Search - JEvents
Search - Categories
Search - Contacts
Search - Content
Search - News Feeds
Search - Web Links
Search - SunBay
Search - JComments
Items filtered by date: Wednesday, 23 October 2019

Something all married couples need to think about when making their estate plan is Florida's “elective share” rule. This refers to a state law that authorizes the surviving spouse to claim a 30-percent share of a deceased spouse's elective estate–i.e., any property that would normally be disposed of by will or trust.

It is possible, however, for a spouse to waive his or her right to take an elective share by written agreement. For example, if the spouses signed a prenuptial agreement where each spouse waived their future right to claim an elective share in the other spouse's estate, that would be considered legally binding by a Florida court.

Court: Husband's Trust Does Not Override Prenuptial Agreement

In fact, the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal recently held that a waiver contained in a prenuptial agreement can actually override contrary instructions in a spouse's trust. The case, Wilson v. Wilson, involved a dispute between the wife and son of a deceased Florida man.

When the husband and wife married in 2011, they signed a prenuptial agreement. The agreement contained specific language waiving and relinquishing any “elective share” rights they might have under law in the “property or estate of the other party.” Notwithstanding this language, the agreement also said either spouse could still “elect to make a gift to the other by Will” without invalidating the elective share waiver.

Two years later, in 2013, the husband executed a will and trust as part of his estate plan. The trust directed the successor trustee to “set aside from the property of this trust” to “satisfy the Wife's elective share” under Florida law.

After the husband died in 2017, the wife attempted to claim her elective share, citing the language in the trust. The son, who was now trustee, opposed the election, maintaining the original 2011 waiver remained in force.

The Second District agreed with the son. Affirming an Indian River County judge's earlier ruling, the appeals court said the “language of the prenuptial agreement unambiguously waived the wife's elective share.” The husband's subsequent decision to create a trust “could not modify the prenuptial agreement since it was not signed by both parties as was required by the prenuptial agreement” and Florida law. And even if the husband gave his wife a “testamentary gift,” that would not effect the waiver of the elective share itself.

The critical thing to note here is that when a married couple signs a prenuptial agreement affecting their rights under Florida probate law, any subsequent modification to that agreement must also be in writing and signed by both parties. One spouse cannot unilaterally assume their actions will automatically invalidate a waiver.

If you are thinking about making changes to your own will or trust, it is important to work with an experienced Fort Myers estate planning attorney who can advise you in the proper way to do things. Contact the Kuhn Law Firm, P.A., at 239-333-4529 to schedule a free, confidential consultation today.

small smiley face with sunglasses1

Published in General/Features

General Motors can afford the comparatively rich offer it made to settle the month-long United Auto Workers strike in part because it has a revamped line of highly profitable trucks and SUVs ready to hit showrooms in a few weeks.

It also gained some much needed production capacity reductions with the closing of three plants, especially its massive Lordstown Assembly Plant in northeast Ohio that eliminates production of 300,000 units a year.

That flexibility came in exchange for a promise over four years to invest $9 billion in U.S. facilities, give two annual raises of 3% each and two 4% bonuses, uncap profit sharing pay and an $11,000 signing bonus to each UAW member.

It's a good enough deal for the UAW to justify its walkout. Strikers will be made whole by the signing bonus, and the union also won important concessions on temporary workers.

Still, it all teeters on a strategy that requires GM to keep churning out vast quantities of money making and less fuel-efficient SUVs and pickup trucks. General Motors expects to sell a lot of these over the next few years because nearly all of its large vehicle models have been redesigned for 2020.

But the automaker could well find its plans stymied by a shift in energy and emissions policies should a progressive Democrat be elected president next fall. Nearly all of the Democratic contenders have pledged a major crackdown on fossil fuels, with some setting aggressive timelines for moving America to a zero-emissions economy.

Among the frontrunners for the nomination, former Vice President Joe Biden, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders have all signed on to some version of the Green New Deal, which would basically put the internal combustion engine out of business.

While automakers are slowly moving toward electrification of their fleets, it will be a long time before most SUVs and pickups are fully electric.

Warren presents a particular danger. She says she would "ban fracking everywhere." Fracking is the extraction technology that has allowed the United States to become a major exporter of oil and natural gas, and has kept fuel prices in this country low.

Take away fracking, and the cost of a gallon of gasoline will soar. Detroit has seen before what happens to large vehicle sales when fuel costs rise high enough to change consumer behavior.

The Big Three automakers have virtually eliminated cars and don't have many small vehicle options should extreme fuel prices alter market demand.

If past practice holds, Ford Motor Co. and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV will have to match the economic package GM presented under the UAW's long tradition of "pattern bargaining."

Doing so will keep all three automakers from closing the hourly labor cost gap with their foreign competitors who build vehicles in the United States. For GM, that was $13 an hour going into the strike, for Ford it was $11 an hour and for FCA $5. This deal likely will make the gap worse. For context, Toyota is recruiting workers for its Georgetown, Kentucky plant with an offer of $18 an hour. That's a little more than half of what GM will be paying UAW members at its Bowling Green, Kentucky, Corvette facility.

Again, that's not such a big deal, as long as the assembly plants can produce SUVs and pickups around the clock.

But should the direction of federal policy shift suddenly toward much tighter fuel efficiency standards and less energy production, the new contracts will put all three companies in a tough spot.

small smiley face with sunglasses1


Published in Lifestyle

I have to tell you a remarkable personal story, a story that proves the liberal media are, in fact, out to frame and ruin President Donald Trump and his supporters with lies, distortions and misrepresentation; a story that proves the liberal media are vicious, untrustworthy and sometimes just plain evil.

I was in Miami last weekend to speak in front of 1,200 conservatives at a fabulous three-day conference called AmpFest19. Speakers also included Donald Trump Jr., Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Dinesh D'Souza. The event was organized professionally. The speakers were inspiring. The crowd was enthusiastic. And the energy was sky high.

But it turned out the liberal media sent spies into the audience to try to ruin, denigrate and demonize the event, and kill all the joy. Guess who they went after.
Yours truly.

Their agenda was to paint conservatives as "violent." First, they went after a fake Trump video supposedly played in a back room of the event that no one ever saw. When that didn't work, they went after me.

Nothing violent about me, right? Wrong. When liberals want to slander you, they can take any sentence out of context to hang you — as long as they leave out the actual details and context.

They do this to President Trump every day.

I gave a speech about how to beat Democrats in 2020. It centered on the fact that liberals and the liberal media are bullies — out to intimidate, ban, censor, persecute, beat us into submission.

I told an inspiring, heartwarming story of my high school past, a story of how I became the real-life "Karate Kid," how I morphed from a nerd, persecuted and brutalized by bullies, to a champion fighter who turned the tables on the bullies.

I started out as a skinny Jewish kid with acne, braces and thick glasses attending one of America's roughest and most violent urban high schools. I was tortured, intimidated, persecuted and beaten — in the bathrooms and lunchrooms, on the playground and after school.

But one summer, I changed my life. I learned how to fight, lifted weights like a maniac, got contact lenses and took off my braces. I came back to school, and when the first three tough guys attacked me, I responded in self-defense and beat them each badly. My classmates cheered. The nerd became the hero. I made the bullies cry.

No one ever bullied me again. From that day forward, I was the protector of the nerds.

The moral of the story is to never let a bully intimidate you. Always fight back and defend yourself. Never allow the media, antifa thugs or punks on social media to intimidate you. Be a pit bull, not a Chihuahua.

I've walked tall, with confidence, ever since. And I haven't been in a fight. Peace through strength. And one more lesson: Bullies are cowards. If you fight back, they will crumble.

Great story, right? I brought the house down.

But a Soros-funded liberal media group wrote a story in which it accused me of "promoting violence." It turned a great All-American story of the nerd defeating bullies into a story of "violence by conservatives." That's disgusting. That's fraud.

But it's instructive. This is what the liberal media and liberal politicians do to Trump every day. They are liars and bullies. They slander, intimidate, misrepresent and persecute. Their chief tool is propaganda.

From this day forward, every time you see a negative story about Trump, remember my story.

Wayne Allyn Root

Published in Sun Bay Editorials
Thursday, 24 October 2019 00:50


When you rub your eyes, sneeze or stand up too fast, you might see bright flashes or squiggly lines. These are not figments of your imagination but actual sparks of light inside your eyeballs called biophotons. All cells within the human body let off light or bioluminescence.

You don't see them, of course, except inside your eyes, where the brain is usually able to ignore them.

When you apply pressure to your eyes, more biophotons are created than the brain can process, and the result is visible flashes.

Scott LaFee

Published in Lifestyle

If the Democrat “leaders” would only record what they say and play it back, they would see how really dumb they are.

Look at the House Committees, chaired by completely ignorant Attorneys…Nadler, Schiff, and Swalwell! The American people see people who are “lawmakers”, Congressmen… make incredibly stupid statements; statements that we realize violate our Constitution, and Rule of Law, and these lawyers don’t care. They just want their people running the country and don’t care who it is, as long as they are Democrats.

I believe most Americans do not believe anything these incompetent, ambulance chaser lawyers say, even if they are member of Congress….mistakes!!

The Second Ammendment

I have one question. What defines an “assault weapon”? Size? Number of rounds? WHAT? Beto? What the hell are you babbling about?

Is it multiple round magazines? Then define “too many” and what makes you an expert…because I am a Firearms Expert, and I don’t know the answer to that question!

Is it, “a military type gun”…then define that! Rifle, pistol, revolver, shotgun, machine gun…?

You see…you really can’t, because the sec­ond Amendment is our Rule of Law, and IT doesn’t define assault guns. It just specifies that, “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”…period.

When there’s an Amendment that states…“only guns for hunting”…you still have a problem because you can hunt with a 50 cal…and some do!

You see most intelligent people understand what people like the “Beto” have in mind, but he wants to ease (lie) his way up to it because they don’t want to say, complete confiscation of all guns… that’s what the left wants, and don’t let anybody tell you different!

The Most Despicable Congress Ever... Pelosi, Swalwell, Schiff... They are Disgracefull (my opinion)!

We have a Constitution that defines and establishes our laws and separation of powers of the different branches. The red wing, left, commie, pinkos don’t agree with our Constitution and want to do away with it…so they disobey our Rule of Law, the very basics of our Rule of law…like Equal Rights to all, Due Process, Innocent until proven guilty, the right to cross examine witnesses, and on and on.

These are “Lawmakers” who are breaking the law…it’s not the first time…we arrested several (like Jenrette) during my tenure as an Agent!

Some said they would impeach our duly Elected President before they were even sworn in as Congressman. Tell me that isn’t intent to obstruct the President’s ability to carry out the duties of the President! That’s a crime! They have tried with an all Democrat Special Investigation by a Special counsel to find a crime …and they couldn’t after 2 ½ years and $35 million of our tax dollars.

Then we have Lawmakers who have no idea what they’re talking about. I heard Congressman Eric Swalwell, on FOX, telling the people why the Republicans are barred from the closed door Intel committee hearing…because the Dems are afraid of “leaks”…do you believe it? The only Congressmen in there are Dems and the “Leaks”, that are against the President abound!

He goes on to tell how the President confessed to a crime but doesn’t say what crime!? He believes the President’s conversation with the President of Ukraine was a confession to a quid pro quo. I’ve read the transcript of the President’s call. I’ve also taken, testified many times to confessions from subjects, written, signed, and just verbal, and know and understand what a confession involves. When Joe Biden said that “he threatened to withhold 1 billion dollars if the Ukraine President Poroshenko didn’t fire the AG from Ukraine who was investigating Hunter Biden; Ukraine would not get the approved 1 billion”… is a confession of Hobbs Act-Political Corruption, Obstruction of a Criminal Investigation, Title 18 Sec 1951, CRM 2403!

The President should fight back…ban all Democrats from all White House Intel Briefings, all White House meetings, all briefings…because he is afraid they will leak…like they are doing in their closed door Intel hearing.

There are no laws that mandate the Dems have to attend briefings, nothing in the Constitution either…but there are laws and precedent that the President must be given Due Process, allowed cross examination of witnesses, subpoena power, an attorney and on and on…that’s called the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Due Process, Equal Rights…the Constitution …our freaking Rule of Law!

The President’s authority rests in the Constitution…Article 2 makes him the Boss of all Bosses. He can have anyone he chooses, without Swalwell approval, to negotiate, speak to, and represent him and the US anywhere in the world. He determines what is classified and who gets top secret clearances…not Pelosi or Schiff! He can do any deal he wants to protect, preserve, and defend the Country and our Rule of law. He could offer Ukraine an Aircraft carrier to help on an investigation into any US citizen he wants.

It’s the law…Congress should try obeying the laws they make! Starting with the three stooges…stooges… Pelosi, Schiff, Swalwell… oh…oh yes, Nadler…and Schumer…don’t forget Waters…oh, I give up there’s just too many morons, to name them all!

There MUST be a crime of impeachable proportion to charge a sitting President…that’s the Constitution! Impeachment behind closed doors, unilaterally, without a defined actual impeachable offense is NOT in the Constitution. A quid pro quo by a President with a foreign government, to protect America and enforce our Rule of Law, is not now nor will it ever be a CRIME!

gary smallJ.Gary DiLaura

Published in Politics

The fastest growing cities in the country are in the South and West, according to new data released by the Census Bureau. Cities in the South and West held 14 of the 15 cities with the largest population gains in 2018.

“The South and West currently seem to be attractive places to move,” Adam McCann, financial writer at WalletHub, writes. “As the U.S. Census Bureau reports eight of the 15 cities with the largest population gains in 2018 were located in the South and six were in the West.”

The personal-finance website WalletHub analyzed the findings in its 2019’s Fastest-Growing Cities in America report. The report identifies where the most rapid local economic growth occurred over a period of seven years. It compared 515 cities across 17 key metrics within two key dimensions, “Sociodemographics” and “Jobs & Economy.” Some of the metrics include population growth, education level, unemployment rates, and growth in regional GDP per capita.

The report categorized each city according to population size guidelines. A large city represents more than 300,000 people; a midsize city, 100,000 to 300,000 people, and a small city is comprised of less than 100,000 people.

WalletHub also produced a separate ranking by city size. Of the ten fastest growing cities overall, regardless of population, only Florida and Texas had more than one city make the list.

Lehigh Acres, Florida, recorded the fastest growing population in the U.S. last year. It was followed by Mount Pleasant, South Carolina; Bend, Oregon; Enterprise, Nevada; Frisco, Texas; Fort Myers, Florida; Meridian, Idaho; St. George, Utah; Cape Coral, Florida; and Round Rock, Texas.

Enterprise, Nevada, experienced the highest population growth, at 7.4 percent, having also made the same list last year. Frisco, Texas, recorded the highest job growth of 6.88 percent.

“Accommodating fast growth often requires cities to invest in infrastructure (long-lived assets) or increased municipal services (long-run commitments to municipal operating budgets),” says Russell R. Evans, associate professor of Economics at Oklahoma City University. “It’s a challenge for cities to trust that population and economic growth, so often they wait too long before committing to expanding infrastructure and services. As a result, fast growing cities are often trying to catch up to past growth rather than accommodate current growth.”

For large cities, Austin, Texas, saw the highest growth, followed by Miami, Seattle, Henderson, Nevada, and Denver.

Ten locations recording the slowest population growth were Portsmouth, Virginia, Waterloo, Iowa, Anchorage, Alaska, Albany, Georgia, Springfield, Illinois, Decatur, Illinois, Davenport, Iowa, Erie, Pennsylvania, Canton, Ohio, and Shreveport, Louisiana.

The slowest-growing city, Shreveport, recorded a $1 billion debt last fiscal year, according to the Louisiana State Legislative Auditor’s Office.

Albany, Georgia, experienced the highest population decrease, of 1.59 percent, WalletHub notes.

Five cities in California – Milpitas, Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, San Jose and Mountain View – recorded the highest population growth according to real GDP per capita of 6.41 percent, according to the report.

Entrepreneurship and employment opportunities are disproportionately better in cities that are growing quickly, Evans adds, especially if the cities “are experiencing technological driven growth.” He also notes that employment growth and wage differentials “extend beyond the primary technology industry and into support and services sectors.”

Lafayette, Louisiana, saw the highest decrease in real GDP per capita, at 5.76 percent, while Peoria, Illinois, recorded the highest jobs decrease of 1.12 percent, according to the report.

Data used to create the ranking came from the Census Bureau, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the National Venture Capital Association, and Renwood RealtyTrac.

Bethany Blankley
The Center Square

Published in Business
Thursday, 24 October 2019 00:34

Is Democracy A Dying Species?

What happens when democracy fails to deliver? What happens when people give up on democracy? What happens when a majority or militant minority decide that the constitutional rights of free speech, free elections, peaceful assembly and petition are inadequate and take to the streets to force democracy to submit to their demands?

Our world may be about to find out.

Chile is the most stable and prosperous country in Latin America.

Yet when its capital, Santiago, recently raised subway fares by 5%, thousands poured into the streets. Rioting, looting, arson followed. The Metro system was utterly trashed. Police were assaulted. People died. The rioting spread to six other cities. Troops were called out.

President Sebastian Pinera repealed the fare hike and declared a national emergency, stating, "Chile is at war against a powerful, implacable enemy who does not respect anything or anyone and is willing to use violence and crime without any limits."

How does a democracy that has spawned within itself a powerful and implacable enemy deal with it?

Last week, tens of thousands of Lebanese of all faiths and political associations rioted in Beirut and Tripoli to demand the overthrow of the regime and the ouster of its president, speaker of parliament and Prime Minister Saad Hariri. All must go, the masses demand.

In Barcelona, Friday, half a million people surged into the streets in protest after the sentencing in Madrid of the secessionists who sought to bring about the independence of Catalonia from Spain in 2017.

In all of China, few enjoy the freedoms of the 7 million in Hong Kong. Yet, for five months, these fortunate and free Chinese, to protest a proposal that would have allowed Hong Kong residents to be extradited to China, stormed into the streets to defy the regime and denounce the conditions under which they live.

These protests have been marked by riots, vandalism, arson and clashes with police. "Hong Kong streets descended into chaos following an unauthorized pro-democracy rally Sunday," writes the Associated Press. Protesters "set up roadblocks and torched businesses, and police responded with tear gas and a water cannon. Protesters tossed firebombs and took their anger out on shops with mainland Chinese ties."

What are the Hong Kong residents denouncing and demanding?

They are protesting both present and future limitations on their freedom. The appearance of American flags in the protests suggests that what they seek is what the agitators behind the

Boston Tea Party and the boys and men at Concord Bridge sought -- independence, liberty and a severing of the ties to the mother country.

Yet, because the Communist regime of Xi Jinping could not survive such an amputation, the liberation of Hong Kong is not in the cards. The end to these months of protest will likely be frustration, futility and failure.

Perhaps it is that realization that explains the vehemence and violence. But the rage is also what kills the support they initially received.

In 1960s America, the first civil rights demonstrations attracted widespread sympathy. But the outburst of urban riots that followed in Harlem, Watts, Newark, Detroit and 100 cities after Martin Luther King's assassination sent millions streaming to the banners of Gov. George Wallace in the campaigns of 1968 and 1972.

When the "yellow vest" protests broke out in 2018 in Paris, over a fuel tax, the demonstrators had the support of millions of Frenchmen.

But that support dissipated when protesters began smashing windows of boutique shops on the Champs-Elysee, assaulting police and desecrating monuments and memorials.

This reversion to violence, ransacking of stores and showering of police with bricks, bottles and debris, is costing the protesters much of the backing they enjoyed. In the trade-off between freedom and order, people will ultimately opt for order.

Yet, one wonders: Why are these outbursts of violent protests and rioting taking place in stable, free and prosperous societies?

Chile is the most stable and wealthy country in South America. Catalonia is the most prosperous part of Spain. Paris is hardly a hellhole of repression. And Hong Kong is the freest city of China.

If the beneficiaries of freedoms and democratic rights come to regard them as insufficient to produce the political, economic and social results they demand, what does that portend for democracy's future?

For, despite the looting, arson and attacks on cops in Hong Kong, Xi Jinping is not going to order his satraps to yield to popular demands for autonomy or independence. Nor is Madrid going to accept the loss of Barcelona and secession of Catalonia. Nor is the conservative Chilean government going to yield to the street rebels and revolutionaries. Nor is Paris going to back down to the "yellow vests."

Yet, one wonders: If the "end of history" and worldwide triumph of democratic capitalism thesis has, as most agree, been disproven, is it possible that the Age of Democracy is itself a passing phase in the history of the West and the world?

patrick buchanan small

Patrick J. Buchanan

Published in Politics

Sunbay News Archive

Archive Date Search

« October 2019 »
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31