Michael Jackson's Siblings Promise New Fight Over His Estate - Forbes
Michael Jackson's Siblings Promise New Fight Over His Estate
Michael Jackson’s estate faced a tumultuous beginning three years ago after he unexpectedly died. First his mother, Katherine, and then his father, Joe, filed challenges against the executors of his Estate, John Branca and John McClain. Katherine backed off her attack and Joe’s case was thrown out of court.
Since then, the Estate has been relatively peaceful, at least on the surface. Branca and McClain have led the Estate from a debt-ridden start to enormous profits. They began around $500 million in the red when the King of Pop died. Three years later, the Estate reported $475 million in profits.
Of course, Branca and McClain have enjoyed a huge financial windfall from this as well. They have a special arrangement, blessed by the probate judge who oversees the estate, allowing them to earn 10% from most deals they cut for the Estate. Branca and McClain are now facing a new attack over their handling of the Estate.
Several of Michael’s brothers and sisters — including Janet, Randy, Tito and Jermaine — signed a letter that they sent to Branca and McClain accusing the pair of fraud, forgery, exploitation and abuse. The letter was published on a
celebrity gossip website yesterday.
In it, Jackson’s siblings claim his July 7, 2002 will was “Fake. Flawed and Fraudulent.” They say Michael was not in Los Angeles that day and couldn’t have signed the will. The letter also says that Michael told them in the months leading up to his death that he despised the pair and didn’t want them to have anything to do with his life or estate.
But that’s not all. The letter states that Branca and McClain lied and took advantage of their 82-year old mother, managing to get her to agree to increases in their percentage fees from the gross income of the estate. They claim to be considering retaining a well-respected law firm, Baker Hostetler, who advised them of potential criminal misconduct by the executors. They promise legal action in the weeks to come.
Branca and McClain released a prompt
statement refuting the allegations. They deny that the will or their actions have been fraudulent and point out that three separate courts have rejected a challenge to the will. The executors say the courts laid to rest any doubts as to the will’s validity. They lament that the accusations have been brought in the midst of their remarkable progress in securing the financial future of Michael’s children. Branca and McClain say they have diligently carried out their fiduciary duties. They decry the Jackson siblings “false and defamatory accusations grounded in stale Internet conspiracy theories”.
So, yes, it looks like the fighting over Michael’s Estate may soon return to court. If so, it will likely be a short-lived battle. The reason that Joe Jackson lost his legal challenges is because he is not a beneficiary and lacks legal “
standing.” Because he would not benefit from the estate, he could not challenge the executors. Michael’s siblings will have the same problem if they try to bring suit.
However, this raises an interesting point regarding the executors’ statement. Because Joe did not have standing to bring his challenge to court, and because Katherine withdrew her claim before it was ruled on,
no judge has ever decided the issue of whether Michael’s will was valid or not in light of these allegations.
Ningún juez ha decidido sobre si el testamento de MJ es valido en virtud de estas alegaciones.
To clarify, as has been raised to us by counsel for Branca and McClain since our article first was posted, the will was admitted to probate and the time period for challenging of the validity of the will under California law passed, which has the effect of determining that the will is valid. But this was done without consideration of any challenges to the will’s validity.
Para clarificar, tal y como se nos ha comentado por Branca y McClain desde que nuestro artículo fue posteado, el testamento fue admitido para ser probado y el tiempo para probar la validez del testamento ha pasado, lo que determinó que el testamento era valido. Pero esto fue hecho sin considerar ninguna de las quejas a la validez del mismo.
Es interesante que la familia Jackson se enfoquen en el testamento de Michael y no mencionen su fideicomiso. Michael también tenía un fideicomiso, junto a su testamento, pero interesantemente, el fideicomiso fue datado unos meses antes del testamento. El testameno provee que sus bienes sean distribuidos por su fideicomiso, y desde allí a Katherine, sus hijs, y la caridad.
It’s interesting that the Jackson siblings focus on Michael’s will and do not mention his trust. Michael also had a trust, along with his will, but interestingly, the trust was dated a few months before the will. The will provides that Michael’s assets are to be distributed to his trust, and from there to Katherine, his children, and charity. But the entire document is far from the quality one would expect from any experienced estate planning attorney. Usually, wills and trusts of this nature are prepared and signed together. And estate planning documents prepared for someone of Michael’s wealth and status are almost always much more comprehensive and well-planned than Michael’s will and trust.
Pero el documento entero está muy alejado de la calidad que uno podría esperar de cualquier abogado experimentado en Estates. Usualmente los testamentos y los fideicomisos de esta naturaleza son preparados y firmados de manera conjunta. Y los documentos planeados, preparados para alguien del caché y estatus de MJ son siempre mucho más comprensivos y bien planeados que el fideicomiso y testamento de Michael.
Does that mean that the Jackson siblings’ allegations of fraud and conspiracy are true? No. But certainly there are a number of questions that would have been very interesting to see explored through a lawsuit brought by people who actually did have proper legal standing. It may be that there are legitimate explanations for the questions raised by the Jackson family.
¿Significa eso que las alegaciones de fraude y conspiración por parte de los Jacksons son verdaderas? No, pero ciertamente hay un número de questiones que hubieran sido muy interesantes de ver exploradas bajo una demanda traida por la gente que actualmente tiene capacidad para tomar acciones legales. Podría ser que haya explicaciones legítimas para las cuestiones traidas por la familia de Jackson.
But at this stage, as pointed out by counsel for Branca and McClain, it would be too late for anyone to challenge the validity of the will in court. There may indeed be future challenges to the actions of Branca and McClain, but those could only be brought by one of the beneficiaries of Michael’s trust, not his siblings.
