Jennifer J. Nackley, Partner

Success Stories

Minding Spousal Assets through Change

A matter involved spouses, both of whom had been previously married. One spouse had assets of approximately $4 million, whereas the other spouse had no significant assets. A premarital agreement provided that the spouses' assets were to remain separate. When the well-to-do spouse developed symptoms of dementia, the less-moneyed spouse began a program of transferring assets from the well-to-do spouse to the less-moneyed spouse. Quarles & Brady was alerted to the situation by the daughter of the well-to-do spouse and succeeded in having her appointed as guardian for her parent. Once the guardianship was established, we worked with the daughter to obtain the recovery of more than $1 million that had been diverted to the less-moneyed spouse.

Transferring Trust

A matter involved a daughter who was acting as trustee of her mother's revocable trust. As her mother began to decline, the daughter used assets from her mother's trust to pay the daughter's legal fees and a portion of the property settlement in the daughter's divorce. The daughter also used assets from her mother's trust to pay certain of the daughter's other expenses. Quarles & Brady represented the mother's son in an action to be named guardian, remove the daughter as trustee, and obtain recovery of the assets transferred from his mother's trust.

Florida Trust & Estates and Commercial Litigation Groups Team Up for Another Victory

Jennifer Nackley and Christen Spake prevailed in an appeal in a heavily contested guardianship matter in Naples and received a per curiam decision from Florida's Second District Court of Appeal affirming their trial court win. The case involved apparent undue influence and suspected elder abuse and was extensively litigated in the trial court, with Jennifer and Christen representing the sons of the alleged incapacitated person. They succeeded in disqualifying the attorneys attempting to appear on behalf of the alleged incapacitated person, due to those attorneys' conflict of interest and prior ineffective representation. The lower court's exclusion of those attorneys was affirmed on appeal following multiple rounds of motions and briefing.