Reading that another attorney has been disbarred is never good news; we don’t delight in the misery of others. But we can learn lessons from their mistakes. Let’s take a deeper dive into The North Carolina State Bar v. Erickson to see how we can more understand how to better serve clients.

Ms. Erickson was admitted to the North Carolina State Bar in 2015. She began her career at a law firm, but was discharged in 2018 after certain grievances were filed against her with the State Bar. Those grievances are as follows:

Complaint 1:

Ms. Erickson represented Client 1 in a proceeding to sell the home of Client 1’s deceased husband. Ms. Erickson attempted to notify Client 1’s children and obtain their consent to the sale of the home. In a meeting with Ms. Erickson, Client 1 presented a man that Client 1 claimed to be her son. The man signed the required document and Ms. Erickson notarized it. The man was, in fact, not Client 1’s son. Ms. Erickson did not check the man’s identification upon notarization.

November brought with it changes to California’s real property taxation laws. Proposition 19 passed narrowly and modified laws which were already on the books. Let’s take a look at the old rules and then how the new rules will work.

In many places in California, real property has been sky-rocketing in price in the last several decades. Having real property reassessed with regard to taxes could bring with it hefty tax bills; laws were put into place to curtail the rising tax issues.

Proposition 13 has been law in California since 1978, as an amendment to their Constitution. Proposition 13 dictated that the rate of increase of property assessments would be tied to an inflation factor and could not be greater than 2 percent each year. Also, it provided a limit on property taxes to 1 percent of the assessed value. Finally, it prohibited a reassessment on real property unless there was a change in ownership or the home was new construction.

When applying for long-term care Medicaid, there will be an analysis to determine if the applicant is eligible. Is the applicant medically and financially eligible? For the financial piece of the analysis, there are strict rules regarding how many assets an applicant can have and still qualify for long-term care Medicaid benefits, such as nursing home care or care provided in the community under a Medicaid waiver. But as of what date should the state conduct this financial analysis of assets? This date is called the “snap-shot” date.

How does the applicant know when the snap-shot date is? Federal law (42 US 1396r-5 (c)) dictates that the snap-shot date is the first day that the applicant was institutionalized for 30 consecutive days. “Institutionalized” could mean either a hospital stay, nursing home stay, or combination of both. But the stay must have been 30 days consecutively, with no interruption.