Estate Planning

February 6, 2013

New York Joint Assets May Have to Pay A Share of Estate Taxes

The New York Estate Settlement process may require that an Estate Tax Return be filed for a decedent’s estate. Not all estates are required to file returns or pay an estate tax. In New York, the estate value threshold for having to file the return is $1,000,000. The Federal requirement is equivalent to the exclusion amount which for 2013 is a gross value of $5,250,000.

Even in an estate that is required to file a return, no estate tax may be due on account of various deductions such as the marital or charitable deduction or because of debts or liens such as mortgages or other claims. The gross estate value of an estate is comprised of all of the decedent’s assets that are considered under the tax laws to be includable for estate tax purposes. These items include assets that were owned by the decedent in his name alone at death such as bank accounts, brokerage accounts, real estate, etc. The gross estate also includes assets owned by the decedent that were held jointly with a right of survivorship, and other items where there is a named beneficiary such as life insurance, retirement accounts (i.e., IRA’s or 401K’s) and Totten Trusts.

The New York Probate Lawyer Blog has previously discussed that assets owned in a decedent’s own name typically are administered by an Executor or Administrator as part of the administration estate. Property that has named beneficiaries or joint owners is transferred automatically to such beneficiary/joint owner upon the decedent’s death and is not subject to estate administration.

Regardless of the nature of the assets, where an estate is subject to estate tax, the tax must be paid due to the inclusion of such item for tax purposes. The issue that is always presented is what source is responsible for the payment of the estate tax – is it the decedent’s administration estate or is payment the responsibility of the beneficiary or joint owner who received the property. Of course, like many answers in the legal world, the response is “it depends.”

In the first instance, the tax laws generally require that the estate fiduciary (i.e. Executor or Administrator) is responsible for paying the tax.

It is a common practice that a provision in a decedent’s Last Will provides that all of the decedent’s estate taxes be paid from the decedent’s administration estate which is the property owned by the decedent in his own name and passing under the Will. Such a provision would exempt from the payment of the tax any beneficiary of property passing outside of the Will such as insurance or jointly held assets. This result may not be fair to the persons who are beneficiaries under the Will since they are required to pay the estate taxes allocable to the assets passing to the other outside beneficiaries.

In order to avoid an unintended burden of estate taxes being placed on unsuspecting beneficiaries, a New York Estate Attorney will examine a client’s entire portfolio of assets and discuss the tax issues with a client so that estate taxes can be properly allocated.

The basic law in New York is that each asset is to share its allocable portion of estate taxes. These principals are set forth in New York Estates, Powers and Trusts Law Section 2-1.8 entitled “Apportionment of Federal and State Estate or Other Death Taxes; Fiduciary to Collect Taxes from Property Taxed and Transferees Thereof“. Therefore, if there is no specific direction in a Last Will or other instrument that changes this allocation, all of the outside beneficiaries must contribute their allocable share of estate taxes. EPTL Section 2-1.8 even allows the Surrogate to direct such persons to pay their share of the tax.

Estate Administration can be a very complex process. Calculating the amount of estate taxes that may be payable and determining the persons that are ultimately responsible for such payment adds even more responsibility to the job which each Executor and Trustee is required to perform. Since Estate fiduciaries are responsible for the proper payment of estate tax it is important that they obtain guidance from Estate Lawyers and tax professionals so that the interests of the estate and all beneficiaries are protected.

January 30, 2013

Estate Planning in New York Should Always be a Top Consideration

by Jules M. Haas

There are legions of articles and information postings explaining the benefits of having an Estate Plan. New York Estate Planning, as well as planning in all other states, requires that an individual take the time and consideration to develop the precise manner in which assets, financial affairs and personal matters can be handled in the event of death or incapacity.

However, despite all of the pronouncements and guidance that is offered, New York Estate Lawyers know that a lack of estate planning or an ineffective plan is often the rule rather than the exception. In a recent post by Russ Rankin at churchexecutive.com entitled “Survey: Most SBC pastors not prepared to die“, it was reported that almost 40 percent of pastors in the Southern Baptist Convention have no estate planning documents. It appears that this lack of planning is remarkable since members of the clergy would seemingly interact with parishioners on a day to day basis who face the personal hardships of having to deal with the death and incapacity of family members and friends.

The New York Probate Lawyer Blog has discussed Estate Planning Documents in many posts. These documents include a Last Will, Health Care Proxy, Living Will, General Power of Attorney and Living Trust. When creating an estate plan, an individual should consult with a legal advisor to determine which documents are most suited to his circumstances. Specific provisions and beneficiary designations in a Last Will or Trust, as well as other documents, may need to be crafted to deal with particular circumstances and to insure that a person’s intentions are carried out without confusion or delay.

Interestingly, in Mr. Rankin’s article, the author notes that over half of the pastors believed that when a person dies intestate (without a Will), the decedent’s family determines what happens to the deceased person’s assets. The fact is in New York, like most states, when a person dies intestate New York law determines the persons who inherit the estate. These persons are called distributees (i.e., next of kin) and the order of priority of inheritance is set out in New York Estates, Powers and Trusts Law Section 4-1.1. Also, typically an Administrator will be appointed from this group of distributees after a petition is filed with the Surrogate’s Court in New York.

Since it is always best to create an estate plan, which includes naming one’s Executors and Trustees rather than leaving their selection to an artificial state law, steps should be taken to put a plan in place and to update the plan periodically.

January 23, 2013

A New York Estate Plan Must Consider Assets Held in a Totten Trust

by Jules M. Haas

Estate Planning in New York requires a review and understanding of all of a person’s assets and property interests. The New York Probate Lawyer Blog has previously discussed that a Last Will typically controls or directs the disposition of assets that are owned or held in a decedent’s name alone.

Other assets may pass from a decedent to a beneficiary by operation of law. For example, jointly owned property such as a bank account or real estate is automatically transferred to the surviving joint owner upon death. Similarly, named beneficiaries of life insurance and pension or retirement funds directly receive these assets when a decedent dies. Typically, a Last Will does not control the disposition of these funds without very explicit directions. Similar principals apply to a bank account known as a “Totten Trust”. Such bank accounts are usually created by a decedent and are titled in the name of the decedent “ITF” with the name of the beneficiary appearing thereafter. During his lifetime, a decedent would be completely free to add or subtract funds to the account and the “ITF” beneficiary would have no rights to any of the funds. However, upon the death of the account owner, all of the funds pass automatically to the “ITF” beneficiary. New York Estates, Powers and Trusts Law Section 7-5.2 sets forth many of the rules regarding these types of accounts.

New York Estate Lawyers are aware that an estate plan and creating a Last Will must take into consideration these accounts. The provisions of the Will may provide for property dispositions to persons other than those named as a beneficiary of a Totten Trust. Such an estate plan may not reflect a decedent’s actual intent and may also lead to Surrogate’s Court Litigation.

An example of the potential for contests regarding estate settlement and Totten Trusts was recently provided in a case decided by Manhattan Surrogate Nora Anderson on January 10, 2013 and reported in the New York Law Journal on January 28, 2013. In Matter of Wess, the decedent died leaving a Totten Trust in the name of her former lover in a sum of over $400,000. The Executor of the decedent’s Will claimed that the bank account containing these funds should not be found to be a Totten Trust passing directly to the friend. Instead, the Executor claimed that the bank funds should pass to the estate under the Will.

Based upon a review of the bank records, 1099 Forms, testimony of bank personnel and other evidence, the Court determined that there was a valid Totten Trust. Thus, the bank funds passed directly to the decedent’s friend and not pursuant to the Will provisions.

The Wess case demonstrates that Estate Planning in New York must include a careful review of how assets are owned. If Will provisions conflict with beneficiary designations on assets such as bank accounts, it is essential that a person understand where his assets will go upon death so that his intent is carried out. Moreover, if the intention is that a Totten Trust beneficiary receives an account and that a Will does not control this asset, it would be advantageous to confirm that the bank account name and bank records are absolutely clear as to this intention. In Wess, although the Totten Trust was upheld, the bank had lost the signature cards and destroyed other old papers associated with the original creation of the Totten Trust account.

January 16, 2013

New York Estate Assets in the Age of Facebook

by Jules M. Haas

The New York Estate Settlement process is often an overwhelming challenge to family members and friends who are appointed as Executors or Administrators of a decedent’s estate. Putting aside the sometimes complex task of Probating a Will or seeking Letters of Administration in an Intestate Estate, the newly appointed fiduciary is faced with the duties of marshaling or collecting assets, paying debts and expenses and filing estate and income taxes related to the decedent.

New York Estate Lawyers who represent fiduciaries assist their client with many of these items. However, dealing with assets, debts, claims and taxes, particularly where a decedent’s personal affairs were kept private during a decedent’s lifetime, requires time consuming research and attention to the details provided in the decedent’s records and papers.

In the Facebook and Web centered age, investigating a person’s lifetime affairs is even more difficult due to on-line banking, social media contacts, and web-based information in the “cloud”, all of which is accessed by a plethora of passwords and user ID’s. Thus, rummaging through a decedent’s paper bank and brokerage statements and incoming mail may not provide a full insight into his affairs which may, in fact, be paperless. Just accessing an e-mail account may be impossible.

In this regard, the authority of an Executor or Administrator may be thwarted by privacy rules and restrictions that are imposed on the users of these web/social media accounts. For example, the state of Virginia is now considering legislation that would allow the state’s probate laws to apply to so-called “digital assets”. As reported by Tracy Sears in a post on January 9, 2013 in wtvr.com, this legislation was prompted after the suicide death of a 15 year-old high school student. When the student’s parents attempted to access his Facebook account to try and discover reasons for his untimely death, Facebook refused the family access due to its privacy policies. Unfortunately, there was no state or federal law that gave an estate a right to override these company policies.

It appears that New Hampshire is also considering this type of legislation that would allow an Executor to have control over a decedent’s social media accounts.

An estate fiduciary is entrusted with the obligation of Administrating an Estate and providing finality to a decedent’s affairs so that the estate beneficiaries can ultimately receive their share of estate assets. It is, indeed, ironic that the web/social media avenues that can seemingly provide efficiency and productivity to a person during life are now an impediment to the settlement of that person’s affairs after death.

Providing the Estate Planning to avoid these issues of non-access to account information is always a good practice. Along with estate planning papers such as a Last Will, Health Care Proxy, Living Will, and Power of Attorney, a person should keep a clear and up-to-date record of user ID and password information. A trusted family member or friend should know where to locate this valuable information. Additionally, there has been a new trend towards preparing a “Digital Will”. As reported in an article by Claire Connelly at foxnews.com on August 30, 2012 entitled “Your digital Will: How to share your data after death“, specialized on-line sites allow you to store your user information and designate the beneficiaries who are to receive this information after your death.

January 10, 2013

The Estate Tax is Continued in the New Tax Law

by Jules M. Haas

Back at the end of 2010 when the Estate Tax had disappeared for a brief moment in time, Congress and the President agreed on a new and improved version of the law that raised the Federal Estate tax exemption to $5,000,000 for each individual. However, in the combined wisdom of these lawmakers, the modified tax provisions were to take effect for only two years and were scheduled to expire at the end of 2012 as part of the dreaded fiscal cliff. Certainly it did not seem to matter to the leaders that individuals who were engaging in Estate Planning and Gift Planning had no idea as to what plan they should follow after December 31, 2012.

Fortunately, before the bell tolled on 2012, the estate tax exemption of $5,000,000 (adjusted for inflation), was made a permanent structure of the Federal Estate Tax. There was a small change in the estate tax rate that increased the tax rate to 40 percent.

For New York State residents, there was no change to the $1,000,000 exemption. Also, the annual federal gift tax exclusion continues to rise with inflation and is presently at $14,000 for each individual gift.

The law that was recently passed is called the “American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012”. However, it is questionable whether most taxpayers are relieved since the recent payroll tax reductions are eliminated resulting in fewer dollars in most wage earners paychecks. A summary of some of the most relevant tax changes is set forth in an article by Steve Parrish in Forbes on January 9, 2013 entitled “What the New Tax Law Really Means and New ‘Tax Price Points.’
Since Federal and New York State Estate Taxes appear to be here to stay, it is always a good idea to review an estate plan every few years. New York Estate planning lawyers know that even if there does not appear to be any tax impact, updating documents such as a Last Will, Living Will, Living Trust, Health Care Proxy and Power of Attorney is important to reflect changes in life and beneficiary planning. Estate planning is not just about taxes. The more mundane issues relating to the smooth transfer of assets and avoiding estate battles such as Will contests is always a paramount goal. This is especially true for business owners where estate planning papers and business agreements such as Shareholder Agreements are needed for effective business transition in case of death or disability.

January 8, 2013

New York Guardianship Laws Can Provide a Safety Net for Elderly Individuals

by Jules M. Haas

New York Guardianship Laws are contained in Article 81 of the Mental Hygiene Law (MHL). These statutory provisions are utilized in many situations where a person in need is Alleged to be Incapacitated. Quite often the Alleged Incapacitated Person (“AIP”) is elderly and is suffering from the effects of a sudden medical condition such as a stroke or cardiac arrest or the long term deterioration of mental capacity due to dementia.

Whatever the circumstances may be, the family or friends of an elderly individual who loses the ability to attend to Activities of Daily Living, can follow the procedures outlined in Article 81 and attempt to have a Guardian appointed. New York Guardianship attorneys provide guidance to their clients who want to petition the Court for the appointment of a Guardian of the Person or Guardian for Property Management.

The Guardianship law provides a sort of safety net for persons lacking capacity, particularly in the case of the elderly. MHL Section 81.06 entitled “Who may commence a proceeding”, allows a Guardianship Petition to be commenced by just about anyone who has a concern about the AIP including anyone who resides with the AIP and “a person otherwise concerned with the welfare of the person. . . .” While petitions for Guardianship are usually commenced by family members, the proceedings are sometimes started by a hospital, a nursing home or a governmental agency such as the New York City Department of Social Services where Adult Protective Services provides community intervention. By having an expansive list of individuals and entities that can intercede on behalf of an AIP, there is a greater possibility that an AIP can receive Court intervention and protection particularly where no family member exists or the AIP’s family will not become involved.

A recent article in FoxNews.com published on December 28, 2012 describes the situation of the elderly in China where the national legislature amended its laws to require that adult children visit their elderly parents “often” or run the risk of being sued by the parent. According to the article, the law was instituted due to a number of factors including increased elderly population in China where the social safety net is lacking and there is a limit on family size which creates a large financial burden for elderly care on just a single child.

One can only imagine the plethora of lawsuits that would deluge the Courts if such a law was enacted in New York. While Guardianship proceedings in New York may be formalistic by requiring Court papers and hearings in front of a Judge, the proceedings do provide a process to protect elderly persons from harm due to incapacity. Of course, Estate Planning prior to incapacity in the form of a Health Care Proxy, Living Will, Living Trust and Last Will is always the best course to follow in order to avoid the need for a Guardianship.

December 19, 2012

New York Inheritance Laws Do Not Protect Step-Children

by Jules M. Haas

The various rights afforded to persons by the New York estate laws generally require that a person be related by blood to a decedent. New York Estates, Powers and Trusts Law (EPTL) Section 4-1.1 provides the relationship of individuals who can inherit an estate of a decedent who died without a Last Will. The priority established in this statute begins with a surviving spouse and issue and continues through the family tree to great-grandchildren of grandparents. Section (b) of the law provides that the “decedent’s relatives of the half blood shall be treated as if they were relatives of the whole blood.” Thus, half sisters and half brothers, for example, achieve inheritance rights. The statute further recognizes rights of adopted persons. Such familial relationships also afford a person certain rights to contest a Last Will.

However, absent an adoption, a child of a natural parent who has remarried has no rights with regard to the estate of the step-parent. This situation can present many problems, particularly in the case where the child is young. For example, if the child’s natural parent dies, the deceased parent’s estate or a large portion of it may pass to the surviving spouse if there is no Last Will or the Last Will does not provide for the child. Once the surviving spouse has received the estate property, the surviving child has no rights or expectation regarding the estate of the step-parent since there is no blood-relation between them. If the step-parent dies without a Last Will all of the step-parent’s estate, which includes the assets derived from the step-child’s deceased natural parent, may go to the step-parent’s blood relatives. Unfortunately, the step-child would be excluded under the law from participating as a distributee or next of kin of the step-parent.

This problem was recently recognized in Australia where laws have been changed to protect the interests of step-children. An article by Amanda Banks appearing in the West Australian dated December 3, 2012, entitled “Stepchildren get will rights” discusses this topic.

The best remedy for disinheritance of a step-child is for the child’s natural parent to prepare a comprehensive estate plan which includes a Last Will, Living Will, Health Care Proxy and even a Living Trust. The provisions of these documents can provide for estate assets to go to a child and also that the child be appointed as an Executor or Health Care Agent. If the child is a minor, a trust can be created with an independent trustee to protect the property that is given to the child. While disinheriting a child is allowed under New York, the unintended disinheritance of a child in a second marriage situation can have devastating life-long financial consequences.

Many individuals believe that estate planning is only for those that are wealthy and want to limit estate tax liability. In fact, there are many family situations where there are second marriages, adopted children, unknown heirs or other family concerns unassociated with tax issues which require extensive estate planning and foresight.

November 28, 2012

New York Gift Planning Requires Many Considerations

by Jules M. Haas

New York Estate Planning Lawyers are often asked by their clients about making gifts to family members or friends or charities. When considering a gift there are a number of items that should be part of a list of basic considerations.

1. It is important to identify the person to whom the gift is to be made. While this seems rather basic, it is not always easy to provide a gift to the person to whom you want to benefit. For example, if you desire to make a gift to a grandchild or other person who is a minor, some alternative method such as a trust or a Uniform Gift to Minors Act account may be needed since the minor cannot receive the asset in his or her own right. It may be that the donor of the gift may not want to make a gift that is in a trust or a restricted account and may feel comfortable just providing funds outright to a minor’s parent with the confidence that the parent will use the gift solely for the minor’s benefit.

A similar situation may arise where an individual desires to gift assets to a person who is disabled or incapacitated. Such situations may require the establishment of a Supplemental Needs Trust to protect the governmental benefits received by the intended donee.

2. Another consideration is the financial effect that the gift may have on the donor and the donee. Thought should be given as to whether the donor can afford to make the gift and whether the loss of the asset will affect the donor’s standard of living or future retirement planning. As to the donee, it should be determined whether receipt of the asset might increase the donee’s income tax bracket or create complications regarding the donee’s estate plan by exceeding federal or state exemptions. Additionally, the donee’s physical condition may be a factor since it would not be beneficial to provide assets to a person whose medical costs may skyrocket, especially where those costs might be paid by government programs such as Medicaid.

3. Of course, the gift tax impact of any gift is always important. This is especially true at present since the current Federal tax laws allow a combined estate and gift tax exemption of just over $5,000,000. In view of the uncertainty of the future of this exemption after December 31, 2012, many high net worth individuals are looking to use up their exemption by gifting assets having a value of up to $5,000,000 before the end of the year.

While such a planning step appears to be beneficial, there are certain circumstances where the gifting of assets can be troublesome. A recent article in Forbes on November 19, 2012 by Peter J. Reilly, “IRS Position on Wandry Decision Makes 2012 Gifting More Difficult“, provides an excellent discussion of some mine-fields. As reported in the article, the IRS has announced its non-acquiesence to a Tax Court memorandum opinion which essentially allowed a donor, through a formula clause, to modify his gift percentage interests of a family LLC after the IRS had revalued same.

In the event the IRS revalues a gift after an audit, the possibility exists that the $5,000,000 exemption gift is determined to really be a $7,000,000 gift resulting in thousands of dollars of unintended gift taxes being due.

As in all estate and trust and estate planning contexts, it is necessary to consider both the practical and tax implications of asset transfers and the manner in which such dispositions are made, whether by a gift, a Last Will and Testament and a Trust. Discussions with other family members and advisors such estate planning lawyers and accountants is the best method to avoid unintended results.

October 24, 2012

New York Estate Settlement and Estate Planning Involves Many Kinds of Issues

by Jules M. Haas

New York Estate Planning Lawyers encounter many different issues that can have an effect on an estate plan and a decedent’s estate. Post death concerns are often resolved in proceedings in the Manhattan Surrogate’s Court, Queens Surrogate’s Court or the Surrogate’s Court in New York’s many other counties. It is astounding, even to Long Island Estate attorneys and other probate lawyers, as to the many peculiar problems faced by estate fiduciaries.

For example, in a recent case decided by Manhattan Surrogate Nora Anderson on October 19, 2012 and reported in the New York Law Journal on October 16, 2012 entitled Matter of Ray, the Court was asked to declare a potential heir as deceased due to the heir’s long absence. New York Estates Powers and Trusts Law (EPTL) Section 2-1.7 allows a Court to provide a presumption that a person is deceased after a three year absence. Based upon the demonstration of a diligent search and the potential heir’s long absence and other evidence, the Court ruled that the potential heir was presumed to have died and the sole surviving heir was then able to administer the decedent’s estate.

In another recent case decided by Manhattan Surrogate Kristen Booth Glenn on October 18, 2012 and reported in the New York Law Journal on October 26, 2012, entitled Accounting by Matseoane, the Court dismissed objections to an Administrator’s accounting that were filed by a creditor of the decedent. The problem is this proceeding was that the creditor’s alleged claim against the decedent’s estate had been discharged by the decedent during her lifetime in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy. Not only did the Court dismiss the claim, it found that the creditor and the creditor’s attorney acted improperly and were subject to Court sanctions.

As a New York Trust and Estates attorney, I am aware that having a properly planned estate can avoid many of the problems that arise during estate administration. The fundamental implementation of a Last Will may avoid issues regarding intestate succession and proof of kinship. However, it is not surprising that the lack of attention to proper planning can result in problems regarding estate settlement. However, even individuals with large estates and the monetary resources to obtain counseling regarding probate and succession issues often fail to properly plan their post death dispositions. A recent article appearing in Forbes by Erik Carter on October 17, 2012 entitled “What We Can Learn From Celebrity Estate planning Gone Wrong”, chronicles some of the mistakes made by the rich and famous. For example, the article reports about the late classic folk and rock star Sonny Bono who failed to prepare a Last Will but fathered an out-of-wedlock child who claimed a share of his estate. Even the late former Supreme Court Justice Warren Berger cost his estate hundreds of thousands of dollars due to poor planning.

Estate Administration and Estate Planning requires time and thought and the assistance of professionals such as attorneys, accountants and financial advisors. An individual who neglects to create a proper plan with consideration for post death issues runs the risk that their family and beneficiaries will suffer the consequence of unnecessary cost and delay in wrapping up post-death affairs.

October 10, 2012

New York Estate Planning Can Include Pre-Nuptial Agreements and Testamentary Trusts

by Jules M. Haas

There have been numerous posts in the New York Probate Lawyer Blog discussing many aspects of the importance of good estate planning. First and foremost, preparing and signing a Last Will allows a person to provide specific direction as to the disposition of property upon death. Absent the execution of a valid Will, a person is deemed to have died intestate and all estate property that does not pass by operation of law (i.e. joint assets) is distributed to the decedent’s next of kin in accordance with State laws. Thus, long lost relatives with whom the decedent had little or no lifetime contact may become estate beneficiaries. For example, the Las Vegas Sun recently reported in a story by Cy Ryan on September 16, 2012 about a recluse who died leaving $7 million dollars worth of gold bars and coins stored in boxes in his house. It now appears that since the decedent did not have a Will, a first cousin who had not even talked to the decedent for a year, may inherit the estate.

Not only does preparing a Will allow a person to specifically name beneficiaries, a complete estate plan that includes a pre-nuptial agreement and a trust can fine tune the manner by which the decedent’s property is disposed of. A good example of such planning was seen recently with the death of actor, Dennis Hopper. As reported at TMZ.com on September 17, 2012, Mr. Hopper had entered into a pre-nuptial agreement that prevented his estranged wife from receiving any benefits under his Will. As discussed in my prior Blog posts, ordinarily in New York a spouse cannot be disinherited and New York Estates, Powers and Trusts Law section 5-1.1-A provides that a spouse can elect to receive a share of an estate. However, a valid pre-nuptial agreement can provide that a spouse waives the right to receive the statutory share and instead elect to receive only the amounts provided for in the agreement.

The TMZ article also reports that Mr. Hopper left his 9 year old daughter $2.25 million in a trust and that his wife had no control over the trust. It is very common for parents to leave their minor children assets in a testamentary trust, which is a trust created inside of their Will. The trustees that are also named in the Will can be anyone the testator selects, whether a relative, a friend or even a bank or trust company. The trustee does not need to be the child’s other parent. The surviving parent or legal guardian of the child has no authority to control the named trustee.

New York Estate Planning attorneys work closely with their clients to understand their needs and intentions and to develop an estate plan that can reflect their wishes. Mr. Hopper’s advisors apparently were successful in creating a plan whereby his estranged wife was excluded from obtaining or controlling any part of his estate or the manner in which it would be administered for the benefit of his young daughter.