The Dementia Plague
Usually the first image that comes to mind when we say someone has dementia is a person who cannot remember and is confused about even the most basic facts of their being: where he or she is or lives, the present day, month or year, and even the names and faces of his or her most loved ones. We picture someone with dementia as someone who cannot manage their own needs and requires assistance for the tasks of daily living.
As imagined above, a person with dementia no doubt has need for one or more persons acting under a power of attorney to make health care and financial decisions for them. Continue reading “The Dementia Plague”
Instructions Written to Your Lawyer can in fact be a Will
In the right case hand written instructions can be found to be a Will. Case law has evolved in the context of hand written instructions to lawyers and the companion issue of solicitor negligence.
In general, the case law says that as long as there is a deliberate and intentional expression of what should be done with one’s property on death, there is sufficient “intent” for a testamentary instrument. However, if the wording of the document and extrinsic evidence show the testamentary will is an incomplete or only a preliminary expression of wishes, then there will not be sufficient intent and there will no Will. Continue reading “Instructions Written to Your Lawyer can in fact be a Will”
Duty to Correct Examinations
As we know, estate litigation can sometimes drag on for many years with the parties conducting multiple examinations for discovery. Over the course of time it can be easy to forget our obligations under Rule 31.09 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.
According to the Rule, after an examination for discovery if the party examined later realizes an answer given on examination was incorrect or incomplete or is no longer correct and complete based on subsequently obtained information, the party must provide the correct or expanded information to the examining party in writing. The written answer then becomes part of the original examination and, according to case law (Capital Distributing Co. v. Blakey, 1997 CanLII 12173) both the original answer and the corrected answer become part of the record, but the correction or expansion of an answer does not remove the originally incorrect answer from the record. Continue reading “Duty to Correct Examinations”