On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Connecting the Dots: Family Law, Housing Law, and Trusts and Estates Practitioners Discuss Mortgage Debt, Families and Foreclosure (Free)

Released on: Jun. 12, 2012
Running Time: 03:11:38

View this training for an overview of legal and practical problems that arise within families and with mortgage servicers regarding mortgage debts, mortgage delinquencies and foreclosure when real property is co-owned by family members or is transferred in connection with death or divorce or other family changes.  During the session, practitioners specializing in family law, trusts and estates and housing law, respectively, will provide case-study examples of the problems they see when their areas of law overlap and offer strategies for preempting and addressing those problems.  A specialist in legal ethics will also discuss ethical issues that arise out of the representation of homeowners when real property is co-owned by family members or is transferred in connection with death or divorce or other family changes, including age-related lack of capacity.

Lecture Topics  [Total time 03:11:38]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.

  • Program Overview and Introductions* [00:03:10]
    Maeve Elise Brown
  • Mortgage Debt and Foreclosure Avoidance in the Context of a Family Dissolution [01:11:23]
    Janet L. Frankel, Lisa Sitkin
  • Mortgage Debt and Foreclosure Avoidance in the Context of a Death in the Family [00:58:00]
    Sandra B. Price, Noah Zinner
  • Ethics: Representing Family Members with Real Property Challenges or Conflicts [00:59:05]
    Noah Zinner, Andrew Tuft, Lisa Sitkin

Presentation Material

  • Mortgage Debt and Foreclosure Avoidance in the Context of a Family Dissolution (PowerPoint)
    Janet L. Frankel, Lisa Sitkin
  • 1. Glossary of Mortgage-Related Terms
    Janet L. Frankel, Lisa Sitkin
  • 2. Opinion, Martin Glade v. Carla Jean Glade, (Second District, Division 5, 1995), 38 Cal.App.4th 1441
    Janet L. Frankel, Lisa Sitkin
  • 3. Judicial Council of California Family Law Forms
    Janet L. Frankel, Lisa Sitkin
  • 4. Sample Letter of Explanation
    Janet L. Frankel, Lisa Sitkin
  • 5. Mortgage Debt and Foreclosure Avoidance in the Context of a Family Dissolution PowerPoint Slides
    Janet L. Frankel, Lisa Sitkin
  • Links to Online Resources
    Practising Law Institute
  • Mortgage Debt and Foreclosure Avoidance in the Context of a Death in the Family (PowerPoint)
    Sandra B. Price, Noah Zinner
  • 6. Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment in, Francis J. Kerrigan v. Bank of American, United States District Court, Central District of California, Case No. EDCV 09-02082 DDP (OPx)
    Sandra B. Price, Noah Zinner
  • 7. Mortgage Debt and Foreclosure Avoidance in the Context of a Death in the Family PowerPoint Slides
    Sandra B. Price, Noah Zinner
  • Ethics: Representing Family Members with Real Property Challenges or Conflicts (PowerPoint)
    Noah Zinner, Andrew Tuft
  • 8. Rule 3-310 of the California Rules of Professional Conduct, Avoiding the Representation of Adverse Interests
    Noah Zinner, Andrew Tuft
  • 9. Rule 3-500 of the California Rules of Professional Conduct, Communication
    Noah Zinner, Andrew Tuft
  • 10. Proposed New Rule 1.14 of the California Rules of Professional Conduct, Client with Diminished Capacity
    Noah Zinner, Andrew Tuft
  • 11. Evidence Code § 951, § 952, § 962
    Noah Zinner, Andrew Tuft
  • 12. The State Bar of California’s Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct, Formal Opinion No. 1994-137
    Noah Zinner, Andrew Tuft
  • 13. The State Bar of California’s Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct, Formal Opinion No. 2003-163
    Noah Zinner, Andrew Tuft
  • 14. The State Bar of California’s Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct, Formal Opinion No. 2003-161
    Noah Zinner, Andrew Tuft
  • 15. The State Bar of California’s Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct, Formal Opinion No. 1989-112
    Noah Zinner, Andrew Tuft
  • 16. Case Law and Ethics Opinion Summaries Regarding Formation of Attorney-Client Relationship and Representing a Mentally Impaired Client
    Noah Zinner, Andrew Tuft
  • 17. Ethics: Representing Family Members with Real Property Challenges or Conflicts PowerPoint Slides
    Noah Zinner, Andrew Tuft
Chairperson(s)
Maeve Elise Brown ~ Executive Director, Housing and Economic Rights Advocates
Speaker(s)
Janet L. Frankel ~ Certified Specialist in Family Law, Law Offices of Janet L. Frankel
Sandra B. Price ~ Attorney at Law, Sideman & Bancroft LLP
Lisa Sitkin ~ Managing Attorney, Housing and Economic Rights Advocates
Andrew Tuft ~ Staff Attorney, State Bar of California
Noah Zinner ~ Senior Attorney, Housing and Economic Rights Advocates

PLI makes every effort to accredit its On-Demand Web Programs and Segments.  Please check the Credit Information box to the right of each product description for credit information specific to your state.


On-Demand Web Programs and Segments
 are approved in:

Alabama1, Alaska, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho*, Illinois , Iowa2*, Kansas, Kentucky*, Louisiana, Maine*, Mississippi, Missouri3, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire4, New Jersey, New Mexico5, New York6,  North Carolina7, North Dakota, Ohio8, Oklahoma9, Oregon*, Pennsylvania10, Rhode Island11, South Carolina, Tennessee12, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia13, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin14 and Wyoming*.

Iowa, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin DO NOT approve Audio Only On-Demand Web Programs.


Please Note: The State Bar of Arizona does not approve or accredit CLE activities for the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education requirement. PLI programs may qualify for credit based on the requirements outlined in the MCLE Regulations and Ariz. R. Sup. Ct. Rule 45.

*PLI will apply for credit upon request. Louisiana and New Hampshire: PLI will apply for credit upon request for audio-only on-demand web programs.


1Alabama: Approval of all web based programs is limited to a maximum of 6.0 credits.

 

2Iowa:  The approval is for one year from recorded date. Does not approve of Audio-only On-Demand Webcasts.

3Missouri:  On-demand web programs are restricted to six hours of self-study credit per year.  Self-study may not be used to satisfy the ethics requirements.  Self-study can not be used for carryover credit.

 

4New Hamphsire:  The approval is for three years from recorded date.

5New Mexico:  On-Demand web programs are restricted to 4.0 self-study credits per year. 


6New York:  Newly admitted attorneys may not take non-traditional course formats such as on-demand Web Programs or live Webcasts for CLE credit. Newly admitted attorneys not practicing law in the United States, however, may earn 12 transitional credits in non-traditional formats. 

7North Carolina:  A maximum of 4 credits per reporting period may be earned by participating in on-demand web programs. 


8Ohio:  To confirm that the web program has been approved, please refer to the list of Ohio’s Approved Self Study Activities at http://www.sconet.state.oh.us.  Online programs are considered self-study.  Ohio attorneys have a 6 credit self-study limit per compliance period.  The Ohio CLE Board states that attorneys must have a 100% success rate in clicking on timestamps to receive ANY CLE credit for an online program.

9Oklahoma:  Up to 6 credits may be earned each year through computer-based or technology-based legal education programs.


10Pennsylvania:  PA attorneys may only receive a maximum of four (4) hours of distance learning credit per compliance period. All distance learning programs must be a minimum of 1 full hour.
 

11Rhode Island:  Audio Only On-Demand Web Programs are not approved for credit.  On-Demand Web Programs must have an audio and video component.

12Tennessee:  The approval is for the calendar year in which the live program was presented.

13Virginia: All distance learning courses are to be done in an educational setting, free from distractions.

14Wisconsin: Ethics credit is not allowed.  The ethics portion of the program will be approved for general credit.  There is a 10 credit limit for on-demand web programs during every 2-year reporting period.  Does not approve of Audio-only On-Demand Webcasts.


Running time and CLE credit hours are not necessarily the same. Please be aware that many states do not permit credit for luncheon and keynote speakers.


If you have already received credit for attending some or the entire program, please be aware that state administrators do not permit you to accrue additional credit for repeat viewing even if an additional credit certificate is subsequently issued.


Note that some states limit the number of credit hours attorneys may claim for online CLE activities, and state rules vary with regard to whether online CLE activities qualify for participatory or self-study credits. For more information, call Customer Service (800) 260-4PLI (4754) or e-mail info@pli.edu.

 
Print Share Email