for the last push. Community Property is put away and I'm working on Wills right now. When I say "put away" I mean that it's not going to be looked at again until the last weekend.

I found a Wills essay (July '06) that created a trust and the designated trustee was one of the two witnesses. Also, the trustee typed the will for the physically disabled testator and signed the will in the testator's name when asked. So, we have a witness, who also acted as the testator in signing the will, who's also the designated trustee for a trust created by the will.

In my outline I had decided that being a trustee isn't equivalent to "taking" under the will, because notwithstanding the fee paid to a trustee, that's more of a burden than a benefit. But I wasn't sure so I looked at the released answers. One of them agreed with me and said it was because of California law, and the other simply came to same conclusion without mentioning California. I looked for the statute but came up empty.

That's when I said "Blast".

Then I said, "What the heck. Can't know it all.", and moved on.

Switching channels now...

Culinary observation: Lean Cuisines taste better with a lot of salt. And pepper. But that probably defeats the purpose.

Protein shakes with yogurt, bananas, strawberries and apple juice taste great. But don't make them three days in a row when on the fourth day you have to go out in public for more than 15 minutes. You might be able to get away with it if you were standing outside. And it was windy. And noisy.

My tutor's holding a class tonight. Indoors. Four hours. Wish me luck.


xkx said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
xkx said...

sorry, that was me that deleted. I think you are right about the appointment issue. Appointment as an executor isn't considered a gift, so I don't think appointment as a trustee would either.

And, good luck!

RGZ said...

that is so funny about the culinary observations! I should make that smoothie and then go to class to torment my not so nice psycho classmates :)

Speaking of which, don't you think it is odd we are taking our simulated Bar from July 17-19?

I believe Barbri did theirs like two weeks ago, right?

You sound like you're on the right track ready to kick some bar ass!

Anonymous said...

12 more days!!! we're all going to burn.

Amanda said...

I think I did that essay... and I think I found a definitive answer that said trustee is not an interested witness... but yeah, we can't know it all and if the released answers prove anything it's that we don't have to. And yes, lean cuisines are much better with lots and lots of salt. My husband likes to eat two for dinner. That's really defeating the purpose.

The Grand Poobah said...

xkx: I've done quite a few Wills essays in the last few years and that's the first time I had seen that. I think. I'm just glad that my intuition was correct.

rgz: Better late than never, I suppose. But if I haven't figured it out by that time, there's no hope for me. And you need three straight days of the smoothies to get the "desired" effect.

anon: That's Exactly Right! I'm on Fire! In a good way, of course. And it has nothing to do with the smoothies.

amanda: Yeah, I don't know about those things. I think people lose weight on them because they taste so... blah. I'm a big fan of salt, and butter, and sugar, and all the things that make food taste good. It's a good thing I was born with a metabolism on overdrive. God help me if it ever decides to slow down. And I think the released answers prove that if you know the law, and you can chat about it for a while, it looks like you know what you're talking about and they pass you. Or not. Who knows.

All I know right now is that it's time to go to bed because I'm going John Holtz's class tomorrow and I'm real tired. Sleep... I need sleep.