Tupac’s Estate

Wednesday, 06 March 2013 14:03
Written by
0 Comments

Rapper Tupac Shakur was killed in 1996.   His estate has released 6 posthumous albums and authorized a hologram likeness of him to perform at last year’s  Coachella Music Festival.  Now, his mother has turned over management of his estate to a new group of managers who have worked with the estates of other artists such as Janis Joplin, Otis Redding, and Henry Mancini.

The new managers have thankfully ruled our a hologram tour, but are considering the use of his music in a Pink Floyd-esque laser light show.   Yawn.  Almost everything Tupac recorded has been released in the past 16 years and only snippets of recordings remain in the vault.  Nonetheless, his mother stated of the management change , “I believe it is our responsibility to make sure that Tupac’s entire body of work is made available for his fans.”  Translation:  it is her desire to make as much money as possible off her son’s music.

Someone Will Cry, Cry, Cry

Friday, 01 March 2013 13:32
Written by
0 Comments

It has been a busy month for the James Brown estate.  First a federal court rejected the attempt of his former manager to insert herself into his estate affairs.  Now, the South Carolina Supreme Court has rejected a settlement regarding the division of his estate that was brokered by the SC Attorney General and said that the estate must be distributed per Mr. Brown’s will (i.e. most to the trust for its charitable beneficiaries).

Quick facts.  The Godfather of Soul left most of his estate to a trust for the education of needy children.  His relatives asked the probate court to remove the trustees of the trust after the trust assets dissipated to almost nothing.  I suspect that they also challenged the terms of his will.  The SC Attorney General (on behalf of the trust) convinced the parties to settle the dispute with  the trust receiving half of the assets, Brown’s widow 1/4, his adult children the final 1/4 and the trustees replaced by other trustees who made lucrative licensing deals for the trust.

Several points:

1.   The SC Supreme Court is correct – the terms of the will should be followed.  Estates are not like other business deals or disputes where the intent of the deceased can be negotiated.  The intent as expressed in the will must be followed.  Otherwise, people would not have confidence in making wills or leaving assets to charity.

2.  The settlement does seem to have been beneficial to the estate because the new trustees were able to increase its value from near zero to somewhere between $5 million and $100 million (nice specificity on that).

3.    The estate owed $20 million to a bank borrowed for a European tour.  Apparently lunacy in the lending markets in 2006 was not confined only to the sub-prime housing market.

When Dad Is Accused of Murder

Wednesday, 27 February 2013 14:35
Written by
0 Comments

A Rhode Island man was accused of drowning his wife.  His conviction in the British Virgin Islands was later overturned.  However, his wife’s parents sued him for wrongful death and won a $2.8 million judgment against him.  The man was the designated beneficiary of his wife’s will.  His children from a prior relationship were the contingent beneficiaries.

After the wrongful death judgment, the estate executor sought to have the man removed as a beneficiary of his wife’s will under the RI Slayer Statute.  The executor also sought to have the man’s children removed as beneficiaries under the theory that they should not benefit from the misdeeds of their father.

The RI Supreme Court recently upheld a ruling against the children which prohibits them from inheriting under their step-mother’s will.   One of the rationales in the decision is that the children continued to maintain their father’s innocence and said they would use the assets to defend him.

Several points:

1.  I think the  court is wrong.   The children were specifically listed as beneficiaries if their father were to pre-decease them (or allegedly kill his wife).     As such, they are not “inheriting through him” which is prohibited under RI law.

2.  Is it me, or does it seem that anytime a female US citizen drowns in a foreign country that a murder allegation arises against the husband?  You will not see me swimming outside the US.

3.  If your father allegedly murders someone and you will benefit from his misdeed, do not tell people you will spend the inheritance on his defense. Keep your mouth shut and spend the money quietly.

 

Mindy McCready’s Children

Sunday, 24 February 2013 17:10
Written by
0 Comments

In the aftermath of Mindy McCready’s suicide, a key legal question is who will receive custody of her children – six year old Zander and   10 month old Zayne?  The issue is complicated by Zayne’s father pre-deceasing Mindy last month while Zander’s father, Billy McKnight, lost custody of him years ago.

When there is a surviving parent, a court will usually award custody to the surviving biological parent.  When there is no surviving parent, a court will generally award custody to the person designated in the deceased’s will.  I have not read anything indicating whether Ms. McCready left a will, although I doubt a woman living in a garbage and feces strewn house would provide for her post-death affairs.  Here, the commentariat believes that Ms. McCready’s mother and step-father will receive custody of both boys.  I wish them all luck, love, and peace moving forward.  They all deserve it after the tumult in their lives.

This news should serve as a reminder for everyone to prepare a will so that their wishes for the custody of children post-death are not left to chance.

The Morning Line

Tuesday, 19 February 2013 15:05
Written by
0 Comments

Paul Daugherty graciously allowed me to guest write his blog this morning.  Link is here.