This week’s entry discusses a recent decision from the Southern District of New York in which the plaintiff asserted he was the son of John F. Kennedy and Marilyn Monroe, and sought to compel distributions from the late president’s testamentary trust. Especially relevant to the trusts and estates litigator is the discussion of the probate exception to federal diversity jurisdiction.
Continue Reading Ask not what your Trustees can do for you…
This week’s post informs readers of the recent New York County Surrogate’s Court decision regarding whether the trustees of Leona Helmsley’s charitable trust must actually use its funds for the care and welfare of dogs.
Continue Reading A Sop For Cerberus
A recent decision from the Westchester County Surrogate’s Court, Edelman v Hatami is an entertaining read. The decision addresses the Statute of Frauds, and provides a good example of how litigants will attempt to employ the equitable doctrines of promissory estoppel and constructive trust in estate litigation.
In Edelman the defendant sought recovery against a decedent’s
If you don’t like dog puns, you might want to stop reading now.
Hotelier and real estate magnate Leona Helmsley loved dogs and she made no bones about it. Leona Helmsley left $12 million in her will in trust for her dog, Trouble. And, although Surrogate Renee Roth reduced the trust to $2 million, that amount should still be sufficient for Trouble to live, well, a dog’s life for her remaining years. (After all, Trouble’s annual living expenses have been estimated at only $180,000.)
The amount of the Trouble Trust, however, pales in comparison to the full amount of the charitable trust Mrs. Helmsley created — valued at between $5 billion and $8 billion. In a two page “mission statement,” Mrs. Helmsley expressed her desire that the money be used for the care and welfare of dogs. (Actually, it has been reported that she initially stated that the money should go to poor people and dogs, but she later turned tail on poor people, dropping them from the list.)