THE MALDEN ADVOCATE–Friday, August 29, 2025 Page 17 Malden High boys soccer team scrimmages Saugus Sachems T he Malden High School boys soccer squad had a successful first outing in its preseason matchup against Saugus High. The Golden Tornados squad outscored the visitors, 4-1, and showed Head Coach Jeremiah Smith some strong play on both ends of the field. Malden High will open the regular season on the road on Thursday, September 4, at Methuen High. (All Advocate Photos) A Back together again: Malden High Head Coach Jeremiah Smith and his former Malden player, Josh Crespo, who is Saugus High Head Coach. Jamesley St. Jean scored two goals for Malden against Saugus. Massachusetts Appeals Court Judge back in 2016 held against MassHealth with respect to the countability of assets housed in an irrevocable Trust. It is well settled law that for purposes of determining eligibility for MassHealth benefits, countable assets include any portion of the Trust principal that could under any circumstances be paid to or for the benefit of the applicant. Such circumstances need not have occurred, or even be imminent, in order for the principal to be treated as countable assets; it is enough that the amount could be made available to the applicant under any circumstances. This was set forth in the Heyn case, a Massachusetts Appeals Court case decided in 2016, which reversed the prior Superior Court judgment. In the Superior Court case, the applicant had retained a limited or special power of appointment in the Trust that she created that she could have exercised during her lifetime “to appoint the remaining principal and any undistributed income of the Trust among the members of the class consisting of her issue of all generations or charitable organizations other than governmental entities, but no such power or payment shall be used to discharge a leNO GOALS! Goaltender Wandemere and Yassir signal No Goals for the time Wandemere manned the goal for Malden. Malden High School captain Mike Joseph and the Golden Tornados team during the scrimmage. Subscribe to the Advocate Online! www.advocatenews.net THE HEYN MASS APPEALS COURT CASE 5. gal obligation of the applicant”. In a simple sense, appoint is another word for distribute and an example of issue would be children or grandchildren. MassHealth argued that if the applicant appointed Trust principal to family members, those family members could then in turn return the Trust principal to the applicant to be used for her benefit. The Appeals Court in Heyn stated that “Medicaid does not consider assets held by other family members who might, by reason of love, but without legal obligation, voluntarily contribute monies toward the grantor’s support”. The grantor of the Trust is also referred to as the Settlor or Donor, and in this case, was the applicant for MassHealth benefits as well. The court also stated that “the limited power of appointment is exercisable only in favor of permissible appointees, and any attempt to exercise a limited power of appointment in favor of an impermissible appointee (i.e. to use principal for the personal benefit of the grantor), is therefore invalid. An appointment to a permissible appointee is ineffective to the extent that it was: 1. Conditioned on the appointee conferring a benefit on the impermissible appointee 2. favor of an impermissible appointee 3. Upon a trust for the benefit of an impermissible appointee 4. In consideration of a benefit conferred upon or promised to an impermissible appointee Subject to a charge in Primarily for the benefit of the appointee’s creditor, if that creditor is an impermissible appointee, or 6. Motivated in any other way to be for the benefit of an impermissible appointee. The above six items are set forth in the Restatement (Third) of Property and the Superior Court judge held that MassHealth cannot argue that Trust principal could ever be distributed to a permissible appointee in order to benefit the applicant and held that none of the Trust principal was countable. The applicant then qualified for MassHealth benefits. In the case at hand, no principal could under any circumstances be appointed to the applicant. The applicant clearly was not a permissible appointee. If she was, her retained right would have been deemed a general power of appointment thereby providing her a right to receive Trust principal. This case is important to keep in mind as the Trustee of an irrevocable Trust would have the right to distribute some or all of the principal to children or grandchildren, for example, thereby allowing access to the assets housed in the Trust by children or grandchildren. The Court in Heyn is stating that this does not rise to the level of allowing principal distributions to the Settlor/Donor of such irrevocable Trust. The children or grandchildren might, for love and affection, decide to gift some or all of the assets back to the Settlor/Donor, but are under no such legal obligation to do so. They might just decide to spend all of the money themselves. Joseph D. Cataldo is an estate planning/elder law attorney, Certified Public Accountant, Certified Financial Planner, AICPA Personal Financial Specialist and holds a master’s degree in taxation.
18 Publizr Home