The shares to be sold are jointly owned by Dr. and Mrs. D'Ambra. Dr. D'Ambra's plan was adopted in accordance with Rule 10b5-1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Construction superintendent Barry Martin met Edith Macefield late in her life. Now, per her last will and testament, he's left to care for what the Ballard woman left behind.
This is a fun topic. Are there public policy limits to how you can give away your property in your Will or trust? The answer is yes -- some obvious examples of provisions that would be struck down:
"I leave $50,000 to my son Robert, so long as he divorces his horrible wife Bonnie within one year of my death"
"I leave my entire estate to Pamela, so long as, within six months of my death, she murders the following individuals:..."
These provisions would be null and void, so Robert gets his money with no need to divorce, and Pamela gets her inheritance without having to go on a killing spree.
A recent 1st District case (an appeal from Cook County) dealt with the question of whether a specific provision should be void as against public policy. The case is Estate of Feinberg, and it's here as a PDF. Basically, Mr. Feinberg's trust left property to his grandchildren, but any grandchild who marries outside the Jewish faith (to a person who doesn't convert in one year after marriage) is disinherited. Oh goy!
This provision was held null and void, because of the long-standing Illinois rule that "testamentary provisions which act as a restraint upon marriage or which encourage divorce are void as against public policy." There is, however, an interesting dissent, which tries to distinguish between the above divorce example and this case.
Thanks as always to Patricia Brosterhous for bringing this case to my attention through her IICLE Estate Planning & Probate Flashpoints. I'll comment on some of the other cases she mentions in the next few days.
