I read with interest that the Martin County, Florida probate judge acceded to the request of Davy Jones’ eldest daughter by granting her motion asking for the court records to be confidential. Talia Jones’ argued that “the decedent has been a public figure since the 1960s” and she “is concerned about the public’s access to the . . . planning documents and financial affairs as public opinion could have a material effect on his copyrights, royalties and ongoing goodwill.”

I am surprised that the court ruled in favor of the personal representative (or executor). Using that logic, virtually every probate estate could be closed. I am doubtful that Ms. Jones’ argument would have won the day in the Los Angeles County probate court; or for that matter, in any other probate court throughout the state of California.

In most places (including Great Britain) when you die intestate, your probate estate goes to your closest heirs. Since Ms. Weinhouse was divorced and did not have any children, her probate estate will go to her parents. It is possible that she had assets that either had a beneficiary listed or were jointly. If that were the case, those assets would be distributed accordingly.

Some are saying that she should have done estate planning. However, she was only age 27 and her life was constantly changing. It is possible that the people she would have listed in her will or trust the day she executed the documents would not be the same people she would want to leave assets to 6 months later.
She may have been close with her parents. Ultimately, they will decide, one way or another, what happens to her probate estate.

Under the ruling, the two are permitted to reapply to the court for reinstatement, but the reporter writes that it will be difficult as the public administrator contending that they bilked Ms. Clark, lied to the Internal Revenue Service, and permitted Ms. Clark to make gifts that she might not have made under other circumstances.

Relatives of Ms. Clark are challenging her last will which was done six week after she had executed another will. The previous will gave the vast majority of her estate to distant relatives. The last will directed that her Santa Barbara Mansion be turned into a museum housing her art collection and left $50 million to her longtime nurse.

These cases are always difficult as Ms. Clark’s feelings probably changed frequently. The last will may be found to be valid; invalid; or a compromise may be negotiated.

Ms. Clark was the youngest of 7 children of William Andrews Clark who at one time was the second richest man in the USA. Her father died in 1925 when she was 19 and in 1928 she entered into what would be a two year marriage.

She inherited $60 million or so from her father. In 2011 dollars that would be approximately $1 billion so she obviously did not manage her money particularly well. From 1988 until her death this year, she lived in various hospital rooms because she preferred small places.

It is frequently interesting when someone without close family passes as to the distribution of their estate. I work with many people to assist them in crafting their estate plan. Many do wish to leave people who provide care to them with a part of their estate. Sometimes it is a rather significant portion. Ms. Clark, provided her nurse, Hadassah Peri over $30 million dollars. Ms. Peri was originally sent to Ms. Clark by an agency 20 years ago. Over the years, she was treated very well by Ms. Clark.

In some instances a caregiver takes advantage of the person they are providing care to. However, sometimes it appears that way, but really the “patient” comes to see the caregiver as a very good friend and would like to benefit that person.

It seems clear from what I have read in this situation that Ms. Clark did not have anyone that she was closer to than Ms. Peri. Ms. Peri was in the right place at the right time when she got the assignment from the agency!

A large percentage of my clients are in “blended” situations. It may be that both spouses had lost their previous spouse; it might be that both had divorced their previous spouse; or it might be a different combination. In any event, frequently at least one of the spouses has a “step-child.”

Sometimes the relationship between step-child and step-parent is great and sometimes it is not. From an estate planning perspective, it is very important that when people have a child or children from a previous marriage or relationship, that they meet with an attorney who prepares wills and trusts to discuss in complete detail their situation.

An experienced estate planning attorney can really earn his/her fee by creating a plan that works to the satisfaction of both the current spouse and the child(ren) from the previous marriage. In the Peter Falk situation, one of his daughters had tried to become his conservator a couple of years ago and was rebuffed as the judge sided with Mr. Falk’s wife, Shera.

It has been reported that Mr. Falk did have a trust and that most of his estate was left to his wife. However, he did leave money to his two daughters from his first marriage.

In her will, Mrs. Helmsley left $12 million to be utilized on behalf of Trouble. A judge reduced the amount to $2 million at the behest of her grandchildren. The unused funds have been added to the Leona M and Harry B Helmsley Charitable Trust.

The Helmsley Trust has been sued by animal rights groups who contend that Helmsely wanted the money to be utilized on behalf of dogs and that the trustees were allocating just a small amount to dog causes. A lower court judge ruled against them, but last week the groups filed an appeal.

You may be wondering what happened to Trouble’s remains. It is being kept a secret.

Her father was a United States senator and a copper king and considered the richest or second richest American when she was born in Paris. Her father was 56 when he met her mother who was then 17. They ended up marrying four years later and having children. Huguette was the second daughter and she outlived her six brothers and sisters. She grew up in a 121-room mansion in Manhattan; was educated at Miss Spence’s School for Girls; and took extended vacations in France.

Her dad acquired a Santa Barbara estate called Bellosguardo when she was a teenager. She continued to own and maintain it throughout her life despite not having been on the property in at least 50 years. She was married once for two years in her early to mid-20s and never had children.

Few know how her estate planning documents read and those that do know are not talking publicly. When she left her Fifth Avenue co-op in an ambulance in 1988, she moved to Mount Sinai Medical Center.

The Wikipedia entry indicates that she “developed a distrust of outsiders, including her family, because she thought they were after her money.”

Recently distant relatives attempted to have a guardian assigned to her. A New York judge denied their request.

While she seemed to live the way she wanted, her story does teach us that having all the money in the world does not necessarily mean that someone will live life the way we think we would if we had that much money.

As an estate planning attorney, I look forward to learning more about her will and any trusts that she set up.

Since his last grandchild died in 1989, more than 21 years have passed and therefore the estate is ready to be completely distributed. Burt had left one child $30,000 annually and the rest of his children between $1,000 and $5,000 annually. He also left his secretary $4,000 annually and other personal employees $1,000 per year.

There were attempts to break the trust in court by his relatives. Those attempts centered around arguing that he was not of sound mind when he executed his estate planning documents. They were unsuccessful.

Now 12 heirs are splitting the $100 to $110 million. The final probate judge, Patrick McGraw, told ABC’s WJRT he thinks “he was kind of a wise old man, kind of foxy. And really, I think knew what he was doing in the long run.”

While I have clients that provide for their grandchildren and great grandchildren, I have never drafted either a will or a living trust that essentially excluded both children and grandchildren. Interesting man!

I strive to work with my clients to ensure that what they have worked a lifetime to attain is not “wasted” quickly after their deaths. I have read studies that claim that states that 70% of heirs will lose their inheritance.

Matriarchs and patriarchs should think about holding family meetings when appropriate to explain the finances. Heirs need to know that they should engage financial planners or trust advisors to assist them with managing their inheritance. Estate planning attorneys should counsel their clients based upon their individual families. Among the factors to consider include amount of money each heir will be inheriting; each heirs individual situation; potential for divorce; potential for creditors; each heir’s spending habits.

Lawyers who spend a significant amount of time in estate planning are likely to be able to craft an estate plan for their clients that not avoids probate, but creates a plan for the transfer of the estate that is both orderly and successful in the sense that the inheritance is not wasted.