Will your assets pass to family if you die without a Will in New Jersey? Not necessarily. In some cases, a decedent’s property can actually escheat, or revert, to the State of New Jersey when the decedent has living relatives. The only way to ensure that your property is distributed according to your wishes is to execute a Will. While it may be tempting to let estate planning take a back burner to the hustle and bustle of everyday life, having a Will and other necessary estate planning documents helps your loved ones avoid additional hassles at the time of your passing.

Intestacy laws govern what happens to a person’s assets when he or she dies without a Will. Intestacy laws, however, do not interfere with assets that are jointly owned–those go to the survivor; or assets that are subject to a separate designation of beneficiary–those go to the designated beneficiary. In New Jersey, heirs must survive the decedent by at least 120 hours to inherit. New Jersey has adopted an intestacy system that only considers those relatives in the third branch and closer as “heirs” for the purposes of intestate succession. This is known as a parentelic system. The first branch includes the decedent, his children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren. The second branch includes decedent’s parents, siblings, and nieces and nephews down the line to great-grandnieces and great-grandnephews. The third and final branch of heirs for purposes of the New Jersey intestacy laws consists of the decedent’s grandparents and descendants of grandparents including aunts, uncles, and first cousins.

It is important to note that if a decedent dies without a Will and has a spouse or domestic partner, that spouse or partner may not inherit the full estate. This debunks the common misconception that if you pass without a Will, your spouse will automatically receive everything. The surviving spouse or partner’s share depends on many things including but not limited to whether the couple had children together, whether there are children from a prior marriage, and whether the decedent has parents who are still living.

As our clients age they often tell us they do not feel comfortable with their ability to continue to manage their financial affairs. They also express the unfounded fear that upon their death all their bank accounts will be frozen for months on end with no ability for anyone to access their funds to satisfy their obligations after death for the care of their home or loved ones. The common step taken by many is to put a family member or trusted friend on their accounts as joint owner so that in the case of a disability or death, funds will be readily accessible to satisfy the client’s obligations without interference.

Unfortunately, this step, although well-intentioned, has sometimes resulted in significant confusion, litigation and costs to the client’s estate because the creation of the joint account and the transfer of those assets to the surviving joint owner at death were not clearly understood by the elderly client or were not properly explained to her by the custodian of the account.

This miscalculation was recently demonstrated in an Appellate Division case, In the Matter of the Estate of Jones, No. A-2557-16T2, 2018 WL 4471686 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Sept. 19, 2018). Subsequent to the death of her husband, Erna M. Jones visited her investment broker with her middle daughter, Barbara, to open a new account distinct from the one she held jointly with her husband. Mrs. Jones executed a new account application that identified her daughter Barbara as a second party, and the box was checked that the account was “Joint Tenants with Right of Survivorship.” Subsequent to this account opening, Mrs. Jones managed the account, paid her bills and handled her investments with the representative of the brokerage company. At her death in 2015, her daughter Barbara claimed the account as hers as the surviving joint tenant. Barbara’s older brother, David, objected and filed a Complaint under New Jersey’s Multi-Party Deposit Account Act (“MPDAA”) alleging that the account was not held with right of survivorship but was merely a “convenience account,” and that all money in the account was to be distributed equally amongst Mrs. Jones’ surviving three children. Mrs. Jones’ Last Will and Testament provided that her estate was to be divided equally amongst her children and throughout her life, David stated, she had always treated her three children equally. David further alleged that Barbara had utilized undue influence in getting her mother to name her as a joint owner on the account.