Your state's pack. New issues arrive periodically on Mondays. Bookmark it. I built this for the Oregon T&E solo who knows the ORS probate code cold but still loses an afternoon a week tracking the moving Oregon Health Plan pieces — and who has to plan around expanded estate recovery that pulls non-probate assets back into the estate.
For licensed attorneys. This pack is general legal information and professional commentary for practicing attorneys — it is not legal advice, does not apply to any specific matter, and creates no attorney-client relationship. Verify every authority against the cited primary source before relying on it with a client. Published by Mike Moss, a Utah-admitted attorney, as an AI-enablement information product; it is not an offer of legal services and is not a representation that the author is admitted to practice in your jurisdiction.
Three developments I think actually matter to an Oregon T&E solo. Each has a read that lands on your practice specifically — and each comes with a reachable citation so you can verify it yourself before you use it with a client.
ORS § 416.350 defines the recoverable estate to include assets passing by joint tenancy, tenancy in common, survivorship, life estate, living trust, or similar arrangement; transfers without adequate consideration are voidable under ORS § 411.620(2).
This is the structural fact an Oregon Medicaid plan is built around. A bare TOD deed or joint title does not escape recovery — under ORS § 93.969 the TOD beneficiary takes subject to the state's claim if the probate estate is insufficient. The shield is the irrevocable trust or a completed transfer outside the look-back.
ORS §§ 416.350, 411.620(2) · oregon.public.law
Oregon's Uniform Real Property Transfer on Death Act (ORS §§ 93.948–93.979, effective 2012) lets an owner record a TOD deed, but ORS § 93.969 says the beneficiary takes subject to a state Medicaid claim or lien when probate assets are insufficient.
Counsel clients that the TOD deed is a probate tool, not a recovery shield, in Oregon. For LTC clients, the recovery analysis — not just probate avoidance — drives the structure.
Maximum CSRA is $162,660 (minimum $32,532); the single-applicant resource limit is $2,000; Oregon applies the $752,000 home-equity limit.
Two places this lands: community-spouse protection math and high-value-home clients. Flag the 2028 OBBBA $1,000,000 flat home-equity cap now.
42 U.S.C. § 1396p · CMS 2026 Standards (medicaid.gov)
Decisions that bind an Oregon practitioner — the Oregon Supreme Court and the Oregon Court of Appeals, the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, and the Ninth Circuit — read for what actually changes how you draft, advise, and plan. Trusts and estates broadly, not Medicaid alone: wills and capacity, undue influence, fiduciary duty, trust construction, and estate recovery. One read, the holding, and the official cite.
A 2007 family trust used “joint lives” language that left “an inexplicable gap” as to how the survivor managed the trust after the first settlor died. After the husband died, his daughter petitioned to remove the surviving spouse as trustee for breach; the trial court read “joint lives” to cut off the survivor’s rights, removed her, and awarded fees. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded. Reading the trust as a whole under contract principles, it held that provisions “unambiguous in isolation but . . . inconsistent when read together” are facially ambiguous, so extrinsic evidence of the settlors’ intent must be considered — and the surviving settlor’s testimony about her late husband’s intent was admissible under the OEC 803(3) state-of-mind exception. It also reversed the trustee removal (ORS 130.625) and fee award as premature, and held the trust’s in terrorem clause was not triggered: a no-contest clause reaching challenges to administration (rather than validity) is “not authorized by statute” under ORS 130.235 and violates public policy, because mandatory trust-code duties (ORS 130.020(3)) cannot be drafted away.
Two drafting lessons. Define survivorship and the survivor’s administration powers explicitly — “joint lives” shorthand invites litigation, and Oregon will read trust ambiguity through a contract lens and admit a deceased settlor’s statements of intent under OEC 803(3). And tailor your no-contest clauses to validity challenges only: in Oregon an in terrorem clause that purports to penalize a beneficiary for challenging the trustee’s administration is void as against public policy, so it buys no protection and may signal overreach.
Matter of Beaumont Family Trust (Dombrowsky v. Beaumont), 350 Or App 92 (Or. Ct. App. May 28, 2026) (published) · official opinion — ojd.contentdm.oclc.org
This week in Oregon for the T&E solo with Oregon Health Plan-planning clients: what the Oregon State Bar, the OSB Estate Planning & Administration Section, and the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) put in front of you.
The bar CLE calendar, the OHA / ODHS bulletins, and the federal standards all publish on different schedules. This is that sift, already done, with the link on each item.