Supreme Court - AGAIN - reverses Superior Court on Power of Attorney Case
Once again, the Supreme Court has checked the Superior Court in a decision involving powers of attorney. In In re: Weidner, 2007 WL 4555334, the Supreme Court confirmed its long-held stance that powers of attorney must be read broadly to confer powers on those who are appointed as agents. The Court again struck down the Superior Court’s inexplicable penchant for restricting agents and placing interpretative limitations on power of attorney documents.
In Weidner, the power of attorney document - a form-book document - granted the agent all powers set forth in “Chapter 56 of Title 20 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes Annotated, (20 Pa.C.S.A. 5601 through 5607)…as amended from time to time”. The Superior Court said that the document was inadequate and did not expressly grant the agent the power to change the beneficiary designation of a life insurance policy. The Superior Court stated that without more - such as attaching a copy of the statute - the document was insufficient to apprise the principal of what powers he or she is granting. The Superior Court would have required notice to the principal in some form and recommended attaching a copy of the statute to the POA document.
In a unanimous decision (with 2 justices filing concurring opinions), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld its long standing analysis of POA documents as set forth in the Reifsneider case, 610 A.2d 958 (Pa. 1992). The Court, per Justice Eakin, held that [d]ecedent’s power of attorney expressly incorporated the Powers of Attorney statute, and expressly granted Rhodes the power and authority to do any act therein.
The Supreme Court remanded the case to the Superior Court for disposition of remaining issues. On remand, in a non-precedential decision, the Superior Court upheld the trial court’s determination that the power of attorney was sufficient to permit the change in beneficiary on life insurance policies.
This is a recurring theme vis-à-vis our Supreme and Superior Courts, particularly in the area of trusts and estates and powers of attorney. Attempts to interpret power of attorney documents in such limited ways have been litigated repeatedly with the Superior Court applying very limited interpretations of documents and the Supreme Court confirming time and time again that power of attorney documents must be interpreted broadly. Kudos to the Supreme Court for grasping the implications of this issue, as it effects all of those, and there are many, who act under these power of attorney documents.
slip opinion http://www.aopc.org/OpPosting/Supreme/out/J-35-2007mo.pdf and concurring opinion available http://www.aopc.org/OpPosting/Supreme/out/J-35-2007co.pdf
