top of page

Testamentary Trust & MEDICAID…

Writer's picture: Brian A. Raphan, Esq.Brian A. Raphan, Esq.
T.jpg

Testamentary Trust Qualifies As SNT Despite Support Language

The Supreme Court of Connecticut rules that the state Department of Social Services improperly denied a Medicaid application after counting assets in a testamentary trust that should have been considered exempt because, the court holds, the trust was a discretionary supplemental needs trust, not a support trust. Pikula v. Department of Social Services (Conn., No. SC 19533, May 10, 2016).

John Pikula died in 1991, leaving behind a testamentary trust for the benefit of his daughters.  The trust gave the trustee the ability to use the trust income and principal for the daughters “as the trustee may deem advisable for [their] maintenance and support”.  In 2012, one of Mr. Pikula’s daughters, Marian Pikula, entered a long-term care facility and applied for Medicaid.  The Department of Social Services (DSS) denied Ms. Pikula’s application, alleging that the assets in the testamentary trust constituted a countable support trust.

Ms. Pikula appealed DSS’s decision, arguing that her father had intended to create a supplemental needs trust and that the discretionary language in the trust met the requirements of such a trust because Ms. Pikula could not compel payments from the trust for her support.  She was denied at an administrative level and on appeal to the trial court.  The Connecticut Supreme Court transferred Ms. Pikula’s appeal from the intermediate appellate court.

The Supreme Court of Connecticut reverses the trial court.  The court determines that “the fact that the trustee is only required to use as much income as he ‘may deem advisable’ to provide for [Ms. Pikula’s] maintenance, indicates that the testator intended for the trustee to have complete discretion in determining what, if any, of the income was to be used for [Ms. Pikula’s] maintenance.”  The court goes on the analyze the circumstances behind the creation of the trust, and it reasons that because the trust was established with a modest amount of money, it was clearly not intended to be used for Ms. Pikula’s long-term support.

Feel free to contact me for information about the type of Trust to suit your needs.

Regards,

Brian


Comments


MEMBER:

•National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys

•American Bar Association

•New York State Bar Association

•United States District Court N.Y. Southern District

United States District Court NY Eastern District

•State of New York Unified Court System

•National Alliance of Trust & Estate Professionals

•Temple University • Cardozo Law School New York

•AARP Listed Attorney

• CLC Legal Speakers Bureau

•Better Business Bureau

Alzheimers Foundation of America

RAPHAN LAW PARTNERS, LLP   

7 Penn Plaza, 8th floor

(370 7th Avenue)

(7th Ave/31st St.)

New York, New York 10001

 

Tel: 212-268-8200

Fax: 212-244-3075
info@RaphanLaw.com

Twitter.com/NYCelderlawfirm

Elder Law News Blog

 

Legal membership accredited logos
Lawyers of Distinction in New York, Raphan Law
ssl secure website certificate

*Free consultation for new clients only. The information on this site is not, nor is it intended to be legal advice and does not automatically create an attorney/client relationship. 

On negligence and medical malpractice cases we may participate or partner with other counsel with disclosure to potential client before we or such partnering counsel accept the case.

*No mobile information will be shared with third parties/affiliates for marketing/promotional purposes. All OPT-IN requests include text messaging originator opt-in data and consent; this information will not be shared with third parties.           

© 2025  RAPHAN LAW PARTNERS, LLP

bottom of page