Leona Hemsley's will (exclusions)

Isn't it nice to know a judge can change your will even if you explicitly exclude a couple of grandkids? Guessing settlement was to avoid lawsuits, but hey, she said NO to them. So much for final wishes...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/nyregion/22helmsley.html?ref=nyregion

 

You'd think there'd be a way to ensure that the original desires were upheld? Perhaps a multi-layered trust with funds allocated for a bull dog legal defense? The animal organizations were the one's that got shafted in this case.

 

another subversion of the law. judges are pretty much making stuff as they go along.

 

$10 million for a Helmsley Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center

 

Law school will teach you that a judge decides a case based as much on what he had for breakfast as anything else.

 

It is no secret that the "Queen of Mean" was an angry witch of a person. The grandkids deserve millions just for being her descendants.

Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States is the leader of probably the biggest animal rights group in the country. This group should not be confused with your local humane society, it's probably not affiliated and it's objectives are quite different. We should not be funding his operation.

 

"we" are not funding anything.

funds should go as she requested to the penny.

 

Here in Texas, every will I've seen (including my own), has a clause at the end that gives will-challengers $10 and a walk out the courtroom door.

However, that apparently doesn't prevent the disgruntled from mounting a legal challenge that will force an expensive response and hopefully a capitulation and go-away settlement.

I never could understand why a judge will even hear a case like this, providing the terms are spelled out clearly, properly executed, and the law supports them.

 

+1

 

exactly right

 

The Grandkids "deserve" exactly JACK$HIT!

If I want all of my money burned in the back yard then it should happen. Granted you could contain that fire in an ashtray but the point is still valid.