Two recent New York cases and an unofficial conversation with an unnamed official at the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare show trustees the importance of understanding their duties as trustees and putting the beneficiary first.\u00a0 The cases are on opposite ends of the spectrum.\u00a0 The first case[1]<\/a> involved a Special Needs Trust with J.P. Morgan Chase Bank and the beneficiary\u2019s attorney serving as co-trustees.\u00a0 Mark was 16 years old when his adoptive mother, Marie, died in 2005.\u00a0 Mark was then living in a group home where his mother placed him after learning that she was terminally ill.\u00a0 Marie\u2019s Will left $12,000,000.\u00a0\u00a0 The Special Needs Trust should have been funded with a sum of approximately $4,000,000, but for some unexplained reason all of the estate taxes were allocated to Mark\u2019s share of the estate, rather than divided equally between his brother\u2019s share and his share.\u00a0 Five years after Marie\u2019s death an Accounting (more…)<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Two recent New York cases and an unofficial conversation with an unnamed official at the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare show trustees the importance of understanding their duties as trustees and putting the beneficiary first.\u00a0 The cases are on opposite…<\/span><\/p>\n