New allegations of abuse filed in Melvin Simon estate fight

Melvin Simon was one of the richest men in the Midwest until he died last year, at age 82.  A co-owner of the NBA’s Indiana Pacers, he built most of his fortune developing and owning shopping malls.  His assets have been estimated to be worth close to $2 billion.  That vast fortune is tied up in a nasty legal battle over his will and trust, as explained in this prior article of The Probate Lawyer Blog .  Like many second-marriage situations, the widow, Bren, does not get along with the Mel Simon’s children from a prior marriage (to say the least!).  And they aren’t too fond of Bren either.  The children, led by daughter Deborah, sued because Simon signed new estate planning documents seven months before he died, raising Bren’s inheritance from one-third up to one-half, at the expense of the children. Why did the kids challenge this (other than the obvious)?  For one, they claim Mel was so sick from cancer, dementia and neurological disorders that he couldn’t even hold his pen when he signed the new will and trust.  The lawsuit alleged he was mentally incompetent and that Bren exercised undue influence to coerce the estate planning changes.  The lead plaintiff, Deborah, also claimed Bren committed fraud. The problem was that Deborah’s attorneys didn’t include enough details about the alleged fraud, and the Court threw the claim out at the request of Bren’s lawyers.  Well, they asked for more details, and Deborah and her legal team were all too happy to oblige. They re-filed the fraud claim with a host of new specifics about what they think Bren did wrong, including: screening all of Melvin’s calls and lying to Deborah when she called to talk to her father; ordering Melvin’s assistants to stay away from him if he didn’t do what Bren wanted, which isolated him from the outside world; swearing and yelling at her husband, calling him vulgar names; badgering and belittling him; and signing Melvin’s name to financial documents, including some that authorized tens of millions of dollars to be transferred into her name. Of course, Bren wouldn’t take these allegations lying down.  Her lawyers recently fired back with a new filing aimed back at Deborah and her attorneys.  Perhaps trying to turn the tables, they claim that Deborah “rummaged” through her father’s papers when Bren was away, stole important documents, and violated Melvin’s right to keep his medical records private by conspiring with a male nurse who gave Deborah and her attorneys important records about Melvin’s condition from the last few months of his life.  They asking for sanctions to be imposed against them for discovery abuses in the lawsuit. Bren’s team also responded to Deborah’s new allegations, calling them ”vile.” Well that certainly is a good word to describe how ugly this lawsuit is getting.  But, it’s not unusual.  Wealthy or not, many families fight when a loved one passes (especially in second-marriage situations like this one). Children from a prior marriage may not get along with a newer spouse, but both sides can often hold their emotions in check until the loved one dies.  Then emotions can really begin to boil. Throw in changes made to a will, trust or bank account, and things often get ugly in a hurry. What do you do if your family is facing a possible battle like this one?  Talk to an experienced probate litigation attorney and learn your legal rights. Or, you can educate yourself.  Here’s a good place to start . By Andrew W. Mayoras and Danielle B. Mayoras, co-authors of “Trial and Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!” and husband-and-wife legacy expert attorneys. As educators across the United States through speaking engagements, print, broadcast, and social media, Danielle and Andrew consistently draw rave reviews and are in high demand. Email them at  contact@trialandheirs.com .

Read more here:
New allegations of abuse filed in Melvin Simon estate fight

Magazine Article: Lessons of Famously Bad Estate Planning

The May 2010 issue of Insurance News Net Magazine, written for insurance and other financial professionals, has a great feature on how lessons drawn from famous estate screw-ups can help promote proper estate planning.  (Gee, that sounds familiar.)  Co-author of Trial & Heirs:  Famous Fortune Fights !, Danielle Mayoras, was quoted extensively in the article, and several stories and lessons from our book were featured in the story.  Here’s the beginning of the article: Admit it: You can’t resist celebrity news. You’re standing at the grocery checkout behind someone who still uses checks, and then you notice the gossip rags. You can’t help but look and shake your head: “Tiger Woods did what? Brad wants to remarry Jennifer? Kirstie Alley is obese—again?” Let’s face it—celebrity foibles are even more enticing than are the Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups calling your name. Sex might sell, but silliness does too. And celebrity screw-ups can help sell one of the most unsexy things out there: estate planning. Sure, people know they should have a will, but if you tell them about the many celebrity disasters that have ensued because of the absence of a will, you’re likely to grab clients’ attention. Guitar great Jimi Hendrix died without a will in 1970, setting up a family fight that would end up in court more than 30 years later. His father, Al, had cut Jimi’s brother out of the estate and left the Hendrix legacy in control of Al’s adopted daughter, Janie, from his second marriage. And even though Al had built an $80 million business called Experience Hendrix, he reportedly still did not complete Jimi’s grave site. Odds are good that Jimi Hendrix would not have expected these turns of events, but he had no say in the matter because he did not leave a will. Because of undefined intent, the celebrity universe is filled with questionable handling of legacies. Sometimes it is not failure but overwhelming success that generates criticism, as in the Bob Marley case. The Marley estate in 2009 signed a deal with a private-equity firm to sell merchandise worldwide to generate as much as $1 billion, prompting some to ask if that is what Bob Marley would have wanted. Forbes, for example, asked, “Could this be commercial overkill for the Rastafarian whose spiritual songs about social injustice, hope, and redemption have become anthems for billions of fans, from Marrakech to Tokyo, and will it alienate them?” Here’s a link to the full story in the magazine .  Remember, using stories of celebrity estate battles is a great way to motivate family members and clients to do the proper planning! By Andrew W. Mayoras and Danielle B. Mayoras, co-authors of “Trial and Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!” and husband-and-wife legacy expert attorneys. As educators across the United States through speaking engagements, print, broadcast, and social media, Danielle and Andrew consistently draw rave reviews and are in high demand. Email them at  contact@trialandheirs.com .

Read more here:
Magazine Article: Lessons of Famously Bad Estate Planning

Widow of England millionaire in an interesting estate fight

Battles over the assets of those who have passed are far too common, for millionaires and non-millionaires alike.  Usually they involve whether someone was competent when a will or trust change was made, whether a joint bank account owner was supposed to share with the rest of the family, who gets the wedding ring, or other disputes over money and property. But some fights aren’t about money.  59-year old Andrea Walker was crushed when her 64-year old husband died of pancreatic cancer last August.  The couple (who owned a 1000-year-old castle turned into a luxury hotel) had a rocky relationship at times.  In fact, the husband, Brian Walker, reportedly told Andrea he was leaving her in November, 2008, only to return when his cancer was diagnosed a few months later.  They were very close in the months leading up to his demise, with Andrea devoting herself to Brian’s care. At least Andrea thought they were very close.  Shortly after he passed, she found a red file Brian had kept. What was in it?  A series of documents showing that Brian had donated sperm to a lady he was friendly with.  Andrea was shocked.  She had yearned to have children with Brian, but he steadfastly refused — saying he was too old (he was in his late 40’s when they met).  Andrea was always sad that they never had a family together. So, not surprisingly, she couldn’t bear the thought and betrayal of Brian giving his sperm to another woman without telling her.  Brian had even given more than $100,000 to the woman, including credit card payments to the IVF center less than a month before he died. So Andrea sued the fertility center seeking to have the medical records released to her and the donated sperm destroyed.  The IVF center says that, legally, the wife doesn’t need to consent to the donation of sperm, so they intend to honor the documents Brian signed.  They say that Brian and his female friend told them they were “partners”.  Reportedly, Brian wasn’t romantically involved with the woman (although Brian did have an affair a few years earlier with someone else). Andrea’s lawsuit claims the signatures of Brian are forged.  She also seeks to change the law to require the spouse’s consent in a situation like this. If she fails, and the child is conceived and born, will the baby be entitled to a share of the millionaire’s estate?  It’s an interesting question. London’s Daily Mail newspaper has the complete story here .  While fights over frozen sperm (especially a millionaire’s frozen sperm) are rare, probate and estate related lawsuits do happen more often than most realize.  Good estate planning is the best source of prevention. But when a loved one is determined to betray someone — like poor Andrea — there’s usually nothing than can be done to stop it ahead of time.  That’s when it’s time to consult with an experienced probate litigation attorney and learn what options are available. By Andrew W. Mayoras and Danielle B. Mayoras, co-authors of “Trial and Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!” and husband-and-wife legacy expert attorneys. As educators across the United States through speaking engagements, print, broadcast, and social media, Danielle and Andrew consistently draw rave reviews and are in high demand. Email them at  contact@trialandheirs.com .

Read more here:
Widow of England millionaire in an interesting estate fight

Did insurance fraud led to murder of an elderly woman?

The Stephen Hilbert family is well known in Indiana.  Hilbert founded insurance giant Conseco, which he ran until he was forced out because he owed the company hundreds of millions of dollars.  When the company sued Hilbert to collect the giant debt, he tried to hide behind a series of trusts to shelter his fortune.  Our book, Trial & Heirs:  Famous Fortune Fights !, includes the Hilbert story to highlight what trusts are not intended to be used for. But now Stephen Hilbert and his family are in the news for a different reason.  Hilbert’s mother-in-law, Germaine “Suzy” Tomlinson, died under very questionable circumstances on September 28, 2008 at age 74.  Her death was ruled an accident.  Hilbert an d his wife aren’t so sure.  Tomlinson was found fully dressed, face down in her bathtub, where she had drowned after a late night of drinking at a night club.   [See picture which reportedly was taken the night before she died] There was broken glass, a shelf knocked over and a broken faucet knob in the bathroom.  The coroner found no bruising but questions how the water was turned on.  Hilbert says it doesn’t add up. Here’s where it gets really interesting … there was a 15 million dollar life insurance policy on Tomlinson’s life.  That’s a big policy!  And who was the beneficiary named to receive this fortune?  It wasn’t any of her family members. Instead, the $15 million was left to a trust Tomlinson had created.  While she had told the insurance company that the policy was purchased to benefit Hilbert’s wife and other family members, the actual beneficiary, through her trust, was a business called Carlson Media Group.  The company is run by a 36-year-old man named JB Carlson.  He was not only a social friend of Tomlinson, but he was the last person to see her alive.  He says he drove her home from the bar because she was too drunk to drive and he left her (alive and well, he says) in the living room of her house. The insurance company on the hook for the $15 million isn’t buying all this.  They sued Carlson and his company to invalidate the insurance policy, saying it was obtained by fraud and lacked an “insurable interest”.  This means that beneficiary is not a family member and has no other close relationship to the person who died which would have justified the policy.  This legal requirement prevents strangers or acquaintances from buying policies on people as a twisted type of investing. Carlson says the policy was legitimate, because Tomlinson was a “key man” for his company.  Indeed, that can be a valid reason for a policy — companies purchase insurance for owners or other key members of their businesses all the time.  But, again, there are suspicious facts.  The policy paperwork indicated that it was obtained for estate planning, not to protect the business.  And the financial information submitted for Tomlinson said she was worth $46.7 million – nearly $40 million of which was from stock in Carlson Media.  Carlson admits that the true value of that stock was nowhere near $40 million.  In fact, documents uncovered by the insurance company show that Tomlinson had very few assets and her annual income was less than $17,000. So who paid the large premiums for this insurance policy?  Carlson’s company, of course.  But it had to take out a substantial loan to pay the annual premiums.  When that loan was set to come due, it tried to refinance the loan, but the refinance efforts fell through.  As a result, the company was about to be in default.  In fact, the loan was due only two days after Tomlinson died.  So it seems her death occurred just in time for Carlson’s business.  At least, it would have if the insurance company had paid the policy without investigating what happened. And, of course, when that company discovered these questionable circumstances, it sued rather than pay the money.  And now Hilbert’s wife and her siblings have joined the lawsuit saying that the money should be turned over to them, as their mother really intended. They claim that Carlson and others concocted this fraud to take advantage of an unsophisticated elderly woman. And it just may have ended in murder. The lawsuit is scheduled for a jury trial in October of this year.  If the case doesn’t settle beforehand, it promises to be a doozy. Whether or not Tominlson died accidentally, there is no question that someone took advantage of her.  Elderly women with little income or assets shouldn’t be anywhere near a 15 million dollar life insurance policy.  Why this particular situation may seem unusual, scams targeted at seniors are far too common.  Sometimes they involve sales of shady annuities .  Other times there is undue influence designed to coerce a new will or trust.  Or it may be outright theft. Here are some warnings signs of financial abuse and exploitation families should watch out for.  Many families don’t want to pry into the financial affairs of their elderly loved ones for fear of offending them.  Certainly Hilbert’s wife wishes she had done so. Families can share stories like this one with parents and grandparents to break the ice and open the conversation to protect aging loved ones from scams. By Andrew W. Mayoras and Danielle B. Mayoras, co-authors of “Trial and Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!” and husband-and-wife legacy expert attorneys. As educators across the United States through speaking engagements, print, broadcast, and social media, Danielle and Andrew consistently draw rave reviews and are in high demand. Email them at  contact@trialandheirs.com .

Read more here:
Did insurance fraud led to murder of an elderly woman?

The crazy claims of the Michael Jackson Estate

Given MJ’s eccentricities in life, and the craziness that has surrounded his estate since he died, it is no surprise that Michael Jackson’s estate executors are busy denying wild claims left and right.  TMZ has a list of the wackiest ones: Jose Freddie Vallejos asked for $3.3 million to reimburse Los Angeles for the costs of the King of Pop’s memorial service. A homeschooler, Claire McMillan, is seeking $2 million. Michael, according to Nona Paris Lola Ankhesenamun Jackson (try saying that three times fast), was actually married to her, so Nona of course wants custody of the three kids. Richard Lapointe claimed he’s owed $5 million for a memorabilia auction that was wrongly canceled. And, best of all, a woman is convinced that Jackson wiretapped her telephone and had organized criminals watch her.  She wants a mere $50 million. You can read TMZ’s coverage of these claims , which were all formally denied last week by Howard Weitzman, the estate’s attorney.  This means the claimants now have to initial legal action to try to prove that their claims are valid, if they still want to pursue their demands for dough. Oh — let’s not forget the claim of the secret love child.  What celebrity estate mess, with fortune-seekers coming out of the woodwork, would be complete without the claim of a secret child?  25-year-old Prince Michael Malachi Jet Jackson is asking for a DNA sample so he can prove he’s really Michael’s eldest son.  Hey, as wacky as MJ was in life–who knows–maybe some of these claimants are actually telling the truth.  Stayed tuned to find out! But, bad news for Prince Michael Mala(etc.).  Michael, Sr.’s will ( which you can read here ) states that he had no other children and he intentionally did not leave anything for any other heirs (except for this three legitimate children and his mother, who are beneficiaries of his trust).  This means that even if this secret child is telling the truth, he won’t inherit anything (at least, it would be very unlikely because of the language of the will). That’s one of the reasons why it is important to work with a good estate planning attorney.  You never know what kind of crazy people will surface when someone dies, with hands extended looking for money.  If Michael Jackson had properly funded his trust, then his entire estate could have been handled in private, outside of court.  This would have made it much tougher for these crazy creditors to try to stake a claim in probate court . Of course, without crazy creditors, it just wouldn’t have felt right, would it? By Andrew W. Mayoras and Danielle B. Mayoras, co-authors of “Trial and Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!” and husband-and-wife legacy expert attorneys. As educators across the United States through speaking engagements, print, broadcast, and social media, Danielle and Andrew consistently draw rave reviews and are in high demand. Email them at  contact@trialandheirs.com .

Read more here:
The crazy claims of the Michael Jackson Estate

Steve McNair’s widow facing estate tax nightmare

The Steve McNair Estate has been relatively quiet lately, after a fast start with plenty of fireworks.  You can read the Probate Lawyer Blog’s prior articles about it here .  But despite the apparent calm, there are still lessons to be learned.  The lawyers for McNair’s widow, Mechelle McNair, recently had to file a petition with the Tennessee probate court asking for funds to be released from a frozen trust account to pay taxes.  Ho hum, right?  Not so fast. How much did she have to withdraw?  A cool $3.72 million — all for state and federal estate taxes that were due earlier this month.  And that’s just the estimated taxes that she has to pay now.  When the final determination of how much she, as the surviving spouse, will receive is calculated, that price tag may increase.  Her attorneys anticipate filing an amended tax return which may include even more money due to the IRS. Why should this matter to you?  If Steve McNair had done the proper estate planning, he could have avoided all of these estate taxes for his widow.  Through a properly-drafted revocable living trust, his widow would have have avoided the tax bill.  That’s right, she would have owed nothing!  (But the kids may still have owed a tax bill after she died in the future, depending on the tax laws in place then). In fact, if McNair even had a basic will, while the taxes still would have been due, his widow could have saved money in legal fees.  Without a will, she has to pay lawyers to take extra trips to court that result in higher legal fees … not to mention all the headaches that come with dividing an estate based on intestate law between the widow, her two children, and two other children from other relationships. But wait, you may be thinking, this doesn’t matter to me because I’m not a millionaire.  And didn’t Congress repeal the estate tax law this year?  Don’t think like that. While, for 2010 only, the estate tax had been repealed, that only applies to people who pass away this year.  Don’t plan on dying this year?  As of January 1, 2011, the estate tax comes roaring back, at a one million dollar level.  Everyone had expected Congress to “fix” the estate tax and set it at a higher level — possibly even retroactively to apply to those who already passed in 2010.  But, with the new health care laws, the government will be looking for ways to raise money.  Is keeping a low estate tax level one of their answers?  It could be. With a one-million dollar exemption, many Americans will be affected.  Life insurance, home values, and all other assets count towards the exemption.  So, yes, you would have to worry about it even you aren’t a millionaire. Learn from the mistakes of Steve McNair and go see a good estate planning attorney now.  Don’t wait until tragedy strikes and leave your family unprepared. By Andrew W. Mayoras and Danielle B. Mayoras, co-authors of “Trial and Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!” and husband-and-wife legacy expert attorneys. As educators across the United States through speaking engagements, print, broadcast, and social media, Danielle and Andrew consistently draw rave reviews and are in high demand. Email them at  contact@trialandheirs.com .

Read more here:
Steve McNair’s widow facing estate tax nightmare

Dennis Hopper’s deathbed divorce battle getting uglier

Actor Dennis Hopper, at 73 years of age, is dying from cancer.  To make matters worse, he is battling in a nasty divorce that pits his three adult children, from prior marriages, against his wife, Victoria Duffy-Hopper (she’s number five for Hopper, if you’re keeping score), over whether she’ll inherit anything when he passes.  Here is The Probate Lawyer Blog’s prior article on the case. ABC News posted its Top Ten “most hurtful accusations” from the court fight, including: Hopper’s assistant claimed Duffy-Hopper threatened to kill her. Duffy-Hopper called Hopper an abuser who once threatened that “something bad is going to happen to you and you won’t see it coming”. Hopper accused his wife of stealing millions worth of artwork and other valuables from him, and from secretly taking away their young daughter, preventing him from having a final Christmas with her. Hopper’s daughter, Marin Hopper (who is six years older than her “step-mother”), feels frightened for her safety because of Duffy-Hopper. Duffy-Hopper claims that Marin and the other adult children coerced Dennis Hopper into filing the divorce by taking advantage of him when he was legally incapable of managing his affairs. You can read ABC News’ Top Ten article here. Previously, the judge had granted Hopper a restraining order to keep his wife away, based on a doctor’s report that her presence was harmful to his health. A couple days ago, the judge reversed course and ruled that Duffy-Hopper could live at Hopper’s Venice, California property (but at a different house than Hopper) and that he was to pay $12,000 per month in spousal and child support, as well as $200,000 to her for legal and accountant fees. But what about the battle over her inheritance?  That is yet to come.  Reportedly, the couple signed a prenuptial agreement before they wed 14 years ago, that called for her to lose her inheritance if they were divorced or were living apart.  And there’s a court hearing set for May to determine how to divide his life insurance policy. Family feuds over inheritances – especially in second-marriage situations — are very common.  The odd part about this one is that the person whose money is being fought over is still alive and competent.  While Hopper was too ill to attend the court hearing, his three adult children did, on his behalf (along with his lawyer of course). The divorce judge finds the whole situation odd as well.  She sternly lectured the two sides to put aside their differences, because the seven-year-old daughter was already losing her father and all the fighting certainly won’t help her get through it. Inheritance fights can come in all shapes and sizes.  If you find yourself facing one, make sure to work with an experienced probate litigation attorney . By Andrew W. Mayoras and Danielle B. Mayoras, co-authors of “Trial and Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!” and husband-and-wife legacy expert attorneys. As educators across the United States through speaking engagements, print, broadcast, and social media, Danielle and Andrew consistently draw rave reviews and are in high demand. Email them at  contact@trialandheirs.com .

Read more here:
Dennis Hopper’s deathbed divorce battle getting uglier

Announcing the homecoming celebration of "Trial & Heirs"

Please join Andrew Mayoras and Danielle Mayoras at the homecoming celebration and book signing for the nationally acclaimed “Trial & Heirs:  Famous Fortune Fights!”, the new book that actually makes estate planning fun and interesting!  The event will take place at the Barnes & Noble in Troy, Michigan, on April 23, 2010, from 7 to 9 p.m. and is open to the public.   By Andrew W. Mayoras and Danielle B. Mayoras, co-authors of “Trial and Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!” and husband-and-wife legacy expert attorneys. As educators across the United States through speaking engagements, print, broadcast, and social media, Danielle and Andrew consistently draw rave reviews and are in high demand. Email them at  contact@trialandheirs.com .

Read more here:
Announcing the homecoming celebration of "Trial & Heirs"

Farrah Fawcett trust in the midst of ugly lawsuit

Richard Francis is the trustee of The Fawcett Living Trust, Farrah Fawcett’s trust which details how she wanted her money to pass.  You can read the Probate Lawyer Blog’s prior article discussing this interesting trust here .  On behalf of the trust, Francis sued Hollywood producer Craig Nevius accusing him of embezzling hundreds of thousands of dollars from Fawcett’s company and botching production of a television documentary showing her struggles with cancer. Nevius is not taking the lawsuit lying down.  In fact, he says the entire case is a thinly-disguised attempt by Francis to use money from Fawcett’s trust to protect his own interests.  Nevius had already sued Nevius, as well as Ryan O’Neal (Fawcett’s longtime companion) and her friend Alana Stewart when Nevius felt they wrongly excluded him from producing the documentary, which aired on NBC in May of 2009.  In other words, Nevius says that this lawsuit by Francis is retaliation to get back at him for his lawsuit. But, that’s just the beginning of the fireworks.  Nevius claimed that he was a close friend of Fawcett and one of the first she told when she found out she had cancer in September, 2006.  He alleges that Stewart (whom he describes as “Ms. Fawcett’s self-proclaimed ‘best friend’”) only found out about her cancer from the internet, weeks later.  Nevius states that Stewart was absent from Fawcett’s life “when there were no video cameras present”.  Stewart, Nevius says, weaseled her way into the documentary so she could profit from it — and she published a book to make even more money off of Fawcett by divulging her private medical information. But that pales in comparison to what Nevius says Ryan O’Neal and Richard Francis did.  O’Neal, Nevius’ court papers say, actually threatened to kill Nevius to get him to surrender control of the documentary.  Francis, whom Nevius describes as O’Neal’s business manager, later told Nevius to stay away from Fawcett or “you’re gonna get your ass kicked in by Ryan!  And I mean it!”. Nevius says he only wanted to protect Fawcett and make sure her needs were being met.  But O’Neal and Francis conspired to wrest control of the documentary away from Nevius and lock him out of Fawcett’s life. Nevius also expresses his outrage that the documentary included footage of Fawcett on her death bed and being visited by her son in “a prison jumpsuit and chains”, which he claims Fawcett never wanted to be shown.  Nevius also objects to Stewart and O’Neal both using the documentary to make self-serving statements to benefit themselves. Nevius says the whole lawsuit is an excuse by Francis to line his pockets and those of his attorneys, at the expense of the trust beneficiaries, including Fawcett’s father, who have not received the money they’re supposed to from the trust. Courtesy of Radaronline, you can read Nevius’ court filing here .  The lawyer representing Francis, O’Neal and Stewart has already responded, calling Nevius’ allegations “spurious and outrageous”. So what can you make from all this?  Well, clearly, someone tried to exploit Farrah Fawcett while she was dying from cancer.  Was it Nevius, by allegedly embezzling hundreds of thousands of dollars from her?  Or was it the trio of Francis, O’Neal and Stewart?  We don’t know which side is telling the truth.  We do know that it’s obviously gotten very ugly. But the real tragedy is that cases of exploitation of the sick and the elderly is far more common that most people realize.  Many see those with cancer or other diseases, or mental deficits caused by dementia and/or Alzheimer’s, to be a golden opportunity to get close, cut out others, and end up with the money. It doesn’t just happen to the wealthy, either.  Think someone mentally limited with $100,000 in assets isn’t a target for someone desperate for “easy money?”  They are.  And lawsuits where two sides, both claiming to love someone, duke it out in court over his or her true wishes are a growing epidemic. So talk to your loved ones.  Do the proper planning ahead of time.  Protect them and be wary. Many of our clients  say they never could have imagined it happening to their family.  Fawcett’s loved ones are probably saying the same thing. By Andrew W. Mayoras and Danielle B. Mayoras, co-authors of “Trial and Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!” and husband-and-wife legacy expert attorneys. As educators across the United States through speaking engagements, print, broadcast, and social media, Danielle and Andrew consistently draw rave reviews and are in high demand. Email them at  contact@trialandheirs.com .

Read more here:
Farrah Fawcett trust in the midst of ugly lawsuit

Will contest rages over estate of illustrator Tasha Tudor

Tasha Tudor was a beloved children’s book illustrator and author who was considered by many to be a 19-century Martha Stewart.  She lived as if it was the 1800s, on a New England farm.  She even raised her four children for years without electricity or running water.  She illustrated such classics as The Wind in the Willows, The Night Before Christmas, and The Secret Garden. Tudor died at the age of 92 on June 18, 2008, eccentric to the end.  According to the New York Times, she claimed to be the reincarnation of a sea captain’s wife who lived in the early 19th Century and she strove to replicate that life.  Tudor said that, after she passed, she intended to return to the 1830s.  Her estate has been estimated to be worth more that two million dollars.  She left almost all of it to only one of her four children. The will was reportedly signed in 2001 and left everything to her son Seth, and his son Winslow, except for small bequests to the other three children and some of the grandchildren.  Tudor’s will says that she didn’t leave more to her other children because they were estranged. The attack on the will is led by her other son, Thomas Tudor, who says he was never estranged from his mother.  He and his two sisters claim that Seth exercised undue influence to convince their mother to sign that will.  They’ve also claimed that Seth isn’t properly administering the estate, challenging his decision to allow a public memorial service when the will called for no funeral or viewing. The judge appointed a special administrator to handle the estate’s taxes and help determine what the estate is really worth.  In doing so, he noted how he felt it was impossible for the family to ever agree. The Boston Globe has the full story on the case here . As attorneys who regularly handle and educate about estate and trust disputes like this one, we can say that these are always emotional and difficult for everyone involved.  It sounds like the Tudor family feud will be no exception.  That’s one of the reasons we wrote “ Trial & Heirs:  Famous Fortune Fights !”  We use celebrity tales like this one to help families from ending up the same way.  We also include chapters about what families should do if they’re already in a will contest or other family court fight. By Andrew W. Mayoras and Danielle B. Mayoras, co-authors of “Trial and Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!” and husband-and-wife legacy expert attorneys. As educators across the United States through speaking engagements, print, broadcast, and social media, Danielle and Andrew consistently draw rave reviews and are in high demand. Email them at  contact@trialandheirs.com .

Read more here:
Will contest rages over estate of illustrator Tasha Tudor

Powered by WishList Member - Membership Software