Home | Legal | Legal Advice

Could Michael Jackson's Will be a Setup?

By: Berber

Read More About Legal Advice

Michael Jackson's will almost certainly has mistakes. Look, the attorneys are charging big bucks, and the family is already in court even though a family trust was in place. Jackson's mother was named as primary guardian and Diana Ross as secondary guardian is all that we know at this point. In 2002, Jackson made a will that named his attorney John Branca, whom he fired in 2006, and John McClain, an old friend, as his executors. Rumor has it that the will gives pieces of his estate to his mother, his children, and charities, but he also has a family trust, and that may take priority. The word is that by the terms of the will, the whole estate pours into his family trust. There are some obvious problems with the will and the way his estate was planned.

It isn't necessary for you to make the same mistakes it looks like Jackson has made, even though you are in a more modest financial position.
Naming your attorney executor of your estate is the first mistake to avoid. Although your lawyer may be your trusted consultant, do not appoint him as your executor. It's nearly malpractice for the attorney that drafts the will to appoint himself as executor. Funny things start to happen with no contest. It took a long time for the attorney to come forth with Jackson's will. Why? Jackson's mother's lawyer, Burt Levitch is noticeably aggravated that he started a proceeding for custody of the children on behalf of Katherine Jackson, and then a will appeared. Clearly, Mr. Branca had to realize the will needed to come forth. A lawyer doesn't draw up a will for the likes of Michael Jackson and put it in the files and forget about it.

The second mistake to avoid is the guardian problem.Michael Jackson's will did not have stipulations placed on the guardians he appointed.The will simply states that his mother is first choice as guardian, and Diana Ross is second choice. The lawyer, Mr. Branca, should have made the will so that Jackson's mother was his first choice provided she had good health or provided that she was under a certain age. Restrictive provisions limiting Diana Ross' selection as guardian could also have been outlined so that if the will dropped to the second choice of guardian, things would be as Jackson wished. For example, Diana Ross is to be guardian provided she raises the children in Neverland, or provided she raises the children in a certain religion, or sends them to a specific school, or keeps them out of the public eye. The possibilities go on indefinitely. When you draft your will, choose the provisos that are truly important; don't get carried away with the possibilities.

In Guaranteed Millionaire, my latest book, I go through the variations so you can understand and make a wise choice of provisions.

As a final point, you can basically never totally remove a child's biological mother from the picture, and that is true in the case of Michael Jackson. Debbie Rowe is the biological mother of two of the children, and the third child, Prince Michael II (Blanket) was born to a surrogate mother. The surrogate mother indisputably relinquished all of her rights to Prince Michael II per the surrogacy contract.However, it is almost impossible to remove a biological mother from the picture if she wants to be involved. Michael Jackson and Debbie Rowe formally divorced in 1999, but it wasn't until much later that they worked out custody terms for their children. The terms of the divorce were not released, so we don't know the details about their custody agreement. Michael Jackson had the children in his custody from 2006 until his death. Not having custody does not remove Debbie's rights to her children.

Debbie could obtain custody of her biological children and possibly Prince Michael II if she tries to press her parental rights in court, but it is questionable whether she will try.

If you are in a situation where there is an ex-spouse that might obtain appointment of guardianship over the children, and you don't want that ex-spouse to get custody, you need to draft your will's guardianship provisions very carefully.Despite the fact that you have a will naming other guardians, in a court battle your ex-spouse has an excellent chance of getting custody over the biological children. It is important to educate the judge who will be making the ruling the reasons why the ex-spouse is truly not fit to have custody over the children. That education should be included in your will. Sensitively clarify the reasons why you think the ex-spouse should not be named as guardian in your will. If you are vindictive, you will probably lose. "Just stick to the facts," as Joe Friday from TV's Dragnet said.

My next article will address other problems that arise in Michael Jackson's will, but the courts are most interested in the issue of the children's guardian right now.

Lee R. Phillips is an asset protection lawyer and author of 19 books, including a Time Warner Book-of-the-Month Club. Guaranteed Millionaire is his latest book. For a limited time, get a 25% discount on it at www.Phillip

Article Source: http://depositarticles.com/

Living Revocable Trusts Online is an information site aimed at helping prepare you and your family for the future through creating a usable living revocable trust.

Please Rate this Article

 

Not yet Rated

Click the XML Icon Above to Receive Legal Advice Articles Via RSS!
Additional Articles From - Home | Legal | Legal Advice
Sign Up for a free account.
Our other websites
All about SEO
Beauty Tips Forum
Submit Articles
Member Login
Link Us
Submission Guidelines
Ezine Notifications
Article RSS Feeds
Sitemap
New Stuff
About Us
Developer
Good shopping portal
Link to Us
Contact Us
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service

counter easy hit

Powered by Article Dashboard