Branca served as Jackson's lawyer on and off for 29 years. Sources connected to Branca freely admit Jackson fired the lawyer in 1990, but rehired him 3 years later. We're also told Branca quit Michael in 2006 because Jackson insisted on hiring "advisors" Branca believed would do great harm to MJ.
A month before Jackson died, he began conversations with Branca, saying he wanted him back in the fold. We've learned on June 17, eight days before Jackson died, Jackson signed a letter hiring Branca back as his lawyer.
Howard Weitzman, a lawyer for the estate, confirmed, "In mid-June, Michael Jackson retained John Branca to represent him as general and entertainment counsel in his business and personal affairs." Weitzman added, "The letter retaining Branca was shared with lawyers for Katherine Jackson very early in the probate proceedings."
I know that MJ would hire/fire staff as he did with Grace, but we have information that he fired Tohme Tohme and John Branca, but right before his death both are back as being rehired by Michael and are in total control of his Estate while blocking his family from seeing medical records etc???? I just believe all this is from Howard Weitzman's doing who is the lawyer for the estate and also mob affiliated as well. Which in my opinion connects them all back to Tommy Mottola.
Just a little info on WeitzmanBottom line.....I do not believe that MJ rehired either of these men.
is the question whether mike rehired Branca to handle general matter? or is it whether he is the executor of his estate. if mike did not make another valid will then the last will stands.
so Branca retains his position until he relinquishes it or he is removed by the court
The document was produced by John Branca, a lawyer who began to represent Jackson in 1980. Branca and Jackson broke up in 2006 by a disagreement over other advisers, but on June 17 - eight days before his death - Jackson signed a letter once more keep Branca as his lawyer, according to a source close to the relationship.
Be careful when you read the news as simpre talk of a "source" has no name <!-- s:?: -->:?:<!-- s:?: -->
McMillan said the singer never told him that Branca had hired again, but he said "It's Possible." <!-- s:?: -->:?:<!-- s:?: -->
An executor role would give Branca and McClain power to manage Jackson's finances while the court is settling his affairs, a process that could take years. Jackson, 50, died with more than $400 million in debt, but his assets -- including his musical catalog and his partial ownership of the Sony-ATV catalog -- outweigh his debts by hundreds of millions of dollars.
"You could give" power to manage Branca, Mc Clain ,.... "could" do not know ...... <!-- s:?: -->:?:<!-- s:?: -->
"The late singer’s will omitted details of how his funds would be divided, leaving that instead to the Michael Jackson Family Trust – a document that has not been made public. However, a source familiar with the details of the trust told the Associated Press that it would be split between his mom, Katherine Jackson, who would get 40 percent, his three children, who collectively get 40 percent, and charities for children, which would get the remaining 20 percent"
"The Michael Jackson Family Trust - So What is a Family Trust?
Wednesday July 8, 2009
OK, enough already about Michael Jackson's estate, but unfortunately I think that his estate plan has created some confusion when it comes to understanding a basic estate planning term - "Family Trust."
Traditionally in the estate planning arena a "Family Trust" is another term used for the "B Trust" in an AB Trust system that is commonly used by married couples to maximize the use of each spouse's exemption from federal estate taxes. In fact, Family Trust is the term that I use in my clients' estate planning documents, but at my last firm they used the term "Bypass Trust" and at the firm before that they used "Credit Shelter Trust." No big deal - all of these terms refer to the B Trust in an AB Trust plan.
So leave it to Michael Jackson to create confusion by naming his Revocable Living Trust the "Michael Jackson Family Trust." No, Michael Jackson's "Family Trust" isn't a B Trust, Bypass Trust, Credit Shelter Trust, or even a Family Trust in the traditional sense of the term - it's simply the name Michael Jackson decided to use for his Revocable Living Trust (or more likely what his estate planning attorney decided to name the trust). He could have named it the "Michael Jackson Revocable Trust" or the "Michael Jackson Living Trust" or even the "Thriller Trust" - in other words, the name of a Revocable Living Trust, or of any trust for that matter, really isn't important. Instead, what is important is what the written trust agreement says.
So the bottom line is don't let Michael Jackson's estate plan confuse you - his Family Trust has nothing to do with saving on estate taxes in the traditional sense of a Family Trust - it's just a name."
"The Michael Jackson Family Trust Will Control All of Michael Jackson's Assets
2 The Michael Jackson Family Trust is going to draw a lot of attention very soon. The Michael Jackson Family Trust has been set up as an entity to be used to help out Michael Jackson and recipients in his will, but most importantly the Michael Jackson Family Trust will control Michael Jackson's estate. As is dictated in the Michael Jackson will, MJ is giving his entire estate to the Michael Jackson Family Trust, where all of the assets will be managed together rather than as separate entities. The will makes things easier for the executors, and having the Michael Jackson Family Trust in place will help his children long-term as well.
In Michael Jackson's will, he outlines exactly what will take place, and in section III of the 2002 will, he enables the executors to put into action the Michael Jackson Family Trust. The will states, "I give my entire estate to the Trustee or Trustees then acting under that certain Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust executed on March 22, 2002 by me as Trustee and Trustor which is called the MICHAEL JACKSON FAMILY TRUST, giving effect to my amendments thereto made prior to my death. All such assets shall be held, managed and distributed as a part of said Trust according to its terms and not as a separate testamentary trust."
What this all boils down to mean, is that the Trustees of the Michael Jackson Family Trust will have a lot of power when it comes to Michael Jackson's assets, but reading between the lines, it means that they will also over-see how much of the monetary assets, and at what intervals, Michael Jackson's kids will see the funds. Trusts like these are set up in order to help out people who are awarded monetary and physical assets in a will, and it will allow the Trustees to help advice the kids, and disperse the assets at the right time. His mother, Katherine Jackson, will also retain some rights as guardian of the children, and thus a vested interest in the Michael Jackson estate."
"Posted on July 3, 2009 by David Shulman
Speculating on what the Michael Jackson Family Trust Provides
Email This
Print
Comments (3)
Trackbacks It’s not my intention to turn this blog in to a celebrity gossip site. However, there are a number of legal issues regarding Michael Jackson’s estate that are continuously being reported on by reporters who do not fully understand (or do not care about) the nuances involved. The latest batch of confusion involves the disposition of Jackson’s assets in the Michael Jackson Family Trust.
As I previously posted, on July 1, Jackson’s Will was filed with the Cour along with a Petition for Probate. His will is what is known as a “Pourover Will” because it pours over any assets that Jackson owned in his individual name and not in the name of the Michael Jackson Family Trust, into the Trust. The Petition for Probate listed Jackson’s mother Katherine and his three minor children as primary beneficiaries, along with a number of other Jacksons (who I assume are his nieces and nephews) as secondary or contingent beneficiaries.
There is no legal requirement for a Trust to be released to the public. In fact, one of the reasons to do a Trust, especially if you are very wealthy or a celebrity is to keep your affairs private after your death. That being said, like everything else involved in this case, I expect a full version of the Trust to be leaked any day now. Already the press is reporting on, as TMZ so bluntly put it, “Who Gets What”. According to the reports, “Katherine Jackson will get 40% of the assets. Michael's 3 kids will get another 40%. And the remaining 20% goes to several children's charities.”
This cannot be completely accurate. While I have not yet seen the document, I am 100% positive that each of Jackson’s mother, and his children are to receive their shares in trust, with a the trustee having the power to make or not make distributions of income or principal according to certain standards.
There are a number of reasons for this, from a tax perspective, from a creditor and asset protection perspective, and from a “Control” (yes, that’s Janet, not Michael) perspective.
Later today I’ll explain why. (I’d do it now but I have to go to a client meeting. Blogging is fun but doesn’t pay my mortgage)."
"Law Office of Karen MeckstrothServing clients in San Jose, Los Gatos, Palo Alto, Santa Clara & San Mateo Counties, & throughout the Bay Area/Silicon ValleyAboutServicesContactArchivesHome > Michael Jackson Family Trust >
Michael Jackson's Will Makes Sense in California
Posted on July 6, 2009 by Karen Meckstroth
There is nothing dramatic about the structure of Michael Jackson's basic estate plan. At least not in California. It looks like Michael Jackson set up a revocable living trust (the Michael Jackson Family Trust) and a "pour over" will (pdf). Most Californians who establish estate plans, even Californians with modest estates, use revocable living trusts to dispose of their property. The trust, not the will, directs how to distribute the individual's assets on death. The will "pours over" to the trust and, in the case of a parent, nominates guardians for minor children.
The California Bar Association's pamphlet "Do I Need a Living Trust" describes how a revocable living trust like the Michael Jackson Family Trust works:
What is a living trust? It is a written legal document that partially substitutes for a will. With a living trust, your assets (your home, bank accounts and stocks, for example) are put into the trust, administered for your benefit during your lifetime, and then transferred to your beneficiaries when you die.
The terms of the revocable living trust are private. Unlike a will, the trust is not lodged with the court. The terms of the Michael Jackson Family Trust will not become public unless there is a trust contest or other proceeding involving the trust. Or the trust is leaked to the public.
One reason Californians prefer to use a revocable living trust instead of a will to dispose of their assets is the high cost of probate in California. Probating an estate in California is usually much more costly than a trust administration. From the Bar Association's pamphlet:
How could a living trust be helpful at my death?
The assets held in your living trust could be managed by the trustee and distributed according to your directions without court supervision and involvement. This can save your heirs time and money. . . .
If your assets (those in your name alone) are not in a living trust when you die, they would be subject to probate. Probate is a court-supervised process for transferring assets to the beneficiaries listed in one's will. . . .
Probate can take more time to complete than the distribution of property held in a living trust. In addition, assets tied up in probate may not be as readily accessible to the beneficiaries as those held in a living trust. And the cost of a probate is often greater than the cost of managing and distributing comparable assets held in a living trust.
A trust alone will not avoid probate. After someone sets up a revocable living trust, he or she must take steps to transfer assets to the trust. (Some assets are not subject to probate and are not transferred to the trust -- for example, retirement plans with beneficiary designations.) Even though Michael Jackson set up the Michael Jackson Family Trust, a probate may still be necessary if "probatable" assets were left outside the trust. There are some other possibilities, short of a formal probate, such as transferring assets to the trust by means of a Heggstad petition.
From the Bar Association pamphlet:
If I have a living trust, do I still need a will?
Yes. Your will affects any assets that are titled in your name at your death and are not in your living trust or some other form of ownership with a right of survivorship. If you have a living trust, your will would typically contain a pour over provision. Such a provision simply states that all such assets should be transferred to the trustee of your living trust after your death. (This does not mean, however, that your beneficiaries can avoid going through probate for these assets.)
Michael Jackson did what most Californians do when they set up their estate plans. He established a revocable living trust and a pour over will. The Michael Jackson Family Trust, and not Michael's will, dictates how Michael's estate is to be distributed. Most likely, the Michael Jackson Family Trust establishes separate share trusts for each of his children. There may also be distributions to other family members and charity. The trusts for Michael's children may last for their lifetimes with distributions to Michael's future grandchildren. Or the trusts for his children may terminate during their lifetimes. We don't really know.
Which brings us to another reason Californians prefer revocable living trusts to wills -- privacy.
Tags: Michael Jackson Family Trust, Michael Jackson estate, Michael Jackson probate, Michael Jackson trust, Wills & Trusts"
Compensation approved for Jackson estate admins
AP NEWS | 2010-02-03 22:54:12
Judge approves 10 percent compensation for Michael Jackson's estate administrators
Two men administering Michael Jackson's estate will receive a total of 10 percent of the its profits minus several sizable assets, a judge agreed Wednesday.
Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff approved the compensation for attorney John Branca and music executive John McClain, who have been administering the singer's estate since shortly after his death on June 25.
Branca and McClain will each receive five percent of the estate's profits, minus earnings from the recent "This Is It" movie and Jackson's interest in lucrative Sony-ATV music catalog.
Beckloff approved the arrangement after discussing it with various attorneys representing Branca, McClain, Jackson's children and the singer's mother, Katherine Jackson.
None raised any objections to the arrangement.
Howard Weitzman, an attorney for Branca and McClain, said the men would be fairly compensated but likely receive less money than if they received guideline amounts for administering Jackson's estate, which has an estimated value of more than $500 million.
"They will be fairly compensated," Weitzman said.
Katherine Jackson's attorney, Adam Streisand, agreed.
"I think that this is very reasonable," he said. "There is an incentive for the executors to grow the business and that will, of course, affect their compensation."
Weitzman noted that Branca represented Michael Jackson throughout his life and that McClain is a childhood friend of the singer.
Beckloff is retaining some oversight over the payments and scheduled a progress report for September. But he expressed faith in Branca's leadership of the estate. The judge recalled a hearing last year in which Branca testified by phone about his business connections and a deal Jackson merchandise and a memorabilia exhibition.
"I found him extraordinarily impressive," Beckloff said, noting that's not a distinction he normally draws about people from a phone conversation.
An old joke asks the incauto why sharks refuse to eat lawyers that naufragan at sea: professional courtesy.
There is also an old "curse" gypsy says you look between lawyers. God, I believe that is all parties are considered a pest <!-- s:evil: -->:evil:<!-- s:evil: -->
I think this isn't very helpful. Who even cares about Branca? Someone clearly explain what he has to do with the hoax plz. <!-- s:( -->:(<!-- s:( -->
Also, making your text big and rainbow gets a bit annoying after a while.
A better strategy is to bold parts you think are important.
MJHOAX live found it important so they asked people to spread it because it could be significant, or not, that is up to others to decide, so just because you don't find it helpful, someone else may feel differently. If users rainbow colors are annoying you, don't you think you could ask a bit nicer? You seem kinda rude. Jeez.
MJHOAX live found it important so they asked people to spread it because it could be significant, or not, that is up to others to decide, so just because you don't find it helpful, someone else may feel differently. If users rainbow colors are annoying you, don't you think you could ask a bit nicer? You seem kinda rude. Jeez.
I'm just asking for a clear explanation for our fellow foreign hoaxers.
I didn't mean to be rude. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
Just trying to be direct.
Approx 2:00 p.m., July 6, 2002, New York City time, 6 hours away from LA. Now why would MJ leave after making this powerful speech, to meet with Branca on the very next day in LA to sign his will? Did he think that perhaps he felt had just signed his own death certificate by publicly outing the bad boys of Sony? I should hope not. If anything, he should've been feeling re-born. He'd just made HIStory. But I don't know. there was bad blood. You tell me.
LA Times Article about the "legal mess" after June 25 th 2009 quotes his then attorney MacMillian that it might be possible that MJ rehired John Branca at June 17th.
Please forgive me if this has been asked or answered somewhere else, but I have a question:
If according to MJ's Will, his mother is supposed to get 40% of his assets, his children get 40%, and the other 20% goes to charities - Why are his mother and children just getting an "allowance" instead of their full inheritance?
Please, I beg you not to use Courtney Love as a source for any reliable information. This is a person who repeatedly changes her stories to suit her situation and to avoid responsibility for her own actions. This is the same person who recently took to FB to publicly diss her own child b/c she can't own up to her f*cked up behavior.
In the end, it doesn't matter what we think regarding the individual players in MJ's "death." It's clear that a lot of this is being engineered, the only question really is whether MJ is also a player in this game or if he is a victim of it.
The one thing the players have succeeded in is generating plenty of confusion, which is the surest way to obscure the truth. As a result, most of this will always remain a mystery and given MJ's fondness for mysteries, if he is alive, he probably prefers to leave it that way.
Comments
Attorney Brian Oxman -- the lawyer who pops up from time to time in the Jackson saga -- says he has a document proving Jackson fired Branca.
Read more: <!-- m -->http://www.tmz.com/2009/10/01/michael-j ... z0fvG8QSwn<!-- m -->
Branca served as Jackson's lawyer on and off for 29 years. Sources connected to Branca freely admit Jackson fired the lawyer in 1990, but rehired him 3 years later. We're also told Branca quit Michael in 2006 because Jackson insisted on hiring "advisors" Branca believed would do great harm to MJ.
A month before Jackson died, he began conversations with Branca, saying he wanted him back in the fold. We've learned on June 17, eight days before Jackson died, Jackson signed a letter hiring Branca back as his lawyer.
Howard Weitzman, a lawyer for the estate, confirmed, "In mid-June, Michael Jackson retained John Branca to represent him as general and entertainment counsel in his business and personal affairs." Weitzman added, "The letter retaining Branca was shared with lawyers for Katherine Jackson very early in the probate proceedings."
I know that MJ would hire/fire staff as he did with Grace, but we have information that he fired Tohme Tohme and John Branca, but right before his death both are back as being rehired by Michael and are in total control of his Estate while blocking his family from seeing medical records etc???? I just believe all this is from Howard Weitzman's doing who is the lawyer for the estate and also mob affiliated as well. Which in my opinion connects them all back to Tommy Mottola.
Just a little info on WeitzmanBottom line.....I do not believe that MJ rehired either of these men.
so Branca retains his position until he relinquishes it or he is removed by the court
Be careful when you read the news as simpre talk of a "source" has no name <!-- s:?: -->:?:<!-- s:?: -->
McMillan said the singer never told him that Branca had hired again, but he said "It's Possible." <!-- s:?: -->:?:<!-- s:?: -->
An executor role would give Branca and McClain power to manage Jackson's finances while the court is settling his affairs, a process that could take years. Jackson, 50, died with more than $400 million in debt, but his assets -- including his musical catalog and his partial ownership of the Sony-ATV catalog -- outweigh his debts by hundreds of millions of dollars.
"You could give" power to manage Branca, Mc Clain ,.... "could" do not know ...... <!-- s:?: -->:?:<!-- s:?: -->
<!-- m -->http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/image ... n.will.pdf<!-- m -->
attachments name all the beneficiaries to the trust
<!-- m -->http://www.accesshollywood.com/report-m ... icle_20130<!-- m -->
"The late singer’s will omitted details of how his funds would be divided, leaving that instead to the Michael Jackson Family Trust – a document that has not been made public. However, a source familiar with the details of the trust told the Associated Press that it would be split between his mom, Katherine Jackson, who would get 40 percent, his three children, who collectively get 40 percent, and charities for children, which would get the remaining 20 percent"
"The Michael Jackson Family Trust - So What is a Family Trust?
Wednesday July 8, 2009
OK, enough already about Michael Jackson's estate, but unfortunately I think that his estate plan has created some confusion when it comes to understanding a basic estate planning term - "Family Trust."
Traditionally in the estate planning arena a "Family Trust" is another term used for the "B Trust" in an AB Trust system that is commonly used by married couples to maximize the use of each spouse's exemption from federal estate taxes. In fact, Family Trust is the term that I use in my clients' estate planning documents, but at my last firm they used the term "Bypass Trust" and at the firm before that they used "Credit Shelter Trust." No big deal - all of these terms refer to the B Trust in an AB Trust plan.
So leave it to Michael Jackson to create confusion by naming his Revocable Living Trust the "Michael Jackson Family Trust." No, Michael Jackson's "Family Trust" isn't a B Trust, Bypass Trust, Credit Shelter Trust, or even a Family Trust in the traditional sense of the term - it's simply the name Michael Jackson decided to use for his Revocable Living Trust (or more likely what his estate planning attorney decided to name the trust). He could have named it the "Michael Jackson Revocable Trust" or the "Michael Jackson Living Trust" or even the "Thriller Trust" - in other words, the name of a Revocable Living Trust, or of any trust for that matter, really isn't important. Instead, what is important is what the written trust agreement says.
So the bottom line is don't let Michael Jackson's estate plan confuse you - his Family Trust has nothing to do with saving on estate taxes in the traditional sense of a Family Trust - it's just a name."
"The Michael Jackson Family Trust Will Control All of Michael Jackson's Assets
2 The Michael Jackson Family Trust is going to draw a lot of attention very soon. The Michael Jackson Family Trust has been set up as an entity to be used to help out Michael Jackson and recipients in his will, but most importantly the Michael Jackson Family Trust will control Michael Jackson's estate. As is dictated in the Michael Jackson will, MJ is giving his entire estate to the Michael Jackson Family Trust, where all of the assets will be managed together rather than as separate entities. The will makes things easier for the executors, and having the Michael Jackson Family Trust in place will help his children long-term as well.
In Michael Jackson's will, he outlines exactly what will take place, and in section III of the 2002 will, he enables the executors to put into action the Michael Jackson Family Trust. The will states, "I give my entire estate to the Trustee or Trustees then acting under that certain Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust executed on March 22, 2002 by me as Trustee and Trustor which is called the MICHAEL JACKSON FAMILY TRUST, giving effect to my amendments thereto made prior to my death. All such assets shall be held, managed and distributed as a part of said Trust according to its terms and not as a separate testamentary trust."
What this all boils down to mean, is that the Trustees of the Michael Jackson Family Trust will have a lot of power when it comes to Michael Jackson's assets, but reading between the lines, it means that they will also over-see how much of the monetary assets, and at what intervals, Michael Jackson's kids will see the funds. Trusts like these are set up in order to help out people who are awarded monetary and physical assets in a will, and it will allow the Trustees to help advice the kids, and disperse the assets at the right time. His mother, Katherine Jackson, will also retain some rights as guardian of the children, and thus a vested interest in the Michael Jackson estate."
strange?
"Posted on July 3, 2009 by David Shulman
Speculating on what the Michael Jackson Family Trust Provides
Email This
Print
Comments (3)
Trackbacks It’s not my intention to turn this blog in to a celebrity gossip site. However, there are a number of legal issues regarding Michael Jackson’s estate that are continuously being reported on by reporters who do not fully understand (or do not care about) the nuances involved. The latest batch of confusion involves the disposition of Jackson’s assets in the Michael Jackson Family Trust.
As I previously posted, on July 1, Jackson’s Will was filed with the Cour along with a Petition for Probate. His will is what is known as a “Pourover Will” because it pours over any assets that Jackson owned in his individual name and not in the name of the Michael Jackson Family Trust, into the Trust. The Petition for Probate listed Jackson’s mother Katherine and his three minor children as primary beneficiaries, along with a number of other Jacksons (who I assume are his nieces and nephews) as secondary or contingent beneficiaries.
There is no legal requirement for a Trust to be released to the public. In fact, one of the reasons to do a Trust, especially if you are very wealthy or a celebrity is to keep your affairs private after your death. That being said, like everything else involved in this case, I expect a full version of the Trust to be leaked any day now. Already the press is reporting on, as TMZ so bluntly put it, “Who Gets What”. According to the reports, “Katherine Jackson will get 40% of the assets. Michael's 3 kids will get another 40%. And the remaining 20% goes to several children's charities.”
This cannot be completely accurate. While I have not yet seen the document, I am 100% positive that each of Jackson’s mother, and his children are to receive their shares in trust, with a the trustee having the power to make or not make distributions of income or principal according to certain standards.
There are a number of reasons for this, from a tax perspective, from a creditor and asset protection perspective, and from a “Control” (yes, that’s Janet, not Michael) perspective.
Later today I’ll explain why. (I’d do it now but I have to go to a client meeting. Blogging is fun but doesn’t pay my mortgage)."
"Law Office of Karen MeckstrothServing clients in San Jose, Los Gatos, Palo Alto, Santa Clara & San Mateo Counties, & throughout the Bay Area/Silicon ValleyAboutServicesContactArchivesHome > Michael Jackson Family Trust >
Michael Jackson's Will Makes Sense in California
Posted on July 6, 2009 by Karen Meckstroth
There is nothing dramatic about the structure of Michael Jackson's basic estate plan. At least not in California. It looks like Michael Jackson set up a revocable living trust (the Michael Jackson Family Trust) and a "pour over" will (pdf). Most Californians who establish estate plans, even Californians with modest estates, use revocable living trusts to dispose of their property. The trust, not the will, directs how to distribute the individual's assets on death. The will "pours over" to the trust and, in the case of a parent, nominates guardians for minor children.
The California Bar Association's pamphlet "Do I Need a Living Trust" describes how a revocable living trust like the Michael Jackson Family Trust works:
What is a living trust? It is a written legal document that partially substitutes for a will. With a living trust, your assets (your home, bank accounts and stocks, for example) are put into the trust, administered for your benefit during your lifetime, and then transferred to your beneficiaries when you die.
The terms of the revocable living trust are private. Unlike a will, the trust is not lodged with the court. The terms of the Michael Jackson Family Trust will not become public unless there is a trust contest or other proceeding involving the trust. Or the trust is leaked to the public.
One reason Californians prefer to use a revocable living trust instead of a will to dispose of their assets is the high cost of probate in California. Probating an estate in California is usually much more costly than a trust administration. From the Bar Association's pamphlet:
How could a living trust be helpful at my death?
The assets held in your living trust could be managed by the trustee and distributed according to your directions without court supervision and involvement. This can save your heirs time and money. . . .
If your assets (those in your name alone) are not in a living trust when you die, they would be subject to probate. Probate is a court-supervised process for transferring assets to the beneficiaries listed in one's will. . . .
Probate can take more time to complete than the distribution of property held in a living trust. In addition, assets tied up in probate may not be as readily accessible to the beneficiaries as those held in a living trust. And the cost of a probate is often greater than the cost of managing and distributing comparable assets held in a living trust.
A trust alone will not avoid probate. After someone sets up a revocable living trust, he or she must take steps to transfer assets to the trust. (Some assets are not subject to probate and are not transferred to the trust -- for example, retirement plans with beneficiary designations.) Even though Michael Jackson set up the Michael Jackson Family Trust, a probate may still be necessary if "probatable" assets were left outside the trust. There are some other possibilities, short of a formal probate, such as transferring assets to the trust by means of a Heggstad petition.
From the Bar Association pamphlet:
If I have a living trust, do I still need a will?
Yes. Your will affects any assets that are titled in your name at your death and are not in your living trust or some other form of ownership with a right of survivorship. If you have a living trust, your will would typically contain a pour over provision. Such a provision simply states that all such assets should be transferred to the trustee of your living trust after your death. (This does not mean, however, that your beneficiaries can avoid going through probate for these assets.)
Michael Jackson did what most Californians do when they set up their estate plans. He established a revocable living trust and a pour over will. The Michael Jackson Family Trust, and not Michael's will, dictates how Michael's estate is to be distributed. Most likely, the Michael Jackson Family Trust establishes separate share trusts for each of his children. There may also be distributions to other family members and charity. The trusts for Michael's children may last for their lifetimes with distributions to Michael's future grandchildren. Or the trusts for his children may terminate during their lifetimes. We don't really know.
Which brings us to another reason Californians prefer revocable living trusts to wills -- privacy.
Tags: Michael Jackson Family Trust, Michael Jackson estate, Michael Jackson probate, Michael Jackson trust, Wills & Trusts"
why have those lawyers?
BECKLOFF STRIKES AGAIN
http://www.fromthewestwing.com/article/Compensation%20approved%20for%20Jackson%20estate%20admins/?k=j83s12y12h94s27k02
Compensation approved for Jackson estate admins
AP NEWS | 2010-02-03 22:54:12
Judge approves 10 percent compensation for Michael Jackson's estate administrators
Two men administering Michael Jackson's estate will receive a total of 10 percent of the its profits minus several sizable assets, a judge agreed Wednesday.
Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff approved the compensation for attorney John Branca and music executive John McClain, who have been administering the singer's estate since shortly after his death on June 25.
Branca and McClain will each receive five percent of the estate's profits, minus earnings from the recent "This Is It" movie and Jackson's interest in lucrative Sony-ATV music catalog.
Beckloff approved the arrangement after discussing it with various attorneys representing Branca, McClain, Jackson's children and the singer's mother, Katherine Jackson.
None raised any objections to the arrangement.
Howard Weitzman, an attorney for Branca and McClain, said the men would be fairly compensated but likely receive less money than if they received guideline amounts for administering Jackson's estate, which has an estimated value of more than $500 million.
"They will be fairly compensated," Weitzman said.
Katherine Jackson's attorney, Adam Streisand, agreed.
"I think that this is very reasonable," he said. "There is an incentive for the executors to grow the business and that will, of course, affect their compensation."
Weitzman noted that Branca represented Michael Jackson throughout his life and that McClain is a childhood friend of the singer.
Beckloff is retaining some oversight over the payments and scheduled a progress report for September. But he expressed faith in Branca's leadership of the estate. The judge recalled a hearing last year in which Branca testified by phone about his business connections and a deal Jackson merchandise and a memorabilia exhibition.
"I found him extraordinarily impressive," Beckloff said, noting that's not a distinction he normally draws about people from a phone conversation.
how does this affect the hoax?
There is also an old "curse" gypsy says you look between lawyers. God, I believe that is all parties are considered a pest <!-- s:evil: -->:evil:<!-- s:evil: -->
Also, making your text big and rainbow gets a bit annoying after a while.
A better strategy is to bold parts you think are important.
MJHOAX live found it important so they asked people to spread it because it could be significant, or not, that is up to others to decide, so just because you don't find it helpful, someone else may feel differently. If users rainbow colors are annoying you, don't you think you could ask a bit nicer? You seem kinda rude. Jeez.
I'm just asking for a clear explanation for our fellow foreign hoaxers.
I didn't mean to be rude. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
Just trying to be direct.
[youtube:3my75hbu]
@Aintnosunshine, Thank you for answering my question in part. I have just had an AH moment! <!-- s:idea: -->:idea:<!-- s:idea: -->
If according to MJ's Will, his mother is supposed to get 40% of his assets, his children get 40%, and the other 20% goes to charities - Why are his mother and children just getting an "allowance" instead of their full inheritance?
Please, I beg you not to use Courtney Love as a source for any reliable information. This is a person who repeatedly changes her stories to suit her situation and to avoid responsibility for her own actions. This is the same person who recently took to FB to publicly diss her own child b/c she can't own up to her f*cked up behavior.
In the end, it doesn't matter what we think regarding the individual players in MJ's "death." It's clear that a lot of this is being engineered, the only question really is whether MJ is also a player in this game or if he is a victim of it.
The one thing the players have succeeded in is generating plenty of confusion, which is the surest way to obscure the truth. As a result, most of this will always remain a mystery and given MJ's fondness for mysteries, if he is alive, he probably prefers to leave it that way.