http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog Thu, 19 Apr 2012 21:49:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=536#comment-25 Margiecarbert Thu, 19 Apr 2012 21:49:00 +0000 http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=536#comment-25 evelyn and her crocked friend need to join evelyn s boyfriend because i an tired of evelyn out of control fighting we like to see people haveing fun sometime her stuff is getting old and tiresom jen is real cool and together. tell evelyn its time for her to move around. evelyn and her crocked friend need to join evelyn s boyfriend because i an tired of evelyn out of control fighting we like to see people haveing fun sometime her stuff is getting old and tiresom jen is real cool and together. tell evelyn its time for her to move around.

]]> http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=444#comment-24 Gizimonster Sat, 07 Apr 2012 15:00:00 +0000 http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=444#comment-24 you have to be kidding judge hennings englander is the worst judge. This judge couldnt decide anything and timely forget it, terrible and yes if you are an average person and not of big money she will go against you. She is not about justice she is all about money in her pocket in my opinion. Yes she is great for businesses because they can lie,cheat, and steal and she will side with them. crooked crooked judges and this courthouse is crooked .when this judge allows attorneys to hide and suppress evidence with no punishments its like a smack in the face to the people shes strictly for big business so if you get stuck with this judge consider your case lost and forget it. she says 1 thing and does another. very obvious she is not worthy of this position. run run run she comes from a long line of judges in the family so does this make her good ? Even heard another attorney comment she is wrong and unjust but I am not going to say anything because I have to go before her in this courthouse. This is why I believe she is no good,unfair to those who put faith in her. you have to be kidding judge hennings englander is the worst judge. This judge couldnt decide anything and timely forget it, terrible and yes if you are an average person and not of big money she will go against you. She is not about justice she is all about money in her pocket in my opinion. Yes she is great for businesses because they can lie,cheat, and steal and she will side with them. crooked crooked judges and this courthouse is crooked .when this judge allows attorneys to hide and suppress evidence with no punishments its like a smack in the face to the people shes strictly for big business so if you get stuck with this judge consider your case lost and forget it. she says 1 thing and does another. very obvious she is not worthy of this position. run run run she comes from a long line of judges in the family so does this make her good ? Even heard another attorney comment she is wrong and unjust but I am not going to say anything because I have to go before her in this courthouse. This is why I believe she is no good,unfair to those who put faith in her.

]]> http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=479#comment-22 Kevin Kantorowski Wed, 07 Mar 2012 10:45:00 +0000 http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=479#comment-22 somone needs to help Judge Daniel Caruso seen all the evidence and still did nothing! Richard Bortoloc is not having care for my grandmother he uses the drunk Jack to be his gofer somone needs to look into this!!!! somone needs to help Judge Daniel Caruso seen all the evidence and still did nothing! Richard Bortoloc is not having care for my grandmother he uses the drunk Jack to be his gofer somone needs to look into this!!!!

]]> http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=479#comment-21 Kevin Kantorowski Wed, 07 Mar 2012 10:44:00 +0000 http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=479#comment-21 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NmneAFJNcs&feature=player_detailpage http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NmneAFJNcs&feature=player_detailpage

]]> http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=214#comment-19 Montecito Money: Protecting Your Financial Privacy Sat, 14 Jan 2012 22:51:33 +0000 http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=214#comment-19 [...] Contrary to defendants’ suggestion, we do not determine the tax provision in Sidney’s will presented a choice to Sylvia such that her acceptance of the benefits under the QTIP trust signaled agreement that plaintiff would carry the burden to pay the full estate tax upon Sylvia’s death. We find no support for the suggestion that Sylvia is presumed to have consented to such a condition. See Olsen, supra, 119 N.J. Eq. at 106-07 (stating there is a rebuttable presumption that if a legatee or devisee does not reject a gift or devise he or she is deemed to accept it). Sidney was an attorney and familiar with will-drafting and the tax provisions at issue here. He opted to create an ambiguity to assure a marital deduction. The estate elected and was approved to receive a marital deduction, shielding the entirety of the assets comprising the QTIP trust, despite the fact that the gifts were not given to Sylvia outright. The desired tax benefits were achieved. Nothing in the language confirms the assertion of waiver, belying the necessity for “the direction against apportionment” whether explicit or implicit, that it “must be clear and unequivocal.” Adair, supra, 149 N.J. at 601 . After reading Sidney’s will, we do not agree it is unmistakably clear that he considered the issue and made a deliberate decision about the burden of taxation, which was accepted by Sylvia.Source: klugerkaplan.com [...] [...] Contrary to defendants’ suggestion, we do not determine the tax provision in Sidney’s will presented a choice to Sylvia such that her acceptance of the benefits under the QTIP trust signaled agreement that plaintiff would carry the burden to pay the full estate tax upon Sylvia’s death. We find no support for the suggestion that Sylvia is presumed to have consented to such a condition. See Olsen, supra, 119 N.J. Eq. at 106-07 (stating there is a rebuttable presumption that if a legatee or devisee does not reject a gift or devise he or she is deemed to accept it). Sidney was an attorney and familiar with will-drafting and the tax provisions at issue here. He opted to create an ambiguity to assure a marital deduction. The estate elected and was approved to receive a marital deduction, shielding the entirety of the assets comprising the QTIP trust, despite the fact that the gifts were not given to Sylvia outright. The desired tax benefits were achieved. Nothing in the language confirms the assertion of waiver, belying the necessity for “the direction against apportionment” whether explicit or implicit, that it “must be clear and unequivocal.” Adair, supra, 149 N.J. at 601 . After reading Sidney’s will, we do not agree it is unmistakably clear that he considered the issue and made a deliberate decision about the burden of taxation, which was accepted by Sylvia.Source: klugerkaplan.com [...]

]]> http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=351#comment-18 Pennsylvania wage | Kennedymall246 Sun, 25 Dec 2011 21:56:24 +0000 http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=351#comment-18 [...] Immigrant wage dispute moved from Alexandria to Pennsylvania … Leave a comment « Dragonfire chicken Comments are closed. [...] [...] Immigrant wage dispute moved from Alexandria to Pennsylvania … Leave a comment « Dragonfire chicken Comments are closed. [...]

]]> http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=347#comment-17 Nikimw73 Fri, 23 Dec 2011 07:33:00 +0000 http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=347#comment-17 Im not so sure if I agree with this bill!!Some retirements come very early for some, like in my situation! I received alimony after a 14yr military marriage in 2007, that is one for a time of "seperation" not divorce! My Ex is retiring as I speak, and my alimony ends in May 2012, I guess theres no official end date in my decree. I had absolute no say in my alimony, I didnt even know there were different kinds!! I have a Temp non-modifiable alimony, everyone has different circumstances, mine was horribly wrong at the time and Im still trying to figure out how too obtain more alimony from an Army Pilot! In know everyone "thinks" they should receive alimony permantly but I really do! In 2007 the economy crashed, he abandoned myself and our kids while we lived in Korea with him! I have proof of his illigitamate child and his affair w currant wife, he left me w no education, I helped him become a pilot (he wanted out 10yrs ago), but my lawyer said I could not tell this too the state!! So there for I think this all affected my alimony amongst me being denied Surviors Benifits!The courts do not know how decieving lawyers can be and what they tell their clients to keep hush about! I didnt know!!To make along story short, The best interest is the one receiving the money, and too look at what their doing for a living compared to the other, do not have a warm heart cause their in the military, so what?So was I! He doesnt pay Support!! ! Im not so sure if I agree with this bill!!Some retirements come very early for some, like in my situation! I received alimony after a 14yr military marriage in 2007, that is one for a time of “seperation” not divorce! My Ex is retiring as I speak, and my alimony ends in May 2012, I guess theres no official end date in my decree. I had absolute no say in my alimony, I didnt even know there were different kinds!! I have a Temp non-modifiable alimony, everyone has different circumstances, mine was horribly wrong at the time and Im still trying to figure out how too obtain more alimony from an Army Pilot! In know everyone “thinks” they should receive alimony permantly but I really do! In 2007 the economy crashed, he abandoned myself and our kids while we lived in Korea with him! I have proof of his illigitamate child and his affair w currant wife, he left me w no education, I helped him become a pilot (he wanted out 10yrs ago), but my lawyer said I could not tell this too the state!! So there for I think this all affected my alimony amongst me being denied Surviors Benifits!The courts do not know how decieving lawyers can be and what they tell their clients to keep hush about! I didnt know!!To make along story short, The best interest is the one receiving the money, and too look at what their doing for a living compared to the other, do not have a warm heart cause their in the military, so what?So was I! He doesnt pay Support!!
!

]]> http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=351#comment-15 Bizarre South Florida child rape case now in Miami federal court Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:04:54 +0000 http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=351#comment-15 [...] One of three federal judges presiding over a fair-wage dispute on seasonal immigrant workers, has transferred the lawsuit in his court to a federal court in Pennsylvania. However, a federal judge in Florida, overseeing a lawsuit with basically the same arguments as those in Alexandria, ruled that it would not be transferred to Pennsylvania.Source: klugerkaplan.com [...] [...] One of three federal judges presiding over a fair-wage dispute on seasonal immigrant workers, has transferred the lawsuit in his court to a federal court in Pennsylvania. However, a federal judge in Florida, overseeing a lawsuit with basically the same arguments as those in Alexandria, ruled that it would not be transferred to Pennsylvania.Source: klugerkaplan.com [...]

]]> http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=214#comment-14 Case of the Week: In Re Farraj Thu, 08 Dec 2011 23:04:47 +0000 http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=214#comment-14 [...] Contrary to defendants’ suggestion, we do not determine the tax provision in Sidney’s will presented a choice to Sylvia such that her acceptance of the benefits under the QTIP trust signaled agreement that plaintiff would carry the burden to pay the full estate tax upon Sylvia’s death. We find no support for the suggestion that Sylvia is presumed to have consented to such a condition. See Olsen, supra, 119 N.J. Eq. at 106-07 (stating there is a rebuttable presumption that if a legatee or devisee does not reject a gift or devise he or she is deemed to accept it). Sidney was an attorney and familiar with will-drafting and the tax provisions at issue here. He opted to create an ambiguity to assure a marital deduction. The estate elected and was approved to receive a marital deduction, shielding the entirety of the assets comprising the QTIP trust, despite the fact that the gifts were not given to Sylvia outright. The desired tax benefits were achieved. Nothing in the language confirms the assertion of waiver, belying the necessity for “the direction against apportionment” whether explicit or implicit, that it “must be clear and unequivocal.” Adair, supra, 149 N.J. at 601 . After reading Sidney’s will, we do not agree it is unmistakably clear that he considered the issue and made a deliberate decision about the burden of taxation, which was accepted by Sylvia.Source: klugerkaplan.com [...] [...] Contrary to defendants’ suggestion, we do not determine the tax provision in Sidney’s will presented a choice to Sylvia such that her acceptance of the benefits under the QTIP trust signaled agreement that plaintiff would carry the burden to pay the full estate tax upon Sylvia’s death. We find no support for the suggestion that Sylvia is presumed to have consented to such a condition. See Olsen, supra, 119 N.J. Eq. at 106-07 (stating there is a rebuttable presumption that if a legatee or devisee does not reject a gift or devise he or she is deemed to accept it). Sidney was an attorney and familiar with will-drafting and the tax provisions at issue here. He opted to create an ambiguity to assure a marital deduction. The estate elected and was approved to receive a marital deduction, shielding the entirety of the assets comprising the QTIP trust, despite the fact that the gifts were not given to Sylvia outright. The desired tax benefits were achieved. Nothing in the language confirms the assertion of waiver, belying the necessity for “the direction against apportionment” whether explicit or implicit, that it “must be clear and unequivocal.” Adair, supra, 149 N.J. at 601 . After reading Sidney’s will, we do not agree it is unmistakably clear that he considered the issue and made a deliberate decision about the burden of taxation, which was accepted by Sylvia.Source: klugerkaplan.com [...]

]]> http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=87#comment-13 Amritavap Thu, 17 Nov 2011 07:03:00 +0000 http://www.klugerkaplan.com/blog/?p=87#comment-13 I like this blog very much.Thanks for sharing such a valuable information. I like this blog very much.Thanks for sharing such a valuable information.

]]>