You want to protect your business, but what legal strategy will help you to protect it best?

This might sound a little like something Yoda would say, but the particular strategy or strategies will depend upon what you are most interested in protecting.

LLCs & Corporations

Limited liability companies (LLC) or corporations are generally created pursuant to state law in order to protect the owners of businesses from the creditors of their businesses by creating a figurative "wall" between the owners and the business. Rather than a person owning the business directly, an LLC or corporation owns the business directly and the business owner has an ownership interest in the business entity.

For example, Jane incorporates a corporation in Florida called Great Restaurant Corp., which operates various restaurants of the same name, which are all located in Florida. Someone at one of the restaurants slips, falls, and is injured, requiring hospitalization. The injured person cannot sue Jane personally, rather, she has to sue Great Restaurant Corp. because Great Restaurant Corp. owns the restaurants, not Jane.

But an LLC or corporation can also protect the name of the business, right? 

Kind of.

The names of entities, such as ACME LLC or ACME Corporation, can provide protection within the state in which an LLC was formed or a corporation was incorporated, but that's probably where the buck stops.

In the example above, Jane will likely be able to prohibit, via the courts, other businesses in Florida from using the name Great Restaurant Corp. However, Jane probably can't stop someone in New York from using the name Great Restaurant Corp. in New York, unless Jane takes other steps to protect the business name.

That's where trademarks come into play.

Trademarks & Trade Names

A trademark or trade name is a legal concept to help the public identify the source of goods or services from the goods or services of another source. For example, the trademark Chevrolet identifies the automobiles produced by General Motors from the automobiles produced by other brands, such as Toyota.

But that's where things get complicated.

in the United States, there are three principal types of trademarks:

1. Federal
2. State (sometimes called trade names, depending upon the particular state)
3. Common law

The scope, rights, and registration requirements associated with each of these types of trademarks all vary significantly.

1. Federal Trademarks

The most protective and beneficial type of trademark is a federal trademark registered on the United States Patent & Trademark Office's (USPTO) Principal Register.

Some of the benefits are as follows:

1. The right to use the trademark nationwide
2. The right to file for an injunction
3. The right to file for monetary damages
4. The right to prohibit importation

Although this bundle of rights may not seem that significant at first glance, it is.

For example, Tom owns a company that manufactures wildly-popular toys in China, which is sells in the U.S. using the trademark "Grunchkins," which is registered on the USPTO Principal Register. A competitor seeking to capitalize on the Grunchkins popularity manufactures counterfeit Grucnhkins in China and tries to import them in the United States. Because Tom owns the right to use the trademark Grunchkins throughout the United States it can file with U.S. Customs to stop the importation of infringing Grunchkins from any company but his own.

Although it provides the most protection, however, the registration requirements associated with federal trademarks registered on the USPTO Principal Register are the most demanding and complex.

In order for a trademark to be registered on the USPTO Principal Register, the trademark must:

1. Be distinctive, i.e. not descriptive, or it must have acquired Secondary Meaning;
2. Be "used in interstate commerce;"
3. Not pose a likelihood of confusion with any other mark registered on the Principal Register;

For some businesses, meeting these requirements is just out of the question, likely because they don't need federal registration in the first place.

In the example above, if Jane doesn't ever plan to open restaurants outside of Florida, she wouldn't be able to satisfy the "use in commerce" requirement and she's already protected in Florida because that's where she incorporated the business.

Although some traditional "brick and mortar" businesses may not need federal registration on the Principal Register to protect their business names or brands, businesses that operate across state lines, e.g. technology or internet-based businesses, are the poster children for federal registration.

2. State Trademarks / Trade Names

What if you don't need the limited liability protection of an LLC or corporation and you don't do business across state lines, but you want to use a fictitious or made up name that is not your own?

That's where state trademark or trade name registration comes into play.

For example, John provides a service in the State of Arizona whereby he makes balloon animals at kids birthday parties. John calls this service "Balloonistics," which he has registered as a trade name in Arizona.

Because John has no employees and provides all the services personally, forming a limited liability entity may not provide him with much benefit, however, the state trade name registration will allow him to stop others from using the name "Balloonistics" in Arizona.

So what's the difference between a trade name and a trademark?

It depends upon state law.

In Arizona, a trademark is a stylized logo or drawing. In contrast, a trade name is simply a word or words.

3. Common Law Trademarks

What if you've been doing business for years, but you haven't applied for either federal or state registration? Well, you may have a common law trademark.

The common law that the founding fathers imported from England and incorporated into our legal system generally confers rights in a word or phrase used to distinguish the source of goods or services without state registration. That said, the common law is state-based and can vary substantially from one state to another an may be much harder to enforce and establish than a registered trademark.

As such, a common law trademark is often a last-ditch resort of most businesses and organizations when it comes to protecting the business names and brand.

State Limited Liability & Federal Trademark Registration

As mentioned above, not all businesses need both limited liability protection and federal trademark registration on the Principal Register, however, businesses that either currently, or in the future plan to, provide services to many customers across states lines, likely need both limited liability protection and federal trademark registration, if possible.

This overview of some important considerations associated with federal trademarks, state trademarks and trade names, and common law trademarks is by no means comprehensive. Always seek the advice of a competent professional when making important financial and legal decisions.

Steve Cook is a trademark lawyer at Cook & Cook. Although his main office is located in Mesa, Arizona, he firm represents clients throughout the United States.

Although the idea of asset protection, i.e. protecting assets from creditors of a person who owns them, may seem simple at first glance, it's not. In reality, implicit in asset protection is a rather nuanced process of dealing with the interplay between federal and state law.

Let me explain...

Often, the laws that protect assets from creditors are passed by the states and vary from state to state. In particular, the following are made possible by state law, as opposed to federal law:

• Limited liability entities, such as limited partnerships and limited liability companies
• Irrevocable trusts
• Homestead exemptions

Although the protections associated with the preceding concepts vary substantially from state to state, in general, the creditors of a person who has a beneficial interest in a limited liability entity or an irrevocable trust may be prohibited from satisfying their claims against that person from the assets owned by such entities.

For example, John transfers ownership of a $1 million vacation house into the name of an irrevocable trust. He only retains very specific rights in the trust, which include the right to use the vacation house as he pleases.

5 years after the transfer, a disgruntled business partner sues John for something John did 4 years after the transfer. The business partner is awarded $10 million of damages by the court.

Because John doesn't own the vacation house, the irrevocable trust owns the vacation house, his business partner is likely precluded from forcing a sale of the house in order to satisfy the $2 million judgment against John.

John only has a net worth of $1 million because the irrevocable trust owns the vacation house. As a result, his business partner won't be able to satisfy the $2 million claim from the trust assets, i.e. the house, meaning that at least $1 million will go unpaid.

In the example above, the protections that John has from the claims on his creditor are enabled by state law.

In addition, some federal laws also protect assets from creditors, such the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA") that governs many types of retirement accounts, but that is another discussion for another day.

Bankruptcy Laws

Although the concept of bankruptcy is often portrayed as a way for people to get a fresh start, it may be more beneficial to creditors as opposed to consumers, often times.

In particular, Section 548 of the Federal Bankruptcy Code gives a bankruptcy trustee the power to avoid, i.e. nullify, transfers that were made for less than fair market value when the transferor was insolvent, i.e. has a negative net worth, with "actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any entity to which the debtor" is indebted within two (2) years before the date of the filing of the petition.

In addition to federal bankruptcy laws, however, state bankruptcy laws can often be used to avoid transfers, as well.

The Supremacy Clause

There are state laws that protect assets and there are federal laws that empower creditors, but which wins if these laws are at odds against each other?

To make a long story short, federal law wins — and thus creditors often win — because valid federal law is supreme to, and preempts, state law.

Going back to the previous example of John, if he had transferred the vacation house to the irrevocable trust after the $2 million judgment had been awarded, the creditor could have compelled John's case to Federal Bankruptcy Court because John was insolvent at the time of the transfer and the creditor could have petitioned the bankruptcy trustee to avoid the transfer to trust, thereby removing the home from the trust as if the transfer never happened, which could then lead to the forced sale of the vacation house in order to satisfy the $2 million claim against John.

This brief overview of some important considerations associated with asset protection is by no means comprehensive. Always seek the advice of a competent professional when making important financial and legal decisions.

Steve Cook is an asset protection lawyer at Cook & Cook. Although his main office is located in Mesa, Arizona, he represents clients throughout the Phoenix, Arizona Metropolitan area including the following east valley cities: Scottsdale, Paradise Valley, Tempe, Chandler, & Gilbert.

If a person dies without a will in Arizona, can that person's children who were adopted by another person or persons still inherit from the decedent's probate estate?

It depends.

Arizona's Intestacy statue provides the following, in part:

B. An adopted person is the child of that person's adopting parent or parents and not of the natural parents. Adoption of a child by the spouse of either natural parent has no effect on the relationship between the child and that natural parent or on the right of the child or a descendant of the child to inherit from or through the other natural parent.

A.R.S. § 14-2114(b).

So what does this mean?

It likely means that a child, who is adopted by a spouse of one of the child's natural parents, is entitled to inherit from each of the following:

1. The adoptive parent,
2. The natural parent married to the adoptive parent, and
3. The other natural parent.

If however, the child is adopted by someone who is not married to either of the child's natural parents, the child is not entitled to inherit from either of the natural parents, only the adoptive parent(s).

But why?

Potentially, the legislature enacted this statute because even though a parent gives up his/her rights to a child, the child has not given up his her rights to inherit from that parent, subject to the limited exception that children who are adopted by a person or persons who aren't married to either of the child's natural parents aren't entitled to inherit from their natural parents, potentially because all of their ties to their natural parents may well be severed.

Can this be avoided?

Probably, with some planning.

In Arizona, a will allows a parent to disinherit that parent's non-minor children — a parent is still obligated to minor and dependent children in almost all situations.

Non-Probate Transfers

Although children who have been adopted by another person may still be able to inherit from their natural parent's or parents' probate estates, this is not necessarily the case in regard to non-probate interests, such as life insurance policies, retirement accounts governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), such as IRAs and 401(k) plans, and beneficiary deeds, largely because such interests include beneficiary designations that name beneficiaries by their names, as opposed to general classes or groups of people.

Beneficiary Management

The key to determining who will receive your assets after your passing is planning — once a person passes, changing the heirs and beneficiaries is generally not possible.

As a result, it's important to keep your estate planning documents — such as a will or trust — up-to-date, as well as the documents that govern your non-probate interests.

This brief overview of some important considerations associated with estate planning is by no means comprehensive. Always seek the advice of a competent professional when making important financial and legal decisions.

Steve Cook is an estate planning lawyer at Cook & Cook. Although his main office is located in Mesa, Arizona, he represents clients throughout the Phoenix, Arizona Metropolitan area including the following east valley cities: Scottsdale, Paradise Valley, Tempe, Chandler, & Gilbert.

Have you ever asked yourself this question:

If I die without a will, who will inherit my assets?

Well, it depends.

A will only controls the distribution of probate assets. But what are your probate assets?

Probate Assets

The following types of assets are often non-probate assets:

• Real estate titled in joint tenancy with right of survivorship;
• Real estate titled as community property with right of survivorship;
• Life insurance;
• Bank accounts titled in joint tenancy with right of survivorship;
• Bank accounts titled as community property with right of survivorship;
• Individual Retirement Accounts ("IRA"); and
• Other retirement accounts governed by ERISA.

Non-Probate Assets

The following types of assets are often non-probate assets:

• Real estate titled in joint tenancy with right of survivorship;
• Real estate titled as community property with right of survivorship;
• Life insurance;
• Bank accounts titled in joint tenancy with right of survivorship;
• Bank accounts titled as community property with right of survivorship;
• Individual Retirement Accounts ("IRA"); and
• Other retirement accounts governed by ERISA.

Typically, non-probate assets are distributed pursuant to beneficiaries who are named in the documents and/or plans associated with the non-probate assets. 

So, Who Gets My Probate Assets?

In Arizona, if you don't have a will, the distribution of your probate assets is governed by Arizona's "Intestacy Statutes." A.R.S. § 14-2101, et seq.

If you've only been married once and that spouse is the biological parent of all your children, then your probate assets go to that spouse, if s/he is living. If, however, your spouse it not living, then your assets are distributed equally to your living children. If, however, one or more of your children is no longer living and that child also had children, then the deceased child's children share equally in that child's share of the probate estate

But here's were things start to get complicated.

While many people fit into the category above, many people don't.

If your current spouse is not also the biological parent of your children, then your current spouse is entitled to half of your separate property, while your children are entitled to the other half of your separate property and your half of the marital community property. Moreover, the same provisions regarding your children that predecease you, as mentioned above, also apply.

If, however, you do not leave a surviving spouse, then all of your living biological or adopted children are entitled to an equal share of your probate assets — the aforementioned provisions regarding children who predecease you, also apply.

If you aren't legally married at the time of your death and don't have any children, then your parents are your heirs, if they are living. If you parent's are not living, then your parents' descendants are your heirs. If your parents are not living and they had no other descendants, besides you, then your probate estate is split between the descendants of your paternal and maternal grandparents.

What About Step-Children?

Notice a group of people not listed in the provisions above?

Step-children.

This comes as a big shock to many, but unless you legally adopt your step-children, they are not entiled to a share of your probate assets, if you die without a will. That said, you can change this presumption by adding your step-children to your will.

This brief overview of some important considerations associated with estate planning is by no means comprehensive. Always seek the advice of a competent professional when making important financial and legal decisions.

Steve Cook is an estate planning lawyer at Cook & Cook. Although his main office is located in Mesa, Arizona, he represents clients throughout the Phoenix, Arizona Metropolitan area including the following east valley cities: Scottsdale, Paradise Valley, Tempe, Chandler, & Gilbert.

When people have heard through the grapevine about the potential perils of the probate process, they often ask me if they should just add their kids to their bank accounts in order to avoid probate.

My answer is always a resounding:

No. Absolutely not.

To which, they often respond:

But why? They’re good kids. They won’t steal from me.

Well, they’re probably right. Most of the time theft probably won’t be an issue, but guess what could be an issue:

Your kids’ creditors.

For example, if one of your children causes a car accident and they don't have enough insurance coverage to pay for the damage that they caused, the creditors can attach your bank account to satisfy their claims against your children… because your children are on your bank account — it's technically theirs, too.

What happens if one of your children has problems in his/her business and borrowed a significant amount of money? The lender wants to be paid back. Your bank account is also your child's and the lender — or a bankruptcy trustee — can attach the account to satisfy the unpaid loans

What happens if your child goes through a divorce? There is a good possibility that your child’s soon-to-be ex-spouse will claim some right to your bank account.

What happens if your grandchildren apply for financial aid to pay for their higher educations? Well, your grandchildren could actually be ineligible for some types of financial aid because your children have too much money — remember, you're children on your bank account. We see this happen all the time.

In other words, just don't put your kids on you bank account. It's almost never a good idea. The same thing goes for putting your kids on the title to your house or other real property:

Don’t do it.

How Do You Avoid Probate Otherwise?

Well, first and foremost, probate just isn’t that bad in Arizona, but it does take a while — at least 5 or 6 months, in my experience.

In other states, like California, Nevada, and many states back east, attorneys can charge fees based on a percentage value of the estate. The good news is that charging a percentage fee for probate is prohibited here in Arizona.

Secondly, there are lots of other, much better, ways to avoid probate, but they do take some planning and forethought:

• Revocable Trusts
• Irrevocable Trusts
• Beneficiary Deeds
• Transfer on Death Instructions
• Beneficiary Designations
• Administration via Affidavit

But only some of these tactics, can protect you from creditors during your lifetime and can also protect your children from creditors after you’ve passed on, while others provide no such protection.

In fact, the law allows you to do things for your heirs/beneficiaries that they can’t do for themselves, such as putting assets into trust that their creditors won’t be able to touch, while still allowing your children to access and benefit from those assets.

In addition only one of these strategies can provide protection from the costs of long-term care, while still enabling you to keep your assets.

But how do you know which tactics are right for you? Well, you can learn more about each of these tactics and how to create a comprehensive strategy by scheduling a free consultation with me using the calendar below:

This brief overview of some important considerations associated with estate planning is by no means comprehensive. Always seek the advice of a competent professional when making important financial and legal decisions.

Steve Cook is an estate planning lawyer at Cook & Cook. Although his main office is located in Mesa, Arizona, he represents clients throughout the Phoenix, Arizona Metropolitan area including the following east valley cities: Scottsdale, Paradise Valley, Tempe, Chandler, & Gilbert.

How is an end of year bonus taxed?

Bonuses are characterized as a special type of income called "Supplemental Wages," which are defined by the IRS as follows:

Supplemental wages are wage payments to an employee that aren't treated like regular wages for withholding purposes. They include, but aren't limited to, bonuses, commissions, overtime pay, payments for accumulated sick leave, severance pay, awards, prizes, back pay, retroactive pay increases, and payments for nondeductible moving expenses. Other payments subject to the supplemental wage rules include taxable fringe benefits and expense allowances paid under a nonaccountable plan. How you withhold on supplemental wages depends on whether the supplemental payment is identified as a separate payment from regular wages.

Withholding for supplemental wages is at a flat rate of 25% for any bonus that is below $1,000,000. However, withholding for bonuses taxed at the highest marginal rate, currently 39.6%, for any amount exceeding $1,000,000 is at that same rate, 39.6%.

It's important to note that although the withholding rate is different for bonuses, the tax imposed on bonuses is the same as regular wages — they are ordinary income.

This brief overview of some important considerations associated with the federal taxation is by no means comprehensive. Always seek the advice of a competent professional when making important financial and legal decisions.

Steve Cook is a business attorney at Cook & Cook. Although his main office is located in Mesa, Arizona, he represents clients throughout the Phoenix, Arizona Metropolitan area including the following east valley cities: Scottsdale, Paradise Valley, Tempe, Chandler, & Gilbert.

Although Trump and the Republicans in the House of Representatives generally agree on a number of significant tax reform issues, there are still a number of issues that need to be resolved, as discussed in the video below from the Wall Street Journal, including a radical plan for taxation of imports and exports, which is called Destination-Based Cash Flow Tax.

This brief overview of some important considerations associated with the federal taxation is by no means comprehensive. Always seek the advice of a competent professional when making important financial and legal decisions.

Steve Cook is a business attorney at Cook & Cook. Although his main office is located in Mesa, Arizona, he represents clients throughout the Phoenix, Arizona Metropolitan area including the following east valley cities: Scottsdale, Paradise Valley, Tempe, Chandler, & Gilbert.

Congress has passed, and the President has signed, a significant change to the Federal Medicaid laws applicable to supplemental needs trusts, commonly called special needs trusts.

WealthManagement.com:

On Dec. 13, 2016, President Obama signed the 21st Century Cures Act (H.R.34 — 114th Congress (2015-2016)). Section 5007 of the Act, titled “Fairness in Medicaid Supplemental Needs Trusts” incorporates language from the Special Needs Trust Fairness Act of 2015 by adding two words (“the individual”) to an existing statute. With the stroke of a pen, more than two decades of unfair treatment to individuals with disabilities was ended by now allowing those with capacity to create their own self-settled special needs trust (SNT), without having to go to court. Prior to enactment of this new law, individuals with disabilities who didn’t have a living parent or grandparent couldn’t create their own self-settled SNT without going to court.

For those unfamiliar, a supplemental needs trust is a type of trust that can allow a disabled person to qualify for Medicaid — a needs-based program that pays for medical care — while still allowing the Medicaid recipient to have access to funds for their supplemental needs.

For more information, you can read the following post on our website: https://cooklaw.co/blog/special-needs-trusts.

This brief overview of some important considerations associated with estate planning is by no means comprehensive. Always seek the advice of a competent professional when making important financial and legal decisions.

Steve Cook is a estate planning lawyer at Cook & Cook. Although his main office is located in Mesa, Arizona, he represents clients throughout the Phoenix, Arizona Metropolitan area including the following east valley cities: Scottsdale, Paradise Valley, Tempe, Chandler, & Gilbert.

Only "rich" people need estate plans, right? Wrong.

Although estate plans can be especially beneficial in terms of estate tax planning for the affluent, almost everyone needs an estate plan, regardless of how much, or how little, property they own.

Are you:

• A parent?
• An aunt or uncle?
• A pet owner?
• A property owner?

Then you need an estate plan.

What is an Estate Plan?

Estate plans come in all shapes and sizes. They can be comprehensive and integrated or they can be ad hoc.

And guess what? An estate plan doesn't just apply when you're dead. Nope, estate plans apply while you're living.

Although there are seemingly countless ways of making an estate plan, an estate plan can often consist of one of more of the following:

• Wil
• Revocable "Living" Trust
• Beneficiary designations
• Beneficiary Deeds
• Joint Tenancy
• Health Care Power of Attorney
• Health Care Proxy
• Advance Directive
• Living Will
• Durable General Power of Attorney
• Qualified Personal residence Trust
• Charitable Remainder Trust

The list goes on and on.

But when it comes down to it, there are four (4) main objectives of an estate plan:

1. Specify who you want to take care of your children if you can't
2. Protect your assets from creditors while your alive and after you've passed on
3. Specify what will happen to your assets after you've passed away or if you are not able to care for yourself
4. Explain those life-saving medical procedures that you do or don't want want to be performed if you are not able to do so yourself
5. Empower someone step into your shoes and make financial and health care decisions on your behalf, if you can't

Your estate plan isn't just about your legacy, no, it has a far-broader effect.

What Happens if You Don't Have an Estate Plan?

If you don't have an estate plan, you're leaving it all up to chance -- or more specifically, you're leaving it all up to the courts and the government.

But what does that mean, exactly?

It means that if you can't make decisions on your own behalf, a court will choose who makes those decisions for you? But they'll know what you want them to do right?

Probably not. Actually, that's one of the principal objectives of a living or advance health care directive, i.e to express what you do or don't want done on your behalf.

So, Where Do You Start?

There are lots of options, but downloading our free Special Report: 4 Estate Planning Documents Everybody Needs is probably a good place to start.

This brief overview of some important considerations associated with estate planning is by no means comprehensive. Always seek the advice of a competent professional when making important financial and legal decisions.

Steve Cook is a estate planning lawyer at Cook & Cook. Although his main office is located in Mesa, Arizona, he represents clients throughout the Phoenix, Arizona Metropolitan area including the following east valley cities: Scottsdale, Paradise Valley, Tempe, Chandler, & Gilbert.

For many people, their homes are their most significant assets — they symbolize a lifetime of hard work. The thought of losing their homes to pay for nursing home or assisted living care, can be demoralizing.

Medicaid coverage can help people avoid needing to sell their homes in order to pay for the costs of long-term care, but that doesn't necessarily mean that their homes are protected; rather, they are simply not required to be sold while they are living. After a Medicaid recipient passes away, however, things can get much stickier.

Specifically, the State of Arizona often pays substantial amounts of money for the care of people on ALTCS and may be required to seek reimbursement for the cost of that care, if possible. Moreover, Arizona has at least two (2) options when it comes recovering those costs: (1) estate recovery and (2) property liens, which could result in ALTCS taking a Medicaid recipient's home.

1. Estate Recovery

When a Medicaid recipient over the age of 55 dies, Arizona must attempt to recover the benefits provided to that individual from his or her estate – that is a requirement under federal Medicaid law. However, Arizona cannot proceed with this recovery process if any of the following applies:

• If the recipient’s spouse is still living;
• If the recipient has a child under age 21; or
• If the recipient has a child who is blind or disabled

Some states have expanded the scope of assets from which they can recover the cost of a Medicaid recipient’s care to include non-probate assets; however, Arizona has not. Arizona law still only permits ALTCS to recover from a person's probate estate, which doesn't include property held in joint tenancy, life insurance proceeds, or other accounts that include designated beneficiaries, such as IRAs.

2. Property Liens

In addition, Arizona can place a lien on a Medicaid recipient’s home during that person's lifetime, unless certain dependent relatives live on the premises. Sale of the property, while the recipient is still living, could result in the loss of Medicaid coverage -- because of excess assets -- and an obligation to use the sale proceeds to satisfy the lien.

There are exceptions to this rule, as well. Satisfaction of the lien is not required if the applicant returns home prior to their death or one or more of the following individuals reside on the property:

• The recipient’s spouse
• A child under age 21
• A child who is blind or disabled
• A sibling with an equity interest in the home
• A child who cared for the recipient for the two years preceding his or her application for Medicaid coverage

Property that is owned by a life estate or governed by a beneficiary deed can also be subject to such a lien.

In addition to these limitations upon the assets that Medicaid can look to for reimbursement, there are other strategies to structure the legal ownership of assets to preclude Arizona from attempting reimbursement, including certain types of asset protection trusts.

This brief overview of some important considerations associated with ALTCS eligibility is by no means comprehensive. Always seek the advice of a competent professional when making important financial and legal decisions.

Steve Cook is a estate planning lawyer at Cook & Cook. Although his main office is located in Mesa, Arizona, he represents clients throughout the Phoenix, Arizona Metropolitan area including the following east valley cities: Scottsdale, Paradise Valley, Tempe, Chandler, & Gilbert.