WEALTH PRESERVATION AND ESTATE PLANNING

 

Wealth PreservationExpertise combined with patience, a listening ear and a touch of diplomacy are the qualities that highlight our Wealth Preservation and Estate Planning group. Since 1896, Moss & Barnett attorneys have helped clients plan for the preservation, conservation and management of their assets and businesses.

Our attorneys have worked with:

  • Parents concerned about providing for their children
  • Individuals looking for ways to pass on their assets while minimizing taxes
  • Business owners seeking to gradually relinquish control to a new generation
  • Clients who want to benefit their families or community
  • Employees who are contemplating business ownership

Inevitably, situations like these present challenging legal, financial and emotional issues.

Moss & Barnett's wealth preservation attorneys enable clients to achieve their financial and personal objectives and customize estate plans while minimizing tax burdens, in an atmosphere of empathy and understanding.

Our services include:

  • The preparation of wills, trusts, powers of attorneys, living wills and related documents
  • Tax reduction strategies
  • Estate and trust administration
  • Private foundations
  • Charitable trusts
  • Trustee selection
  • Guardianships and conservatorships
  • Resolution of family and business differences
  • Succession planning for family-owned businesses
  • Life insurance trusts and related planning
  • Assistance in IRS tax audits
  • Prenuptial agreements
  • Retirement planning

Related

News Headlines


Case Summaries

Elder Law

[05/05] Miller v. Am. Airlines, Inc.
In a suit against American Airlines under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) a collective bargaining agreement did not require that plaintiffs be offered positions of comparable pay past the retirement age; 2) a claim, that a supplement to the collective bargaining agreement governing the retirement of flight engineers was facially discriminatory, was not properly raised before the EEOC.

[03/11] Budnick v. Town of Carefree
In an action raising, inter alia, a claim that defendant-town violated the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (FHAA) by denying plaintiffs a Special Use Permit (SUP) to build a multi-level continuing-care retirement community in the town, summary judgment against plaintiffs on the FHAA claim is affirmed where plaintiff failed to establish a discrimination claim under any of the theories of disparate treatment, disparate impact, or a failure to make reasonable accommodations. Potential residents of a retirement community do not presently qualify as disabled under the FHAA simply because some of them will become disabled as they age.

More...

Probate Trusts

[05/06] Estate of Herold
An order denying petitioner's safe harbor petition, which sought a declaration that his proposed "Petition for Information" would not amount to a will contest, is reversed and remanded where the trial court erred in finding that a no contest clause of the will was incorporated by reference into a trust.

[05/06] Estate of Coll-Monge v. Inner Peace Movement
In an action for trademark infringement and related claims, summary judgment for defendants-non-profits is reversed in part and remanded where: 1) the district court erred in holding that a non-profit corporation cannot be a related company whose use of the trademark is controlled by the mark's registrant; and 2) there remain disputed issues of fact regarding both the doctrine's applicability in this case, and the capacity in which testator registered the marks with the USPTO.

More...


4800 WELLS FARGO CENTER | 90 South Seventh Street | Minneapolis, MN 55402-4129
P: 612-877-5000 F: 612-877-5999 contact@moss-barnett.com