When Luke Perry, whose full name was Coy Luther Perry III, died on March 4, 2019, he was surrounded by family and loved ones. Tragically, the actor — who rose to fame playing a teenage heart-throb on Beverly Hills 90210 — died from a condition that almost everyone thinks of as one that only strikes “old” people. Fortunately, Perry’s foresight to do the proper estate planning meant that the tragedy was not made worse for his family.
At the young age of 52, Perry suffered a serious stroke and was hospitalized under heavy sedation. Five days later, his family made the decision to remove life support, after it was apparent that he would not recover, following a reported second stroke. He was surrounded by his children, 21-year-old Jack and 18-year-old Sophie, along with his fiancé, ex-wife, mother, and siblings, among others.
The decision to allow Perry to die – when he was healthy and vibrant less than a week earlier – must have been difficult. The fact that the hospital allowed Perry’s family to end life support means that Luke Perry likely had executed the proper legal documents so that his family could make the decision. Specifically, in California, those wishes generally are made in writing, through an Advance Directive or a Power of Attorney. Without a proper legal document, Luke Perry’s family may have needed an order from a probate court to terminate life support, at least if family members disagreed. That would have been a public and emotional process that would have prolonged his suffering and made it even harder for his family.In 2015, Perry reportedly created a will, leaving everything to his two children. Starting that year, Perry became an outspoken advocate for screening for colorectal cancer. He discovered he had precancerous growths following a colonoscopy and began urging others to do the same testing. According to a family friend, it was because of this scare that Perry created a will to protect his children.
Given that Luke Perry had a reported (but unverified) net worth of…
Danielle and Andy Mayoras are co-authors of Trial & Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!, television hosts and keynote speakers. You can find them on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn. Be sure to check out their new TV show, Fortune Fights, on the REELZ channel.
For legal help in Michigan or elsewhere, or to learn more about their law practice, visit Barron, Rosenberg, Mayoras & Mayoras.
[photo credit: Flickr]
At this year’s Oscars, Madonna publicly laid to rest her “feud” with Lady Gaga. While the former dispute between the two music superstars appeared to be little more than media chatter, Madonna has been through more than her fair share of true feuds, in court rooms spanning three continents.
And unlike Madonna’s disagreement with Lady Gaga, her other feuds involved real stakes — some with the lives of children on the line. Was Madonna also able to end those with a hug and a smile?
This is the fourth installment in our Fortune Fights series, based on the celebrity documentary television show, Fortune Fights, for which we serve as hosts, legal commentators and executive producers. New episodes air on the REELZ network Thursday nights at 9 pm et/pt. The next episode, Madonna: Fortune Fight, airs February 28th.
Madonna is no stranger to courtrooms. She famously married and divorced both Sean Penn and Guy Ritchie. While her split with Penn was resolved quickly and quietly based on a confidential prenuptial agreement, the Ritchie divorce was significantly more complicated.
Despite Madonna’s great success and wealth at the time, she surprisingly married Guy Ritchie without a prenuptial agreement. This led to a drawn-out divorce battle in England that ended with Madonna paying out around 60 million pounds — worth more than 90 million in U.S. dollars — to Ritchie in the property settlement.
Even though they finalized the divorce in 2008, Madonna and Ritchie continued fighting, spending a reported nine months in a courtroom battle over custody over their son, Rocco, in 2016. Ultimately, the judge allowed 16-year old Rocco choose which parent to live with, and he chose to reside primarily with Ritchie in London, rather than Madonna in New York (and other places).
And Madonna did not only have to contend with divorce issues. In 2012, she tussled with the Marlon Brando Estate over licensing issues when she wanted to continue using Brando’s image during concerts for her famous song, Vogue.
In 2016, Madonna won a key federal court of appeals ruling that determined the same song did not improperly infringe on another song, released in 1976, based on a similar horn blast that lasted all of a quarter of a second.
Most recently, Madonna was sued by her neighbors in a New York co-op apartment building who want the singer to pay for the extensive legal fees that Madonna’s three-year lawsuit against the co-op board caused. Madonna unsuccessfully sought a court order to change the rules at the complex so that her children and nannies would be allowed to stay there even if she was out of town on tour.
But Madonna’s biggest court fights came not in the United States or Europe, but in Africa. There, she was involved in three separate legal proceedings over her efforts to adopt children from the impoverished country of Malawi.
The first was completed relatively smoothly, as Madonna adopted son David Banda. Banda’s father consented to the adoption, although he later said in an interview that he did not understand what the adoption meant. He claimed that he thought Madonna would take David away to be educated, and then he would return home to work on his birth-father’s farm.
Madonna’s second adoption, for daughter Mercy James, was rejected in 2008, in large part because Madonna was not a resident of the African country. Madonna appealed the decision to Malawi’s Supreme Court and won a reversal, based on her established connections to the country, which included extensive charitable work.
Most recently, after publicly denying that she was in adopting more children in Malawi, in 2017 Madonna adopted twin girls, again from an orphanage after their father was unable to support them. As with the first adoption, the birth father of the twins complained to the media that he did not understand it and thought the arrangement was temporary, not permanent.
There can be no doubt that Madonna has given all four of the children a much more privileged and comfortable life than they would have had growing up in an orphanage in Africa. And her charitable works there have been notable, including raising a reported $7.5 million dollars to open a pediatric surgery and intensive care wing to a hospital in Malawi in 2017. Malawi’s President was so grateful he publicly proclaimed that the country was adopting Madonna as a daughter of the nation.
Yet some have questioned why a celebrity like Madonna was able to adopt the children, without ever residing in the country in apparent conflict with local laws, especially when birth parents were still alive. At times during her struggles to navigate the court system and complete the adoptions, Madonna was accused of being an unfit mother, someone who used fame and fortune to work the system, and even kidnapping. Yet she persevered and let nothing stand in her way.
For more on the Material Girl and her legal struggles, make sure to watch Madonna: Fortune Fight, on REELZ.
The Fortune Fights celebrity documentary series airs on the REELZ cable network, with new episodes airing Thursdays at 9 pm. In the series, Danielle and Andy Mayoras explore the legal ups and downs, and fortunes earned and lost, of stars like Johnny Depp, Madonna, Britney Spears, Robin Williams, Harrison Ford and others.
Danielle and Andy Mayoras are co-authors of Trial & Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!, television hosts and keynote speakers. You can find them on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn. Be sure to check out their new TV show, Fortune Fights, on the REELZ channel.
For legal help in Michigan or elsewhere, or to learn more about their law practice, visit Barron, Rosenberg, Mayoras & Mayoras.
[photo credit: Wikipedia]
Robin Williams, the iconic actor and comedian, had a razor-sharp wit that was second to none. But he also had a dark and troubled side to his personality that contributed to two divorces and other legal drama.
Perhaps learning a lesson from his own courtroom experiences, Williams took great care to prepare his will and trust to try to prevent his family from fighting after he passed away.
So why did his heirs still battle in court?
This is the third installment in our Fortune Fights series, based on the celebrity documentary television show, Fortune Fights, for which we serve as hosts, legal commentators and executive producers. New episodes air on the REELZ network Thursday nights at 9 pm et/pt.
Williams was survived by his third wife, Susan Schneider, and his three children from his two prior marriages. As if the tragedy of losing Robin Williams was not enough, after he died, the family courtroom battle started.
As is very common in families that have experienced multiple marriages, Williams’ children and widow did not see eye-to-eye after he was gone. Instead, Schneider waged a legal battle that lasted for months.
Robin Williams was no stranger to courtroom drama himself. His divorces cost him a reported $20 to $30 million. He famously said, “Ah yes, divorce, from the Latin work meaning ‘to rip out a man’s genitals through his wallet’.”
Even uglier than his divorces, in the late 1980s, Williams was sued for $6.2 million by a former lover who claimed that Williams knowingly infected her with the herpes virus. Williams counter-sued, contending that the woman’s claim was akin to legal blackmail because she asked for $20,000 and a new car to keep quiet. In 1992, on the eve of a trial that would have been potentially disastrous for the comedian’s career, he settled for a confidential amount.
Interestingly, this was just months before the Disney animated classic move, Aladdin, was released in theaters. Williams, of course, voiced the part of the famous Genie – agreeing to accept very little in terms of salary for the role, but with one big twist. Williams insisted on a clause in his contract that Disney could not use his voice or likeness to sell merchandise or for certain other marketing related to the film.
Robin Williams felt that Disney then betrayed him and violated the clause by using his voice for promotional purposes. While he never sued the family-friendly media giant, Williams did win a rare public apology from the studio. Disney executives had initially chastised Williams for using the issue to complain about his salary but later retracted the accusation, apologized, and admitted the company “may have been responsible”. Disney even gave Williams a valuable Picasso painting as a peace offering.
Clearly, as a veteran of legal wars, Robin Williams wanted to take no chances with his will and trust so that his family wouldn’t battle after he died. He and his third wife, Schneider, entered into a prenuptial agreement when they wed in 2011.
Then in 2012, Williams updated his revocable living trust to clarify that, consistent with the prenuptial agreement, Schneider could reside in the home they shared for the rest of her life and that his trust would pay for her expenses there. She was also allowed to keep the contents of the home and certain other possessions, but the majority of his belongings were directed to go to his three children, including his clothing, jewelry, memorabilia and awards in the entertainment industry.
Despite Robin Williams’ carefully-drafted trust, Schneider filed a petition with the court only a few months after Williams’ suicide. She claimed that the trustees would not set aside enough money to pay her living expenses and she objected to their attempts to inspect the contents of the home and remove items meant for the children. You can read more about the dispute in our article detailing the allegations.
The two sides went through a process called mediation – often employed with great success to settle family disputes over wills, trusts and estates. Luckily for everyone, cooler heads prevailed, and they reached a settlement.
Schneider released a statement about the settlement saying that the children received the vast majority of the items in dispute, but she was permitted to keep a few emotional items, such as their wedding gifts, select clothing items, a favored watch of Williams, and a bicycle. The statement pointed out that from the estate worth more than $100 million, Schneider received only a fraction of the estate’s value, in the form of funds sufficient to permit her to remain in the home for her lifetime.
If Williams hadn’t taken such care with his estate planning and prenuptial agreement, his heirs might still be battling today, which we’ve seen with many other celebrity estates. So while Williams wasn’t able to completely prevent a fortune fight, his careful planning did reduce the dispute to a minor squabble over personal property rather than an extensive and expensive battle with the potential to devastate the family.
Other families can learn from Robin Williams’ good planning to minimize family fighting, which is especially important when there are second marriages.
The Fortune Fights celebrity documentary series airs on the REELZ cable network, with new episodes airing Thursdays at 9 pm. In the series, Danielle and Andy Mayoras explore the legal ups and downs, and fortunes earned and lost, of stars like Johnny Depp, Madonna, Britney Spears, Robin Williams, Harrison Ford and others.
Danielle and Andy Mayoras are co-authors of Trial & Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!, television hosts and keynote speakers. You can find them on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn. Be sure to check out their new TV show, Fortune Fights, on the REELZ channel.
For legal help in Michigan or elsewhere, or to learn more about their law practice, visit Barron, Rosenberg, Mayoras & Mayoras.
[photo credit: Wikipedia]
Why are Casey Kasem’s wife and daughter accusing each other of killing the iconic American Top 40 Countdown host? Could either of them really have been responsible for his death?
And what did Casey Kasem’s doctors have to say about the controversy?
This is the second installment in our Fortune Fights series, based on the celebrity documentary television show, Fortune Fights, for which we serve as hosts, legal commentators and executive producers. New episodes air on the REELZ network Thursday nights at 9 pm et/pt.
Casey Kasem passed away in 2014 at age 82, with a host of medical problems including advanced Lewy Body dementia. His death came amidst a tragic story of a family feud that grew worse as Casey Kasem aged and now continues years after he died.
Kasem’s wife of more than 30 years, Jean Kasem, wasn’t exactly close with his three adult children from his first marriage. In fact, Casey’s daughter Kerri Kasem said during an interview with Howard Stern that Jean didn’t like her or her siblings since the time that Kerri was just nine years old.Jean has a different perspective. She told 48 Hours that the children were angry and upset with their father for marrying her.
Things really became ugly when Casey Kasem’s health deteriorated, especially during the last year of his life. Casey was a resident in a California nursing home, where he was sustained on a feeding tube. It was at that time, according to a letter from Casey Kasem’s doctor, that Jean Kasem decided to take matters into her own hands. Against doctor’s advice, and after being “informed of the risks of doing so … and placing Mr. Kasem in great bodily harm or possible demise,” Jean disconnected the feeding tube, removed him from the facility at 2:30 in the morning, and loaded him into an SUV.
Jean then drove off with Casey, not telling the rest of the family where she took him. In the 48 Hours interview, Jean said she moved Casey to protect him and leave the drama behind. She described how she had placed Casey into the facility under an assumed name, and once Casey’s daughters found out where he was and planned to file a new court proceeding, Jean decided to relocate her ailing husband.
Casey Kasem’s removal and disappearance prompted a nationwide manhunt, until he was located near Seattle, in the home of a childhood friend of Jean (after a reported stop-over in Las Vegas). Kerri Kasem had been appointed conservator by the court in California. She has to start a second court proceeding in Washington to see her father again and to have him evaluated by doctors.
When Kerri appeared with paramedics to retrieve her father, Jean hurled a pound of raw meat into the street, proclaiming to reporters, “In the name of King David, I threw a piece of raw meat into the street in exchange for my husband to the wild rabid dogs.”
By then, Casey Kasem was suffering terribly, according to Kerri and the doctors. Again, Jean tells another side of the story, supported by her friend, saying that Casey was doing well in the Washington home.
This prompted yet another court hearing. Ultimately, the judge gave permission to remove Casey from life support to end his suffering, over Jean’s objection. He was pronounced dead on June 15, 2014.
Instead of ending the fight, the dispute then took yet another bizarre turn. Kerri Kasem’s authority as conservator ended when her father died, which left Jean — as the closest next-of-kin — with legal authority to handle Casey’s burial. Kerri says that Casey had told many family members and friends that he wanted to be buried in the Forest Lawn Cemetery in Glendale California, close to where Casey and Jean had lived.
But Jean didn’t take his body home to be buried. Instead, Casey Kasem’s remains sat in the state of Washington for almost a month. Kerri returned to court, yet again, to obtain a restraining order to allow an autopsy be performed on the body. Kerri worried that Jean refused to return Casey’s body home to California to evade a criminal, elder abuse investigation involving Jean’s care of Casey.
Kerri’s legal team successfully obtained the restraining order. There was only one problem — they obtained it on July 15, 2014, but Jean had her husband’s body flown to Montreal the day before.
But that still didn’t end the travels. Jean Kasem then had Casey’s body flown to Oslo, Norway, where she finally had Casey Kasem buried. In the 48 Hours interview, Jean declined to provide her reason for the burial in Norway, citing the ongoing litigation.
Jean did say that she blamed Kerri Kasem for Casey’s death, even accusing Kerri of a long-term, premeditated plan to kill her father. She said that the children were motivated by money the whole time – a claim they hotly dispute. They, in turn, accuse Jean of causing Casey to die, particularly the decision to remove him from the California nursing home against doctors’ advice.
Not only is this a sad story, it’s far from over. Since the controversy over the body, the two sides have continued to battle in court over trusts and insurance policies. But the stakes have recently gotten even higher, as Casey’s children sued Jean for wrongful death and she counter-sued. The case is proceeding towards trial to determine if either side is legally responsible for Casey Kasem’s death.
This fortune fight illustrates how divisive and emotional intra-family conflicts can become, especially is second-marriage families. It highlights the importance of proper estate planning, including powers-of-attorney, wills, trusts, insurance, and funeral and burial planning.
Even with the best estate planning, fights like this can occur, but they are almost always more complicated, drawn-out and expensive when documents are changed late in life by someone suffering from health complications like dementia.
The Fortune Fights celebrity documentary series airs on the REELZ cable network, with new episodes airing Thursdays at 9 pm. In the series, Danielle and Andy Mayoras explore the legal ups and downs, and fortunes earned and lost, of stars like Johnny Depp, Madonna, Britney Spears, Robin Williams, Harrison Ford and others.
Danielle and Andy Mayoras are co-authors of Trial & Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!, television hosts and keynote speakers. You can find them on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn. Be sure to check out their new TV show, Fortune Fights, on the REELZ channel.
For legal help in Michigan or elsewhere, or to learn more about their law practice, visit Barron, Rosenberg, Mayoras & Mayoras.
While Johnny Depp is no stranger to the courtroom – having been involved in several different lawsuits in recent years – none have been as impactful or bitter as his ongoing feud with ex-wife Amber Heard. Did Johnny Depp abuse Amber Heard, both physically and psychologically? Or were the allegations faked by Heard, as Depp and his legal team still contend?
And can Depp recover from the blows to his career and his fortune from this and other lawsuits?
This is the first installment in our Fortune Fights series, based on the celebrity documentary television show, Fortune Fights, for which we serve as hosts, legal commentators and executive producers. New episodes air on the REELZ network Thursday nights at 9 pm eastern, starting January 31st, with the premiere episode Johnny Depp: Fortune Fight.
To call Johnny Depp generous after his split from the mother of his two children, Vanessa Paradis, would have been a gross understatement. Even though Depp and Paradis were never married, meaning that she had no viable claim to a share of Depp’s assets, he still gave her a reported $150 million after their 14-year relationship ended. According to reports at the time, this was approximately one-half of Depp’s net worth.The split in 2012 was amicable and free from courtroom drama. Perhaps Depp felt guilty about moving on from Paradis so quickly – dating his co-star from the movie, The Rum Diaries, Amber Heard in June of the same year. Or maybe it was because Paradis was the mother of two of his children and had helped guide his career into more lucrative movies, like the Pirates of the Caribbean films. Whatever the reason, he was not legally obligated to give her half of his fortune, but he chose to do so.
Just four years later, Depp’s divorce from Amber Heard played out much differently. Married in February of 2015, Depp and Heard’s marriage quickly crumbled shortly after an unfortunate legal incident in Australia led to the couple recording a now-infamous public service video for the country.
Heard filed for divorce in May, 2016, only fifteen months after the actors wed. Instead of an amicable parting, the divorce quickly spiraled out of control for both of them. Heard accused Depp of verbal and physical abuse, successfully obtaining a restraining order against Depp. She claimed that he “violently attacked” her and that she was forced to “live in fear that Johnny will return to the residence unannounced to terrorize me.” The court ordered Depp to stay at least 100 yards away from Heard.
Depp and his legal team responded aggressively. They not only denied the claims but alleged that Heard invented the allegations to secure a larger financial settlement from the divorce. Many rushed to Depp’s defense, including his his oldest daughter, his first ex-wife, and Paradis, who said that Heard’s claims were outrageous and that Depp never acted that way during the course of their relationship.
Photographs of Heard’s bruised face quickly surfaced through various media outlets, along with a video that Heard had taken that depicted Depp kicking and slamming cabinet doors in their apartment. Heard could be heard apologizing, until Depp noticed she was recording and grabbed the device. Other photographs and media reports suggested that Depp had, at one point, became so enraged that he accidentally cut off his own finger tip and then dipped it in paint so he could write a message on a mirror in the home alluding to Amber allegedly having an affair with actor Billy Bob Thornton.
Just as the ugliness was reaching its height, the couple reached an out-of-court settlement, for seven million dollars. Heard announced that she was donating the entire settlement to two charities. Seemingly, this settlement, which included a confidentiality clause and a mutual agreement not to disparage one another, ended the feud.
However, the fighting continued. When Depp did not pay Heard the seven-million dollars, her attorneys filed a motion in court asking a judge to order Depp to pay the funds to her. Depp’s own lawyers attacked Heard, seeking to impose sanctions against her for filing the motion and claiming that Heard’s request of the court was a “blatant attempt to extent her fifteen minutes of fame.” The legal teams fought over who should be able to take advantage of the tax deduction that would come with donating seven million dollars to charity. Eventually, Depp agreed to turn the money over to Heard.
Not long thereafter, Depp’s financial and legal woes intensified as he sued his former financial management company, claiming that they defrauded him out of tens of millions of dollars. The company counter-sued, and painted a picture of Depp as a wild spendthrift who wasted his earnings on a yacht, more than a dozen residences, private planes, and more. [You can read our article about this Johnny Depp legal fight here].
Since that fortune fight began in January of 2017, Depp has been very busy with lawsuits. And his fight with Amber Heard is far from finished.
A recent article in the Hollywood Reporter examined new records released from the divorce fight, including descriptive deposition testimony that included Heard explaining that she and Depp referred to the dark side of his personality as “the monster,” which was “present when he beats me up.” This and other testimony from the divorce is critical to a new lawsuit that Depp is involved with, in which he is suing British tabloid The Sun for defamation for publishing stories about the alleged abuse.
Depp and his legal team have contended, both in the lawsuit and in press interviews, that Heard faked the abuse allegations against him. They point to deposition testimony from police officers who responded to the scene, both of whom said they did not see marks or signs of injury to Heard, or shattered glass or broken items. Depp disputes the validity of Heard’s photographs and other evidence she relies on. He claims that she, not he, was the aggressor. An attorney for Johnny Depp also points to dozens of security camera video files that he says further document that Heard’s abuse claim was faked.
Heard, in turn, points to evidence supporting her claims, including deposition testimony of a friend of hers who came to the apartment and says she saw the evidence that the police officers testified they did not see. Further, Heard’s legal team alleges that Depp’s statements refuting the abuse claims themselves violate the divorce settlement agreement, which required confidentiality and prohibited either of them from making derogatory comments about the other. The same Hollywood Reporter article notes that Heard made an arbitration demand against Depp based on his alleged violation of their settlement agreement for these reasons.
So almost three years after their divorce began, Depp and Heard are still fighting publicly about whether or not the abuse allegations or true. You can judge for yourself who you think is telling the truth by watching the premiere episode of Fortune Fights on REELZ on January 31st.
But regardless of whom you believe, one thing is clear. This ugly dispute highlights the value of reaching a quick and quiet settlement to lawsuits over money. Both Depp and Heard appeared to be focusing on the bigger picture when they settled for seven-million dollars, all of which was to go to charity, less than three months after Heard filed for divorce. Doing so was smart at the time for both of them. It permitted them both to get on with their lives and attempt to restore the damage that both of their images and careers suffered. Hopefully this recent flare-up won’t change that.
The Fortune Fights celebrity documentary series airs on the REELZ cable network, with new episodes airing Thursdays at 9 pm. In the series, Danielle and Andy Mayoras explore the legal ups and downs, and fortunes earned and lost, of stars like Johnny Depp, Madonna, Britney Spears, Robin Williams, Harrison Ford and others.
Danielle and Andy Mayoras are co-authors of Trial & Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!, television hosts and keynote speakers. You can find them on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn. Be sure to check out their new TV show, Fortune Fights, on the REELZ channel.
For legal help in Michigan or elsewhere, or to learn more about their law practice, visit Barron, Rosenberg, Mayoras & Mayoras.
Unless you’re under the age of 35 or a fan of electronic dance music, you may have never heard of the Swedish musician, super DJ, and music producer, Avicii, although you likely heard his most popular song, “Wake Me Up,” playing at one point or another.
Avicii, whose real name was Tim Bergling, reached almost absurd levels of fame, success, wealth and adoration. Sadly, his success came a heavy cost of anxiety, depression, heavy alcoholism, and ultimately suicide. He was only 28 when he died from self-inflicted wounds from broken glass on April 20, 2018.
The Grammy-nominated artist enjoyed great financial success, regularly earning tens of millions of dollars per year and landing on many of Forbes highest earning lists, especially during his peak from 2014 through 2016. Celebrity Net Worth reported his net worth when he died to be around $50 million. His Hollywood Hills mansion sold for $17.5 million earlier this year. He signed lucrative endorsement deals with Volvo and Ralph Lauren.
Yet Avicii was never motivated by money. He said during an interview in 2013, “I discovered when I started making money that I didn’t really need it.” Instead, he turned towards charitable goals, saying, “When you have such an excess of money you don’t need, the most sensible, most human and completely obvious thing is to give to people in need.”
These weren’t just words to the famous DJ. In 2012, he embarked on a tour called “House for Hunger” and donated all of his income from the tour to the charity, Feeding America, to combat hunger. He added another $1 million afterwards, along with an additional one million euros to a Swedish “hunger aid” charity a year later. And these were just some of the publicly-reported gifts.
Given his wealth and how charitably-inclined Avicii was, it is surprising that he died without a will. Despite his young age of 28, Avicii could have followed suit of many other celebrity estate plans and used an estate plan to benefit charitable causes, like Mark Zuckerberg, Hugh Hefner, Philip Seymour Hoffman, and Leona Helmsley. Instead, under the probate laws of Sweden, his parents inherit all of his wealth. Avicii was not married and had no children.Is this want Avicii would have wanted? Perhaps. But given his charitable track record, it’s likely he would have preferred at least some of his fortune to combat hunger or advance other worthy causes. He also had two brothers and a sister that he may have wanted to provide for.
By not making out even a simple will before he died, his wishes for what happens with his fortune no longer matter, legally. Rather, his assets pass to his parents. The intestate laws of Sweden do not include siblings (because his parents are alive) or charities, even though Avicii may have wanted to include them.
What about taxes? Because Sweden does not have an estate or inheritance tax, Avicii’s parents will not have to pay a large tax bill, unlike if Avicii had been a United States citizen. But because he lived in California, his U.S. assets – including the Hollywood Hills home – may be subject to estate taxes. Any such taxes could have been minimized by good estate planning, especially considering Avicii’s charitable nature.
And therein lies the lesson. It doesn’t matter that Avicii was only 28 years old. No one is promised tomorrow. It’s not only “old” people that die. Anyone with assets should take the time to plan for what happens if they should die.
Estate planning often starts with a basic will, and for most twenty-somethings, that should be enough. People with greater wealth – even a small fraction of what Avicii earned – should work with an experienced estate planning attorney and create a revocable living trust, or use other more sophisticated planning measures.
Whether you want to leave money to charity, your parents, or anyone else, don’t want until “someday” to make out a will. Learn a lesson from Avicii’s mistake.
Danielle and Andy Mayoras are co-authors of Trial & Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!, television hosts and keynote speakers. You can find them on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn. Be sure to check out their new TV show, Fortune Fights, on the REELZ channel.
For legal help in Michigan or elsewhere, or to learn more about their law practice, visit Barron, Rosenberg, Mayoras & Mayoras.
[photo credit: Wikipedia]
After years of battling pancreatic cancer, the Queen of Soul, Aretha Franklin, died surrounded by family and friends on August 16, 2018. Despite the shocking reality that she died without a will or a trust, her family has banded together to quickly protect her estate. But there are unavoidable problems on the horizon because Aretha did not do the proper estate planning.
As the Detroit Free Press reported yesterday, Aretha Franklin died without a will or a trust. Her longtime entertainment attorney in Los Angeles, Don Wilson, told the Free Press that he “was after her for a number of years to do a trust.” Our review of the recent probate court filing confirms that Aretha died “intestate”, or without a will.
On August 21, 2018, one of Aretha’s four sons, Kecalf Franklin, along with a Detroit-area attorney who worked with Aretha for more than 40 years, filed the paperwork with the Oakland County Probate Court. While Aretha was a lifelong resident of Detroit, her death certificate lists Bloomfield Hills, a northern suburb, as her domicile. So her probate will be handled through Oakland County, not Wayne County, where Detroit is located.
Kecalf asked the court to appoint Aretha’s niece, Sabrina Garrett Owens, as the personal representative to administer the estate. Aretha’s three other sons consented to the appointment, including Clarence whose consent was provided by his court appointed guardian and conservator. According to LinkedIn, Owens is the Associate Director for Labor Relations at the University of Michigan.One of the key drawbacks to dying intestate, or without a will or trust, is that it makes the probate process much more difficult and prone to family fighting. This is particularly the case when there are children from different relationships and marriages, who may not see eye-to-eye. The fact that Aretha’s four sons could come together so quickly to appoint a trusted family member to act on behalf of the estate is a great sign that a family feud may not plague Aretha Franklin’s estate, as it has so many others.
In fact, the family met together, along with the attorney who filed the probate documents, on August 15th – the day before Aretha died. This enabled the process to begin very smoothly and quickly, avoiding the necessity of a public court hearing. Instead, the family was able to proceed with an informal application, meaning that it was processed without a court hearing or even review by the assigned Judge. Informal proceedings can only happen in intestate cases under Michigan law if all of the interested persons agree to it. So the early family harmony is critical to a smoother, and less public, process.
The big question will be whether the family can continue to agree as the Estate administration begins. Under Michigan law, all four of Aretha’s children are equal beneficiaries to the Estate. But, they do not have an equal say on how the Estate is administered. To the contrary, Owens now has all decision making power. She can solicit input from Aretha’s sons if she wants to, but the decisions are hers to make, and hers alone.
Those decisions will be very difficult. How are Aretha’s many royalties to be managed? What should be done about the expected numerous offers for sanctioned movies, documentaries, books and specials about Aretha’s life? Should Aretha’s songs be used for commercials? Should her image be licensed to sell products? What about an onstage hologram as some others — most famously, Tupac Shukar, have done?
And managing the estate estate itself will be very challenging. In addition to marshaling all of Aretha’s assets and paying off her creditors, the IRS awaits. In fifteen months after Aretha’s death, her estate has to file an estate tax return to allow the IRS to determine how much will be owed in estate taxes. As we’ve seen with Michael Jackson’s Estate, and will soon be happening with Prince’s Estate, there could be a major battle over how to value Aretha’s publicity rights.
There are some unconfirmed estimates that Aretha’s net worth was around $80 million, but this figure could be wildly off-base. The state of her finances will be difficult to sort out with so many assets, and rumors of debt. Certainly, as we’ve seen with other late entertainers, the value of her music, performances, and publicity rights could skyrocket after her death, if prudently managed.
And then there’s the issue of distributions. How much should be given to the four sons, and when? If Aretha had created a trust, either a living trust or a testamentary trust through a will, then she could have set out how she wanted the assets to pass — not only to whom, but when and under certain conditions. Are all four of her children capable of inheriting vast sums of wealth in a lump sum? Will this make them susceptible to attracting unsavory types who could cause them harm? You need only to look at the tragedy that happened to Whitney Houston’s daughter, Bobbi Kristina Brown, to see what could happen.
Under Michigan law, a personal representative does not have the right to delay distributions to protect a beneficiary who cannot handle funds. If a beneficiary has a guardian or conservator, as Aretha’s son Clarence does, then the conservator will handle the funds and the risk of harm is not present. But what about the other three sons who are legally competent? Would Aretha have wanted them to receive millions of dollars in lump sums, rather than managed for their benefit over time?
Because Aretha Franklin did not have a will or trust, her wishes about what happens to her assets do not matter, legally. Indeed, her wishes for how her legacy is managed don’t control either. Instead, Sabrina Garrett Owens will make these decisions. It’s a big job, and one that will potentially subject her to second-guessing, legal challenges, and objections. The Prince estate has seen more than its share of fighting on this very issue, and that’s with a professional bank with an experienced trust department in charge.
Hopefully the beginning of Aretha Franklin’s Estate is a preview of good things to come. But with so much at stake, and so many complications on the horizon, it is a lot to expect the family not to fight at some point. If Aretha had done proper estate planning, with a well-drafted will and trust, then the chances of a family feud would have been greatly diminished.
Danielle and Andy Mayoras are co-authors of Trial & Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!, television hosts and keynote speakers. You can find them on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn. Be sure to check out their new TV show, Fortune Fights, on the REELZ channel.
For legal help in Michigan or elsewhere, or to learn more about their law practice, visit Barron, Rosenberg, Mayoras & Mayoras.
[photo credit: Wikipedia]