Bush Tax Cuts Still Up in the Air

The tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003, more commonly known as the Bush tax cuts, are set to expire on December 31, 2010 if Congress does not change the current law.  If and when these tax cuts expire, the estate tax exemption equivalent shall be reduced to $1 million.  What this means is that the government will tax the amount of your net worth that exceeds $1 million at a top rate of 50%-60% (i.e., graduated rates up to 55% plus a possible 5% surcharge).  For instance, if your estate is worth $2 million when you die, $1 million will pass tax free, and $435,000 out of the remaining $1 million will go to the IRS.  What makes up your estate?  Essentially, anything you own minus your debt counts towards the value of your estate.  Even a life insurance policy is considered an asset of your estate if you have any incidents of ownership over the policy (i.e., the ability to change the beneficiaries).  To illustrate, assume you have a house worth $500,000, a $1.5 million life insurance policy, and no other assets when you die.  The IRS would take $435,000!

However, there are some very effective ways to get around these high taxes, especially for married couples.  A husband and a wife can set up what is known as a QTIP / Bypass Trust.  This type of trust allows a married couple to double the amount of money they can pass to their heirs tax-free by fully utilizing each spouse's exemption amount.  For illustration purposes, let us assume we have a married couple who has an estate worth $2 million, and that the husband dies first.  When the husband dies, $1 million is placed into a bypass trust.  The other $1 million can pass tax-free to the wife (either outright or in trust) because of the unlimited marital deduction.  The wife can gain access to the bypass trust during her lifetime, but the money in the bypass trust will not be considered part of the wife's estate when she dies.  Thus, if her trust (or outright gift) has a value of $1 million when she dies, the couple has successfully passed $2 million to their heirs without the government getting one dime.  If you have any questions or would like to discuss this type of trust in greater detail, please contact the Law Office of Conrad Willkomm, P.A. Take advantage of our free consultation!

Brandon R. Bytnar, Esq.
Law Office of Conrad Willkomm, P.A.
590 11th Street South
Naples, FL 34102
Tel:  (239) 262-5303
Fax: (239) 262-6030
brandon@swfloridalaw.com

This is outrageous!

Now a Judge is flat out saying that the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure do not apply!

Florida Rules of Civil Procedure

1.510 Summary Judgment

e) Form of Affidavits; Further Testimony. Supporting and opposing affidavits shall be made on personal knowledge, shall set forth such facts as would be admissible in evidence, and shall show affirmatively that the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated therein. Sworn or certified copies of all papers or parts thereof referred to in an affidavit shall be attached thereto or served therewith.

Not only does it appear that the judge "withdrew" the defendants motion to dismiss, he flat out tells him the Fla.R.Civ.Pro do not apply in his court...

Now check out the order below!

The Florida Rules of Civil Procedure are the Procedure Rules that all judges and courts in Florida must follow in order to insure the orderly administration of Justice and Due Process.

Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 1.510, is the Rule that covers Summary Judgment.  According to Rule 1.510(e), Affidavits filed in Support of Summary Judgment require the following:

Florida Rules of Civil Procedure

1.510 Summary Judgment

e) Form of Affidavits; Further Testimony. Supporting and opposing affidavits shall be made on personal knowledge, shall set forth such facts as would be admissible in evidence, and shall show affirmatively that the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated therein. Sworn or certified copies of all papers or parts thereof referred to in an affidavit shall be attached thereto or served therewith.

"SWORN OR CERTIFIED COPIES OF ALL PAPERS OR PARTS OF PAPERS REFERRED TO IN AN AFFIDAVIT SHALL BE ATTACHED TO THE AFFIDAVIT"

This Rule of Civil Procedure cannot be abrogated or modified by a Judicial Administrative Rule.  It has been around a long time and has served the Florida Courts well in all areas and divisions of the law.  Rule 1.510(e) favors no one and is applied to all parties in a law suit whether it involves divorce, contract law, probate, real estate, etc.

Florida Courts have routinely singled out Homeowners in Foreclosure for special (negative) treatment.  Florida Judges, who administer foreclosure cases, have been ignoring this Rule of Civil Procedure in favor of granting fast and expedient summary judgments.

The fact that these Affidavits in Support of Summary Judgment lack the necessary attachments to meet the requirements of Rule 1.510(e) has been a constant battle fought by every attorney who fights on behalf of the homeowner; and, who seeks to have the Rules of Civil Procedure applied in a fair and just manner.

This Order is a tacit admission that the Rules of Civil Procedure are not being followed in the same manner as these same rules have been followed in other areas of the law or judicial divisions in the court system.  This is the travesty to which - www.4closureFraud.org - has dedicated itself to eliminated.

The Florida Rules of Procedure was promulgated to be followed by the judges in all divisions, in all areas of the law, and equally among all parties. NO EXCEPTIONS!

When administrating the Florida Rules of Procedure, or the Florida Rules of Evidence or applying the Florida Statutes,  Judges should not look first to whether or not the defendant is in foreclosure and adjust the rules and laws to fit a perception of guilt or expediency.  Rather the judges and court should first look to see if the plaintiff even has standing to appear before the Court; and, second, if the plaintiff has proved its case through admissible evidence - not manufactured evidence. The rules of discovery should be followed and a proper chain of title, through admissible evidence, must be proven.  Everything that happens to that Note is a proper focus of discovery according to the Florida Rules of Evidence.

Based on what www.4closureFraud.org has seen, the fight for equal justice under the law and under the Rules of Civil Procedure is still an ongoing battle.  Homeowners are still not being given due process under the law.

Ultimately, the District Courts of Appeal are going to have to decide if the Florida Laws apply equally to everyone or that Homeowners in Foreclosure are not entitled to equal protection under the law, due process, or fair and equal treatment of the Rules of Civil Procedure and the Rules of Evidence.  Furthermore, there will have to be a determination as to whether judges who operate outside the parameters of the Constitutional Right of Due Process, Equal Protection, and the impartial administration of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure and Rules of Evidence are qualified to be judges.

http://4closurefraud.org/2010/12/06/wow-is-lee-county-foreclosure-court-above-the-law/

In an attempt to clear its backlog of foreclosure cases, the Lee County Circuit Court has implemented a policy whereby the Court, on its own motion, calls for a Docket Sounding, allowing banks to accelerate the foreclosure process.  However, many homeowners and defense attorneys have complained that the manner and timing of the "Rocket Docket" is unconstitutional and permits the Court to disregard the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. 

On Thursday, December 2, the Lee County Circuit Court actually executed an order stating that it is not requiring the banks to comply with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510(e).  This rule requires that banks substantiate what their representatives swear to in an affidavit.  This order was the result of a hearing between HSBC Bank, represented by the Florida Default Law Group, P.L., and the Defendant, represented by Todd B. Allen, Esq. of the Law Office of Conrad Willkomm, P.A.  At the hearing, the Defendant moved to strike the Bank's affidavits for failure to comply with Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.510(e).  According to Allen, the Court stated that it has not been requiring banks to comply with this rule of Florida law.  As is common practice, Allen drafted an order reflecting the Court's ruling and sent a proposed copy to the bank's attorney.  After the bank's attorney confirmed the accuracy of the proposed order, Allen forwarded it to the Court.  The Judge signed the order, which stated, among other things, "Defendant's Motion to Strike is DENIED, Lee County is not requiring that Plaintiff's comply with Fla.R.Civ.Pro 1.510(e)." 

"Many people are surprised by this ruling, but it has become quite common in Lee County," said Allen. "Everyone has been talking about how egregious the use of the Rocket Docket has become, but the fact that the Court actually admitted on the record that it wasn't requiring the banks to comply with the rules is certainly shocking and upsetting. The significance of this is not simply for this one case, nor only for foreclosure issues.  If the courts are allowed to ignore the law, the future ramifications can be enormous."