What can we learn from watching "Roadhouse"?

I'm not sure why it took this long, but I finally saw "Roadhouse" for the first time the other day. While it may not match "Point Break", it comes awfully close, with emphasis on the word awful. What a classic! Beyond the entertainment value, I learned some valuable things that should help in the practice of law:

1) "Nobody wins a fight." Well said. You can fight to the death, but it will cost you money, time and stress, so reaching a settlement is preferable. Even so, Patrick Swayze still had to do a lot of roundhouse kickin' before he made his peace with the bad guys, and you may have to as well.

2) "It gets worse before it gets better." Even if this isn't really true, it sure feels that way. Taking your case to court and confronting the bad guys in your life will usually unleash their fury. They may not bring their kung fu grip, pipe bombs, tire irons or semiautomatic machine guns to the fight, but they can still inflict pain and it's best to expect it and be prepared.

3) "Pain don't hurt." This one I'm still trying to understand. He was the philosphy Ph.D., though, while I only took a few units, so I'll let you know when I reach enlightenment. His practice of carrying his medical records with him, though, makes a lot of sense, and I'd suggest carrying an advance health care directive and HIPAA authorization as well. In our advanced technological age, a wallet card allowing medical providers access to this information would suffice.

He doesn't mention his trust and powers of attorney in the movie, but if your profession is cleaning up dive bars and bringing justice to evil land barons, keeping your estate plan up to date is highly recommended.

Help! My grandma's marrying her prison boyfriend!

Here's my favorite article of the day, from Slate magazine--it's not too far from the kind of calls I get every day: "Grandma's Prison Pal."

Astor elder abuse sentencing

Not even the rich and powerful can get away with elder abuse--Brooke Astor's son was sentenced today. It's a minimum sentence, but he's also 85 years old, so 1-3 years is a long time for him. My guess is that he couldn't say no to his wife, who unfortunately was not prosecuted. He was set to receive a large inheritance anyway, and was receiving money from his mother also, so if he (or his wife) could have been content with what they had, he would not be facing this. I'll be anxious to see what kind of sentence his attorney receives, but in the meantime, you can find the story here.

Justice

A couple of thoughts and my observations about our justice system, inspired by today's sermon at church...I think the system ought to be about finding the best resolutions to problems, hence RRJ's slogan "Providing practical solutions."

One of the things I've noticed, and I know I'm only one of many in a long line of past observers, is that the poor are denied access to the justice system--the system, for the most part, requires a good deal of money for access, in fact. This means, then, that the "haves" take advantage of the "have-nots", and I was particularly repulsed by an example of this a couple of weeks ago--a couple of attorneys and their client went way beyond the bounds of decency and the Probate Code, apparently figuring their victim wouldn't have the resources to fight it. We found a way to help, but there are plenty of others I can't.

I'm encouraged by the Hon. Aviva Bobb's efforts to improve self-help access in the downtown Los Angeles probate court--now that she's retired, I hope it continues. It's made a tremendous difference in helping those with conservatorship needs who didn't have much money or had cases where it wouldn't have made sense to pay attorney fees.

The rise of mediation has also helped in giving clients a forum to voice the emotional aspects of a case, not just the legal ones, which usually means faster and cheaper settlements. Once they feel their concerns have had a fair hearing, they're more inclined to agree to a solution that addresses them--these concerns may not have ever had a chance of being addressed by the legal system. It reminds of me of my disillusionment on the debate team in college--my professor stressed that it was a truth-seeking activity, but it seemed much more a truth obfuscation activity to me...an adversary system in court doesn't always, and can't always, produce accurate and just results, so finding a solution with the help and true understanding of those involved in a lawsuit has a better chance of producing a just result.

Estate planning for your online accounts

I read something on this subject the other day, and realized it's something that ought to be mentioned in every estate planning session with clients--planning for online access to your accounts, and listing the accounts, for the right people to access after your death.

There are services to keep the information, and who to allow access to it, after proof of your death, like Legacy Locker and Deathswitch. It's important, as many accounts might not even be found without them--I can think of several of mine that have no paper trail--even the tax information is sent online.

I remember being interviewed for a TV news story a few years back on the family of the Marine killed in Iraq, who had to sue Yahoo (successfully) to gain access to his email account--I was asked (before the family won in court) what else the family might do, and I suggested hiring some hackers. I still laugh at the reporter's horrified expression, and she asked, "Really?" It turns out that's what a lot of people do, and have to do, if other options aren't available--perhaps the most famous case was that of a museum in Norway, which put the call for help out to hackers after one of its employees died, taking some passwords with him to the grave.

Michael Jackson will

I won't be the only estate planning & probate attorney writing this, but I have to wonder why Michael Jackson's attorney wrote up a plan that ensured probate. The will provides that his estate be given to the Michael Jackson Trust--why didn't he just skip that step and fund the trust during Jackson's lifetime? It would have ensured the privacy that Jackson seemed to want. Now his financial details, the beneficiary details and creditor claims (there will be some strange ones, I'm sure) will all be public record.

With the large size of Jackson's estate, I don't think probate fees would be much higher, if at all, than trust administration fees, but now the whole family drama will play out in a public way. For most people, including Michael Jackson, a revocable living trust is the best foundation for an estate plan.

Another opinion on how long our frugality will last

I came across this on one of my favorite sites this morning, The Oxford Club's Investment U:

Will Frugality Remain?

I tend to agree, that those forced to be frugal will not make it a habit any longer than they have to. I do think some people have been shaken enough to build up large reserves, but how many?