Michael Jackson’s family is grasping at straws if they think they “have something” on Michael’s executor, John Branca.
According to reports today, the family — egged on by none other than Jackson hanger-on Brian Oxman — thinks they’re going to oust Branca on some kind of technicality. Oxman claims he has some “smoking gun” about Branca being fired by Jackson in 1990 — only to be rehired three years later. In 2006, after over 25 years on and off, Branca and Michael parted company. A week before Michael died, he rehired Branca.
The irony here will be that Brian Oxman is involved. Oxman, who used to doze off in open court — I mean, snore — during Michael’s criminal trial in 2005, was fired by lead defense attorney Thomas Mesereau. Oxman’s entire connection to Michael was that he represented Randy Jackson when his brother, Jermaine, conducted a takeover of his wife and kids. Oxman was Randy’s divorce attorney. He has hung on to his slim attachment to Michael ever since, sort of the way Harold Lloyd famously hung from the clock in the movie, “Safety Last.”
The Jackson family’s constant attacks on Branca are laughable, and ironic. It was Branca who engineered the purchase of ATV Music aka the Beatles catalog for Michael in the 1980s. After his brief absence, it was Branca again who merged ATV Music with Sony’s music publishing company, got Michael $90 million, and set him up for life. Without that deal, Jackson would have been destitute — and so would the Jackson family as they lived off of Michael’s largesse.
Indeed, it was only during the times that Michael was separated from Branca that he got into real trouble. And it was a stroke of luck that Michael returned to Branca this past spring. Otherwise, Jackson’s children’s interests could have been left in the hands of far more disreputable types — not naming names here — whose interests were purely self-centered.
October 2nd, 2009 at 10:15 am
Roger – I’m perfectly willing to believe that John Branca is the greatest lawyer in the hemisphere. I even believe that it was Michael Jackson’s intention to retain him as an executor of his estate.
But if he’s that terrific, why are the names of the Jackson children wrong in the will drawn up by Branca’s firm? Seems to me that with an estate estimated at the time as half a billion dollars, someone would have made sure of the correct names of the heirs. How could such an important detail slip by?
October 2nd, 2009 at 10:19 am
John Branca is a man of class and honor. Having had the great pleasure to work at the firm as a legal assistant years ago, when Mr. Branca represented Mr. Jackson, I will say he handled everything in the utmost confidence and professionalism. Not to mention he is VERY handsome, makes all the ladies blush, has exquisite taste, the office is amazing. He is a brilliant attorney, and any celebrity who can have him as their attorney knows they’ve made it, and are in the best hands possible. There are maybe 10 attorneys in entertainment that can match John Branca.
The Jackson camp are embarrassing themselves and Michael’s memory already, with ANOTHER CLAIM of “something.” Michael and the public need for this to be over, move on, stop pointing fingers, John Branca is a great man, and Michael’s memory does not deserve this.
October 2nd, 2009 at 10:26 am
Isn’t it better to ask John Branca that question?
October 2nd, 2009 at 10:46 am
Sad to say. But Mr Friedman is right on every single point.
I pray Michael’s kids won’t be caught up in the money war that will be going one in the Jackson Family. They did not care enough to help MJ deal with his problems (in fact, he cut ties with his family)…but now they all want to get their hands on his money. i hope Branca will not be discouraged…for Michael’s children sake. Be strong Mr Branca. And Mr. McClain. You are the last hope for MJ’s children.
October 2nd, 2009 at 11:58 am
seems like everything this website says is against the jackson family michael had alot of insecurities but the one constant was his mother and for this site and people to keep demeaning the jackson’s when you no absolutely nothing about them is wrong every family has problems and their’s is no exception if there wasn’t money involved here you people wouldn’t even care my prayers are with the jackson family stay strong.
October 2nd, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Roger Friedman, you nailed it again. Without Branca, Michael most certainly would have been destitute, like so many other junkies. His family needs to do what he’s always done with them, keep out of his business.
October 2nd, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Roger –
It wasn’t a stroke of luck that Michael re-hired Branca 8 days before he died. It was God watching over him – something he EARNED through his good works here on earth.
October 2nd, 2009 at 12:13 pm
read this about the jackson,and you just know 411 is riad about the jackson.
http://www.mpjjacksonrevelation.com/
met vrienderlijke groet Mocienne
October 2nd, 2009 at 2:04 pm
I agree with you Mr. Freidman the attempts by the Jackson family to oust Mr. Branca are so laughable. Michael had the good sense to choose Mr. Branca (one person that has shown true loyalty to Michael over the years) to oversee his estate, because he knew that he would do what was best for his children. Mr. Branca provided very solid advise to Michael over the years. Michael even had that clause put in the will that would have Katherine’s 40% forfeited if it was contested. I still shake my head at the judge’s decision to let Katherine’s team have her day in court on that matter.
Bottomline, no one in the Jackson family should have anything to do with administering Michael’s estate (can see Jermaine now walking around in his gold suit). For god’s sake Jackson family you lived off him for too long, Michael loved you regardless of your greed, respect his wishes as outlined in his will, at least for the sake of his children.
Re: Simba comment; will in 2002 was not drawn up by Branca’s firm, he saw it as it was a conflict of interst and it was drawn up by another firm.
Re: BNS – I so so agree.
October 2nd, 2009 at 3:37 pm
u guys are full of shit
October 2nd, 2009 at 9:24 pm
Roger, I totally agree!! the jacksons (minus MJ’s 3 kids) are just despicable with their greed! I hope Branca & Co will continue to work on behalf of Michael’s kids. It will be so unfortunate for the jacksons to get control of Michael’s estate.
October 2nd, 2009 at 10:53 pm
The question is who will look after MJ’s fortune once the probate time runs ut. Who will have the power to name the administrators then? Katherine and the children’s rep? That doesn’t seem right, since I suppose at least Katherine Jackson only benefits from interest of 40% of the estate, she won’t have access to the trust fund itself (fortunately). I suppose there’s a clause in the will at some point giving the children full control, maybe at age 25 or so?
October 3rd, 2009 at 12:52 am
Nick…
“like all other junkies”??? What hell does that mean?? No drugs found in Michaels system besides the sedatives and propofol given to Michael by Dr. Dumbass. No pills no 80 Xanax pills per day no pot or even traces of it nor alcohol. No evidence of long term Rx mess at all. Where do you stand now unless you want to argue with medical report. Nice try Nick but sorry, the MJ drug addict theory has been blown out of the water. Get over it!
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:04 am
According to his sister Latoya, MJ did “cleanse” in England to prepare for the 50 concerts. Apart from sleeping and anxiety meds (which are not all that good but not unusual), he seems to have succeeded – and then, in came the propofol.
October 3rd, 2009 at 6:56 am
Roger, aren’t you being a little dramatic here? First of all, Branca and McClain were named in the will as executors. They would have been the legal executors whether or not MJ had recently reretained Branca on separate legal issues. The two are just not related!
Secondly, I don’t understand the venom a lot of people are expressing towards Michael’s family. Then again, it was only a few months ago that most people were expressing the same kind of venom towards Michael, calling him a child molester, Wacko Jacko among other things. Now he’s supposed to be some kind of saint but his family are evil. People are complex, no one is all good or all bad. And the fact is that if Michael really had been a child molestor and was convicted, I doubt most of the fans and journalists would still support him, unless they believed he was innocent but I’m sure his family would, even if they thought he was guilty, that’s just what families do.
Just remember that everything you hear in the media is not necessarily true, even if it’s widely reported. Don’t just jump on bandwagons because everyone else is doing it.
October 3rd, 2009 at 7:19 am
Thanks for keeping us up to date Roger.
The Jackson family should be extatic that they get 40% of MJs money through Katherine. The kids should get all 80%!
October 3rd, 2009 at 8:34 am
axon – I would love to hear from John Branca’s lips why the names are wrong in MJ’s will. But I don’t think he feels the need to explain himself in this forum.
Roger, and others, have maintained that Branca is brilliant, far more qualified than Katherine or any of the other Jacksons to administer MJ’s estate. So maybe he can put forth a plausible explanation for the mistakes.
Since most of the verbiage in any will is boilerplate, and the details of the disposition of the estate are in the trust documents, it’s likely that the will was actually drawn up by an associate, or even a paralegal. If that was the case, then all the more reason it should have been carefully reviewed, considering that MJ had two sons known as “Prince”. (And possibly a third!) That’s what a good lawyer would do, let alone a great one.
October 3rd, 2009 at 8:45 am
Well, Branca is renown for his skills in the music business and has been for decades, whereas the Jackson family is not. Last year, several of them did not very lucrative jobs unpacking groceries or working as car mechanics. Nothing wrong with that – on the contrary – but it doesn’t really scream out brilliant businessmen.
I don’t know about the misspellings, I can only say that either the will is false or genuine, an intelligent man like Branca would get the spelling right, so if you are right, it sounds like typos and doesn’t point in any specific direction.
If there were a later will, it would have been deposited with someone other than Branca, and it would have surfaced on June 26.
October 3rd, 2009 at 9:16 am
axon – the names aren’t misspelled. They’re wrong. In the will, they are listed as PRINCE MICHAEL JACKSON, JR., PARIS MICHAEL KATHERINE JACKSON and PRINCE MICHAEL
JOSEPH JACKSON,II.
But the oldest acknowledged son is actually named Michael Joseph Jackson, Jr. Prince is a nickname. The youngest son is Prince Michael Jackson II. Joseph is not in his name at all. Paris’ first name is Paris-Michael – admittedly a minor difference, but that’s why we have lawyers and courts, to parse the minor differences. Typos are just plain not acceptable in a will disposing of half a billion dollars.
It’s interesting that the lesser Jacksons are characterized as greedy and lazy by the same critics (not you, axon) who deride them for doing honest work in modest jobs.
October 3rd, 2009 at 11:19 am
Simba – (are you a lioness?
) – where do you find the exact names? Of course they should be correct in all legal documents. I always believed both boys were named Prince?
October 3rd, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Since the judge is pushing them to settle, hopefully it will all work out. I personally would not want two strangers having complete control of my child’s estate. Sharing the role, yes but not having the whole say. At least the judge is letting them know they still have to get Katherine’s approval on everything and that’s good.
Branca seems to be the only one fighting this so it makes me wonder. John McClane has not come out strongly against anything. He was a childhood friend of Micheal since they were 10 and considers Katherine like a mother. So what’s the real deal with Branca who had allegedly had conflicting interests when he represented Michael before. The more he protests the more he looks like he’s money hungry because it’s not like he is being an executor for free. He gets a pretty big cut and doesn’t want to share. He’s not fooling anyone.
October 3rd, 2009 at 1:27 pm
Ingrid, I think you are speculating. Being close to the family is maybe not all that good. If someone has a weak spot for Katherine, they might listen to her even if her opinions on business are bad, to the detriment of the estate and the children.
I don’t think Branca needs MJ’s money. We are not talking a cheap attorney from a storefront office here. Branca had made many successful multimillion dollar deals, being the top of the trade. The estate is probably lucky to have him.
October 3rd, 2009 at 2:53 pm
Unfortunately the entire Jackson family is being characterized in this item when it most probably it only part of the family trying to gain control of the estate away from the executor. There seems to have been a constant need by this father to control the lives and careers of his children even after they’d become adults. I think he is the one under the guise of Katherine’s name is moving to try and move against the executors and the expressed desire in the will by his son. Michael Jackson went to extreme lengths to leave his family out of his business decisions.
And just for the record the executors cannot get rich without benefiting the estate nine fold over whatever amount they make. What might be behind all of this is instructions in the trust which say on Katherine’s death her inheritance cannot be passed on to anyone else. Her inheritance would revert back to Michael’s children and any family members currently living off whatever Katherine gives them of her portion of Michael’s money would be out of luck forever.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:05 pm
So if Katherine can’t pass on the money to other family members after her death, those of the family who wants Michael’s money (I agree some of the family members probably are taking care of themselves, for instance Rebbie) must get it now. If that is her situation, it’s terrible.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:20 pm
axon – the Jackson children’s birth certificates have been posted online. (Evidently birth records are public in California.) I thought both boys were named Prince, too.
“I don’t think Branca needs MJ’s money. We are not talking a cheap attorney from a storefront office here. Branca had made many successful multimillion dollar deals, being the top of the trade. The estate is probably lucky to have him.”
The executors are paid a percentage, off the top, for their services, even before the debts are paid. The estate is estimated to earn in the neighborhood of $200 million before the year is out. This means that Branca and McClain have realized millions in fees already.
Meanwhile Katherine Jackson and the children are receiving an allowance which is generous on its face, but a pittance compared to what the lawyers are getting. And it’s their money.
The best lawyers in the country would wrestle each other to the ground in their custom-tailored suits for what Branca and McClain are getting. It’s been my experience that “not needing” that kind of money is a foreign concept to members of the legal profession – and just about everybody else in the world!
October 3rd, 2009 at 10:24 pm
Simba – I see what you mean. A Jackson as an added executor would mean he or she would take home percentage of the income (even without really contributing any good money making ideas). But at the end of the probate time, that surely will be taken care of anyway, won’t it? And MJ didn’t want a family member as executor. He wanted these two. They get things done.
Even in the future, the family will need administrators, brilliant people running the estate, because they cant do it themselves. Those persons will earn the money Branca and McClain (sp) are making now.
October 4th, 2009 at 1:10 am
Py – Xanax is a sedative, dumbass. They’re trying to make Michael look like he’s healthy because they lied on the insurance.
Thank God Michael rehired Branca at the 11th hour. His estate is in good hands – away from the grubby paws of his family.
October 4th, 2009 at 6:15 am
When Michael was alive, he supported his family through his mother. There was no limit to the funds she was able to pass to family members because all she had to do was ask Michael and she got whatever she asked. Michael didn’t question her requests. If she asked, she got.
Now there are a few problems for those siblings who depended upon money from mom:
1. The estate has her on an allowance – an allowance for herself and an allowance for the kids. In other words, when the monthly allowance runs out, there is no more. There is plenty enough for her and for the kids, but maybe not for the suckling siblings. So it is probable that she has had to say no to some of her kids.
2. If Katherine wants to go beyond the allowance she needs to ask the executors. They will, in turn, want explanations for the requests and she will have to spend the money on specific things.
3. Even the allowance money needs to be spent on specific things and not to fulfill the sucklings requests. This loss of control will not be pleasant for her or the sucklings.
4. The court has appointed an attorney to represent the kids. This attorney can see to it that the money is spent correctly and that the sucklings do not overly benefit from the expenditures.
And while we are speaking of the sucklings – we know Michael was in debt and we know he spent his own money quite freely. However, has anyone in the media given any thought as to how much of Michael’s debt was due to the fact that he supported his mother and at least 3, 4, maybe 5 or more sucklings —- AND some of the children of those sucklings??? How many children did Michael support that we know of? His own three, two of Jermaine’s, and two of Randy’s – plus the wife that Jermaine and Randy shared??? That alone if 5 extra people to whom we add, Mom and whatever money she asked for.
Now Mom is on an allowance which will completely disappear at her death. Can you know connect with the utter panic the sucklings feel at this point????
October 4th, 2009 at 6:42 am
Hi All,
When it comes to probate law it’s important to understand that each state’s laws are different. Hopefully I can answer some of your questions. I am providing this posting for informational purposes only.
1) When it comes to the Estate of Michael Jackson it is important to note that while Mr. Branca is an attorney by trade, his role in the Estate of Michael Jackson is that of CO-executor, NOT attorney. Howard Weitzman is the current attorney for the estate which Mr. Branca and Mr. McClain represent.
Not all executors are paid for their services. However, here in California, even if the Will did not specifically provide for compensation, the executor(s) would be entitled to it. BUT in California neither the executor(s) – John Branca & John McClain – nor the estate lawyer – Howard Weitzman – can get paid A PENNY before the Court approves the amount to be paid (California has “statutory compensation”, which is a fixed percentage of the value of the estate – so even though the executor is entitled to this money, they cannot take it unless/until the Court says it’s okay to pay himself/herself.)
Generally speaking, it is common practice for those of significant means to appoint an attorney, law firm, or bank to administer their estate. (This is especially true in substantial estates when minor children are – or may be – involved.)
Understand that overseeing an estate the size of Mr. Jackson’s in a full-time job. It’s akin to being a CEO of a Multinational corporation. MOST people are not qualified to hold such a position. And the appointment of Mr. Branca and Mr. McClain by Mr. Jackson as CO-executors to his estate was a truly sagacious move on his part.
Mr. Jackson left his estate to The Michael Jackson Family Trust. As we all know by now, Mr. Jackson named his mother, his children, and to-be-determined charities as Beneficiaries. As Beneficiaries Katherine Jackson and Mr. Jackson’s children are separate entities. Both Katherine Jackson and the children (via their Court appointed attorney) are entitled by law to be informed of any deals Mr. Branca and Mr. McClain enter into on behalf of the estate. If for any reason Katherine Jackson and/or the children’s attorney have concerns over a particular deal they may challenge the deal in Court. Make no mistake, as CO-executors, Mr. Branca and Mr. McClain drive the train until/unless the court rules otherwise.
2) All this talk about the names of Mr. Jackson’s children not matching those listed on their Birth Certificates is a non-issue. There is no question of whom Mr. Jackson designated as his legal heirs. More often than not (and I see this in my practice everyday) people will use accepted common or known names that do not match a parties birth certificates for a variety of reasons. (For example: Tom Doe may draw up a Last Will and Testament leaving his estate to his son Jack Doe. Jack’s legal name may be John Doe but he is commonly known as Jack.) Mr. Jackson has always referred to his eldest son as “Prince.” Remember, Mr. Jackson was the one responsible for providing the names of his children to the attorneys and he signed-off on how they appear in the Will.
3) Given of all the talk of possible illegitimate children of Mr. Jackson some of you may find it interesting that on page one (I), section one(I), of his Will Mr. Jackson states that he has no other living or deceased children. Standard Estate language. Then on page three (III), section four (IV) is the clause: “EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS WILL OR IN THE TRUST REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE III HEREOF, I HAVE INTENTIONALLY OMITTED TO PROVIDE FOR MY HEIRS.” This too is standard language, however it is significant. In layperson terms this means if Mr. Jackson did not SPECIFICALLY name you in his Will or in his Trust you get nothing. Period. This applies to other children, siblings, extended family, etc.
While I have not reviewed The Michael Jackson Family Trust documents, it is clear by the language used in Mr. Jackson’s Will that his intention was to provide for his mother for the remainder of her lifetime (should he predecease her) and that his estate go to benefit his three children.
The Last Will of Michael Jackson is very well written and was beautifully executed. (Having Mr. Jackson sign-off on each paragraph was brilliant!) I cannot imagine any Court not upholding Mr. Jackson’s final wishes as outlined.
I hope I have been able to answer some of your questions. Cheers.
**DISCLAIMER: This information is not intended to substitute for professional legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. You should accept legal advice only from a licensed legal professional with whom you have an attorney-client relationship.
October 4th, 2009 at 9:53 am
Thanks for the info above. It is very helpful and makes me feel more confident that it will be Michael’s children who will eventually acquire everything that was his and that no one will be able to successfully wedge their way in and create a situation that is not exactly what Michael wanted.
I believe Branca and McClain are good choices and will do their best to care for that estate.
Question: Katherine Jackson is up in age. What happens if she should pass away while the children are still minors? Would their new guardian receive the allowance Katherine is now receiving, or would the guardian pay himself/herself from the kids’ allowances?
October 4th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Thanks for the info. It highlights how ill-informed the Jackson family is, claiming “a member of the family” should be on board. It seems it is just not legally possible. Nobody beside the four mentioned in the will has anything to do with the estate.
Question, if you please: When do the Jackson children take control of the estate?
October 4th, 2009 at 10:44 am
The more I think about this will, the more I sense the anger Michael Jackson must have felt for his family (besides the love he certainly also felt). He supported them so many times, but in his will, he doesn’t give anyone but his mother and children a cent. Not a cent. I suppose he was just – fed up.
He should have stopped giving years ago, but what do you do when your brother doesn’t pay his children’s school fees? Or your father can’t afford your mother’s home? He payed for everything there, including security, groceries, everything. And finally, he payed for his own funeral.
He and the rest of the family were on totally different levels. I don’t know them, but it seems they don’t have a clue.
October 4th, 2009 at 11:43 am
Michael’s will specifically omitted other heirs except for Katherine and Michael’s children, Prince, Paris, and Blanket. It being said that Randy Jackson is one of the family who is objecting. I think it’s pretty safe to assume that Joe is objecting as well.
Brian Oxman’s little piece of paper means squat for a number of reasons. Michael had 7 years to change his will if he had wanted. Besides that Michael reportedly signed a document retaining Branca as his attorney 8 days before he died. The other good point that was made above is that Branca is not serving as the estate’s attorney. Howard Weitzman is. Brance was appointed as co-executor/co-trustee not as estate attorney.
Michael made his wishes clear that he did not want to continue to support the rest of the Jackson clan after his death. He did enough for them while he was alive.
I still remember what Jermaine said on LKL. He said:
“KING: It doesn’t bother you that your father wasn’t mentioned?
JACKSON: It doesn’t bother me, because if my mother’s mentioned, my father’s fine. I mean, if my mother’s fine, we’re all fine. But most important, it’s not about money, Larry. It’s not about property. We’re a family. We’re a family. We don’t let that get in the way. That’s not important to us. That’s not important.”
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0907/02/lkl.01.html
So it looks to me like the family is depending on Katherine to be the conduit for Michael’s money to the rest of the disinherited Jacksons.
As far as the rest, i.e. “it’s not about money”, I label that as pure B.S. and insulting the public’s intelligence.
October 4th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
mjuls -thanks for the info regarding wills and estates in California. Do you have any insight as to why the will specifically omits Debbie Rowe as an heir, which I understand is customary when dealing with an ex-wife who is otherwise provided for, but not Lisa Marie Presley?
” All this talk about the names of Mr. Jackson’s children not matching those listed on their Birth Certificates is a non-issue.”
And yet when the executors file a decedent tax return for Michael Jackson, if they use “Prince” as the name for the oldest boy, as in the will, the IRS will reject it. Hard to imagine that getting the names right was so onerous, or so unimportant, that whoever drew up the will couldn’t be bothered.
None of us know the true dynamics of MJ’s relationship with his family, and who got what money for him. We don’t know how much the various family members provided for their own support. The disdain and hatred expressed for the family here seems a bit over the top.
October 4th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
I believe that there is another son that Michael had 25 years ago that can protest this will. if he is proven to be Michael’s son he should have right to inheritance. On his official first son birth certificate his name liste as Michael Joseph Jackson ,Jr. Which mean prince is not his legal name, it is more like a nickname. Blanket is name Prince Michael Jackson, II. Who is the first? Well there is a young man By the name of Prince Michael Malachi Jett Jackson who is demanding a Dna test to prove that he is MJ biological son. He also may Michael’s 1st and only biological son/ child.
October 4th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
Simba – I suppose the disdain for the family – or, on my behalf, rather puzzlement – stems from the knowledge that Michael Jackson provided for them to the extent that he did, including nephews’ school fees, together with the fact that they do not benefit at all from the will. Add to that the family’s attempts to override the wishes MJ expressed in the will, and the dynamics of the family is bound to raise at least some public interest. People loved Michael and hence are concerned for his children and his mother, and his mother seems to be in a bind.
Everyone who knows anything about MJ also knows Joe and the brothers time and again tried to convince him to perform with them again, like he had never left, and time and time again he resisted. He was even against participating in the Victory tour way back when.
Hatred belongs nowhere, I agree with that, but I find interest is not out of place. Had the family not taken all the steps it has taken, we would not discuss them at all except for bringing our condolences.
October 4th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Hi All,
First, as this is a public forum, I must reiterate that I am NOT affiliated with the Estate of Michael Jackson is any capacity. I have addressed your questions in the order they were received.
BNS – There is no straightforward answer to your question when it comes to the guardianship of Mr. Jackson’s children in the event of Katherine Jackson’s death.
There are a number of variables that will be considered. I can tell you that as the court appointed guardian, like Mr. Jackson, Katherine Jackson can name a guardian for the children in her Will. (I promise you, Katherine Jackson’s attorneys have already drafted a new Will.) However, while Katherine Jackson may name a guardian, the court will have finally say regarding the best interest of any minor children.
For the sake of argument lets assume all three of the Michael Jackson children are minors at the time of Katherine Jackson’s death. And lets say Katherine Jackson names her daughter Rebbie Jackson as guardian. The court will need to approve such an appointment. Much will depend on Debbie Rowe. As the surviving parent of Mr. Jackson’s two eldest children, Ms. Rowe maintains her parental rights under California law. Generally speaking, if she decides she wants her children she’ll get them unless the court has reason to believe such a situation would somehow be detrimental to the children. I cannot imagine any scenario in which the court would separate the siblings. But that doesn’t mean the court wouldn’t OK Debbie Rowe as guardian of all 3 children if she were to pursue custody. (Especially if she has an established relationship with them.)
If Debbie Rowe chooses not to pursue custody and were to approve of Rebbie Jackson as guardian of her children (just as she approved of Katherine Jackson’s appointment) the court would most likely grant Rebbie Jackson guardianship. The court will also take into account the wishes of the children. The details of the custody agreement made between Katherine Jackson and Debbie Rowe earlier this summer are largely private. These issues may have already been addressed to each parties satisfaction then. Regardless of any agreements made, ultimately it’s the court’s decision.
The allowance(s) at this point are more or less temporary living expenses until the estate is settled. At any time the court may adjust or revise said allowance(s) as necessary. The estate, and especially the court, closely monitor all expenditures.
As of Friday Mr. Branca and Mr. McClain’s temporary Letters of Administration have been extended until the end of the year. It is my understanding that a trial will be held in December to further establish Katherine Jackson’s objections to Mr. Branca and/or Mr. McClain’s position as dictated by Mr. Jackson’s Will. This SHOULD BE very cut and dry, but nothing in this case has followed established norms. The judge will then decide how to move forward.
I will say this, you will be hard-pressed to find anyone in the legal profession – especially here in California – who has anything bad to say about John Branca. The man is very well respected in legal circles. A Superstar in his own right.
AXON – At this point there is not enough information to answer your question: “When do the Jackson children take control of the estate?” That depends on the terms of the Trust which have not yet been made public. It’s quite possible the Jackson children will never gain control of the Trust. They will always be Beneficiaries and at some point they will be able to do as they please with their Inheritance and they will mostly likely have a voice in the decision-making process, however, as I explained in my earlier post, the administration of an Estate of this nature is a big job. Mr. Jackson may not have wanted to burden his children with the responsibility. Or many times in situations involving multiple minor children the Trust establishes that the children take control at a designated point in time, such as when the youngest minor child reaches the age of 25 for example. Again, right now we know nothing regarding the actual terms and conditions of The Michael Jackson Family Trust.
It is not unreasonable to assume that there are provisions within the Trust to honor any unfulfilled financial commitments Mr. Jackson may have made to others. For instance, if Mr. Jackson promised to pay for the college education of his nephew and noted the Trust accordingly the Trust will honor that commitment and cover the cost, but said nephew is not a beneficiary.
I am of the opinion that Mr. Jackson left his mother such a significant portion of the Trust so she has the financial freedom to provide for other family members for the remainder of her lifetime. As noted above, we do NOT know the full terms of the Trust. My guess is that upon Katherine Jackson’s death the proverbial “well” will run dry.
JUST GUESSING – I agree, from what is publicly known about the Brian Oxman document at this point seems to be a lot of hot air. However, we cannot know for sure until said document is entered into the record. However, the fact that Mr. Jackson retained Mr. Branca’s services before his death only serves to underscore Mr. Jackson’s faith in Mr. Branca. Legally it is irrelevant. The Last Will of Michael Jackson names John Branca and John McClain as CO-executors. Period. Mr. Jackson never changed his Will. Unless the court finds there exists an egregious conflict-of-interest, Mr. Jackson’s final wishes should stand.
Professionally, I don’t believe that Mr. Jackson was being vindictive in the way he set up his estate. On the contrary, I think his focus was on protecting the long-term interest of his children in the event of his demise. Mr. Jackson updated his estate after the birth of his youngest child. People tend to be more thoughtful than you might think when undertaking their Estate Planning. At the time he was a single parent – for all intensive purposes – of three small children. I would think his mindset at the time was “if I died tomorrow” how would my children’s interests be best served. All the documents I have personally seen suggest Mr. Jackson’s children were the priority.
SIMBA – Lisa Marie Presley is mute point regarding the Estate of Michael Jackson. Technically, had I drawn up the Will I probably would have formally omitted her as well, however it certainly was not necessary for them to do so. This should in no way be considered an oversight. The marriage was dissolved, they share no children, there were no remaining matters of litigation between them, and she has no grounds for a claim.
Debbie Rowe is a different story. Not only do they share children, but Mr. Jackson and Ms. Rowe have a continuing, long-standing financial support agreement. By stating: “I HAVE INTENTIONALLY OMITTED TO PROVIDE FOR MY FORMER WIFE DEBORAH JEAN ROWE JACKSON” Mr. Jackson is clarifying that he had no intention of providing for Ms. Rowe beyond his existing obligation. Seven years ago when this Will was drawn there was still pending litigation between the parties.
When Mr. Jackson’s 2009 taxes are filed the IRS will be supplied a copy of his death certificate and any other pertinent information. Normally a copy of the Will is not provided. Again, remember the Will was drawn up seven years ago. When the time comes to file, all corrections and/or addendum’s will have be made.
I understand that many of you are concern about the way the children are identified in the Will, however as I explained earlier, the lawyers went by the information provided to them by Mr. Jackson. The attorneys did not need to have copies of the children’s birth certificates to draw up or include them in the Will. This really is not as important as it appears on the surface.
Hope this helps! Please excuse any typos. Be well, All.
**DISCLAIMER: This information is not intended to substitute for professional legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. You should accept legal advice only from a licensed legal professional with whom you have an attorney-client relationship.
October 4th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Another question, mjuls…
If the allowances are only temporary until the estate is settled, then what happens after that? Will they be able to access more money or less? In other words, how does the 40/40/20 thing work?
October 4th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
Thanks again!
I ask with BNS – how will it work? Will Katherine Jackson and the children simply be paid the interest of their part of the estate, respectively, after other payments are met?
October 4th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
Cont – will all further income, such as royalties, go directly into the trust fund?
October 5th, 2009 at 3:46 am
Although I don’t often agree on your attack on the family … I am sad to say I agree with you on this one … I smell hanger-ons taking advantage of Joe’s sometimes greedy behavior. I for one hate Oxman … he reminds me so much of Gloria Alright, if that is how her nam eis pronounce.
October 5th, 2009 at 6:01 am
Good morning, All – I have a full calendar today but will do my best to answer your questions this evening. Have a good day!
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:19 am
@Simba and Anne
I don’t understand the nastiness towards the family either. Before Michael died this crap was leveled at him. The Jackson family are attacked for some perceived greediness,egged on by the tabloid media, no doubt, and they are ridiculed when it’s reported that they are working in positions such as a car mechanic or real estate agent. They’re not stealing. It’s amazing. As we all know, families are complicated and none of us knows what has truly gone on in the Jackson family.
The only person I’m having a hard time with right now is Jermaine because he introduced Michael to Dr. Thome Thome and the prince from Bahrain. And according to Roger Friedman, Jermain and Grace, the Nanny brought the Nation of Islam into Michael’s life.
Didn’t Michael fire Baranca, back in the day, because of a conflict of interest w/ Baranca working for Sony?