E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
W.A. Clark Memorial Library
Huguette Clark with one of her prized dolls. She reached age 98 without declaring who should receive her copper-mining fortune, and then signed two contradictory wills back to back.
NEW YORK — There is a new surprise in the mysterious story of reclusive heiress Huguette Clark. It turns out that she signed two wills, the first one benefitting her family, the second one cutting out her family altogether. And she signed them one after another, within six weeks.
Despite years of pleading from attorney after attorney, Clark reached age 98 without directing who should inherit one of America's great fortunes from the Gilded Age, estimated to be at least $400 million. She made no plan for her $100 million oceanfront estate in Santa Barbara, Calif.; her $20 million country house in New Canaan, Conn.; her three apartments on New York's Fifth Avenue, worth up to $100 million; her precious paintings by Renoir and Monet, or her doll collection worth millions.
Then, within six weeks, she signed two wills, right about the time that her family says her attorney stopped putting through their phone calls.
It appears both wills are genuine. That is to say, both were presented by her executors, who are her attorney and accountant. The second will was already filed in court by the executors in June, a month after her death in May at age 104. The first will was turned over by the executors voluntarily to her family, which filed it in court Monday morning along with a motion to enter the case.
This is the first step in a family effort to wrest control of Clark's fortune away from her attorney and accountant, who remain the subjects of a criminal investigation.
The family's motion accuses Clark's attorney and accountant of "plundering" her fortune.
"Before the court are substantial and gravely serious issues," the family attorney, John R. Morken, wrote in a sworn statement to the court on Monday, "of alleged deceit, undue influence and exploitation of a very elderly and extraordinarily wealthy woman at the hands of two professionals who, with the help of certain others, took control of her life, isolated her from family, and ultimately stripped her of her free will, as well as millions of dollars." (Document: Read the family's motion.)
On March 7, 2005, in her spartan hospital room at Beth Israel Medical Center on Manhattan's Lower East Side, Clark signed a will leaving $5 million to her longtime nurse Hadassah Peri, and everything else to her 21 closest relatives, who are descendants of her father from his first marriage, according to documents filed Monday morning in a New York court. The relatives are not named in the documents, but are referred to only as her "intestate distributees," legal jargon for the people who would inherit her money if she didn't have sign any will at all. You can read that first will here from NBC News.
On April 19, 2005, in the same hospital room, Clark signed a second will. This time her family got nothing. The nurse's share jumped to an estimated $34 million. There was half a million for her accountant and half a million for her attorney, who drew up both wills. Her doctor received $100,000. And the largest share went to a charitable foundation, controlled by the attorney and accountant, to set up an art museum in her California mansion, known as Bellosguardo. You can read that second will here from NBC News.
Both wills are typewritten, with what appears to be her signature in a firm hand.
She also had two earlier wills from the years 1926 and 1929, when she was 19 and 22 years old. Both of those wills left everything to her mother, who died in 1963, so in effect those wills would also, under state law, have left everything to the relatives making a claim now.
What happened during those six weeks?
And so begins what could be a long, expensive battle for her fortune. The case may turn on the answer to these questions: What happened in those six short weeks to turn around the fate of her fortune? Did her attorney and accountant exercise undue influence on her decision? Did she have the mental capacity to know what she was signing? How close was she to her relatives? Will the judge allow her attorney to serve as an executor, and to be a beneficiary, after he drew up the will — the same attorney whose family benefitted from nearly $2 million in gifts from Clark? Will the judge allow her accountant, a convicted felon, to be an executor?
The relatives maintain in the new court documents that they were much closer than her attorney has portrayed. Though the Clark family was spread from California to New York to France, several family members were in regular contact with her over many years, exchanging holiday greetings and letters and having phone conversations arranged through her attorney, even as she secluded herself in a hospital room, hiding her location from even these relatives, according to the sworn statement by attorney Morken, who represents 19 of the 21 relatives.
"Despite her reclusive life style," wrote attorney Morken, "Huguette remained true to her family and her all too important family name, by remaining in contact with certain of her relatives over the years, sharing events in their lives. Indeed, she well knew and was proud of the fact that she was a Clark, and her family was integral to who she was. She therefore remained close to them, but from a distance, simultaneously preserving her desire to communicate with her relatives and her need for seclusion and solitude."
Relatives have said that Clark's attorney cut off those contacts without explanation, just before the wills were signed. "Suddenly in or about 2004/2005, phone contact ceased, and relatives who were speaking to Huguette on the phone were no longer able to," Morken wrote. "Thereafter, in 2008, on at least one occasion when relatives sought to visit their Aunt Huguette to check on her well-being, they were prevented from doing so by" her attorney. Several of these relatives asked a judge last year to appoint a guardian for her, based in part on the information in the msnbc.com articles, but that case was rejected without a hearing.
Copper King Mansion Bed And Breakfast, Butte, Mont.
Huguette Clark, heiress to a copper fortune, was secluded for decades. How much contact she had with family may be an issue for the court.
The second will tells a different story, attempting to foreclose any claim by family. "I intentionally make no provision in this my Last Will Testament (sic) for any members of my family, whether on my paternal or maternal side, having had minimal contacts with them over the years. The persons and institution named herein as beneficiaries of my Estate are the true objects of my bounty."
The fact-gathering in this case is expected to be extensive. Prominent lawyers have been retained to represent all sides. Testimony should shed light on her contacts with family and what changed during that six-week period in 2005.
Though she inherited one of the great mining fortunes of the 19th century, Huguette (pronounced "oo-GET") Marcelle Clark lived quietly into the 21st century, secluded under fake names in a hospital room for more than two decades despite being in relatively good physical health. Intensely shy, she was almost entirely alone, aside from her private nurse, other helpers and occasional visits by her accountant. One of her former attorneys represented her for 20 years without meeting her face to face, instead talking to her through a closed door.
In the last year of her life, after her three empty mansions drew the attention of a reporter for msnbc.com in late 2009, she became a subject of public fascination, a trending topic of searches on Google and Yahoo, pictured on the cover of the New York tabloids, with fan pages on Facebook, a biography on Wikipedia, and her story read by tens of millions — though the last known photograph of her was made in 1930.
Huguette Clark was married only briefly and had no children. Her only full sister died at age 16 and had no children. Her mother had no other children. Under state law that leaves 21 "intestate distributees" — the relatives who would inherit her estate if she left no will or if the court chooses to uphold the earlier will instead of the later one. Those 21 relatives are descended from three of the children from Sen. Clark's first marriage: 13 half-grandnieces and half-grandnephews (and their children), and eight half-great-grandnieces and half-great-grandnephews (and their children). Counting all the children of these relatives, there are about 50 living descendants of Clark's father, former Sen. William Andrews Clark of Montana.
Criminal investigation continues
The estate fight is beginning two blocks away the office of the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., whose criminal investigation of the actions of her attorney and accountant in handling her finances is continuing. A state grand jury issued subpoenas for documents, and a forensic accountant and police officers have been chasing leads. Both wills would grant large sums to the attorney and accountant. As executors, each would receive about 2 percent of her estate, or $8 million to $10 million each. Under the second will, they also receive the $500,000 apiece as beneficiaries and have a nearly unlimited ability to draw fees and salaries as trustees of the art museum.
There are other parties besides her family and the attorneys for the executors. The New York attorney general has entered the case, representing the interests of charities that could be helped or hurt by the decision —those include the Corcoran Gallery of Art in Washington, which is named in the second will to receive one of Monet's "Water Lilies" series of paintings, and the yet-unborn Bellosguardo Foundation, the art museum to be set up at her California home under the second will. And the public administrator, a county official, has been named as a third temporary executor to serve alongside, and to monitor the activities, of her attorney and accountant. The judge took the unusual step of requiring that all actions by the temporary executors be unanimous, in effect giving the public administrator veto power over handling of her accounts for now.
Msnbc.com reported last year that her wealth was managed by her attorney, Wally Bock, now 79, of Queens, N.Y., and her certified public accountant, a felon named Irving H. Kamsler, now 64, of the Bronx, N.Y. Kamsler pleaded guilty in 2008 to attempting to distribute indecent material to 13- and 15-year-old girls in an AOL chatroom, where he went by the handle "IRV1040." He remains a registered sex offender in New York.
Msnbc.com also reported that the attorney and accountant took over ownership of the New York City apartment of another elderly client, a lawyer at Bock's firm who had been Clark's attorney. The apartment was bequeathed to them after the man's last will and testament was revised six times during his last years, a period when his family and neighbors said he suffered from dementia.
Her attorney, Bock, confirmed in court documents that after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, he had solicited a donation from Clark of more than $1.5 million, which she gave to a West Bank community where his daughter is a settler. Bock said that she gave the donation freely of her own accord. New York ethics rules prohibit lawyers from soliciting gifts from clients "for the benefit of the lawyer or a person related to the lawyer."
The attorney and accountant have not been accused of a crime in the handling of the Clark finances. Bock told the court he has safeguarded Clark's health, safety, welfare and privacy. He said she chose to live in the hospital, even when she was well. He denied controlling her affairs and access to her, saying he has merely carried out her wishes. "Ms. Clark has explicitly instructed me on many occasions that she does not want visitors and does not want anyone — including her relatives — to know where she resides," Bock wrote.
A recent accounting of her finances by Bock and Kamsler show $126.3 million in spending by them from her accounts during her last 15 years, and another $43.3 million that was transferred into her personal account, apparently to cover her own spending, ending in early 2009. The total of $170 million works out to $1 million per month for a woman who never left her hospital room during that time.
The family calls the accounting "a chilling report of the mishandling, misappropriation and mismanagement of Huguette's assets."
"The interest of the family members is not just financial, although that is of course considerable," wrote family attorney Morken. "Even of greater concern to them is the family's heritage. That a very significant member of their family should have fallen victim, it appears, to the greed of persons who had put themselves in a position of trust with their great-aunt, and with the apparent assistance of others, had violated that trust, is something that requires an exhaustive review of every transaction which they engineered: in other words, full and complete accountability."
An independent attorney's perspective
A prominent estate attorney in New York not involved in the case, Sanford J. "Sandy" Schlesinger, addressed in an interview several of the issues that he said the judge, Surrogate Kristin Booth Glen, might look at closely, depending on the evidence presented.
The close timing of the two wills, signed within six weeks, could raise a hurdle for the relatives, if they argue that Clark was not competent to sign the second will. "How can you argue," Schlesinger asked, "that she was competent in March but not competent in April?"
But the relatives may have more traction with a claim of undue influence, Schlesinger said, giving them the opportunity to knock out both wills.
The dual roles of attorney Bock raise several questions. Schlesinger said it is generally frowned upon in New York for an attorney who drafts a will to be a beneficiary; the burden of proof is on the attorney to show that he did not exercise undue influence on the client. The court would probably take into account, Schlesinger said, that the $500,000 bequest to attorney Bock is relatively small, in comparison with the $400 million estate. On the other hand, the size of the gift benefitting Bock's family, nearly $2 million, raises additional concerns. he said.
It's more common, but still not always accepted, for an attorney who drafts a will to serve as an executor, which puts the attorney in line for an executor's fee of roughly 2 percent.
As for the accountant, Kamsler, the court can decide whether to allow him to serve as an executor. Generally a felon cannot serve, but the sentencing judge granted Kamsler a "relief from civil disabilities," allowing him to keep his accountant's license. That makes it possible that the surrogate court will allow Kamsler to serve, Schlesinger said. It may make a difference, he said, that Kamsler's guilty plea to attempting to distribute indecent material to minors, documented in the court record, was not a financial crime, no matter how sordid.
And it's too soon now to know the result of the criminal investigation by the district attorney.
"When you put the whole picture together, it seems there are some real questions to be answered," Schlesinger said. "But I wouldn't rush to judgment. Nobody's proved nothing yet."
The second will's plan to set up a charity for the artwork could sound plausible, Schlesinger said, though the fact that it could provide unending fees and salaries for the attorney and accountant may raise more questions. The court could approve the charity, but not put it under the control of those two men. "You don't have to throw out the baby with the bathwater," Schlesinger said. "You can just throw out the bathwater."
In the end, this sounds like a case that could eventually get settled, Schlesinger said.
"There's plenty of money here to pay everybody."
Associated Press
This is the last known photo of Huguette Clark, taken 80 years ago. She hid away in a New York hospital room for at least the past 22 years, until her death in May. This photo was made on Aug. 11, 1930, the day of her divorce, in Reno, Nev. Her marriage lasted two years. She had no children.
A quiet life
Huguette Clark was born in Paris on June 9, 1906, the youngest child of U.S. Sen. William Andrews Clark of Montana (1839-1925), known as one of America's copper kings. When she was a child, her father was described by The New York Times as either the richest or second-richest American, neck and neck with John D. Rockefeller. W.A. Clark made a fortune in copper mining in Montana and Arizona, and owned banks, railroads, newspapers, sugar, tea, timber, real estate and many other investments. He served one full term in the Senate as a Democrat from Montana, from 1901 to 1907, despite having to give up the seat earlier in 1900 in a scandal involving bribes paid to legislators. The 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which removed the election of senators from the hands of legislators and gave it to the people, is a backhanded tribute to his legacy.
While serving in the Senate in 1904, the 65-year-old widower shocked the political and financial world by announcing that he had secretly remarried three years earlier, and that he and his 26-year-old wife already had a 2-year-old daughter, Andrée. A second daughter, Huguette, was born in 1906. When Huguette was about 4, the family of four moved into a 121-room house at Fifth Avenue and 77th Street in New York City, stuffed with the senator's collection of French paintings.
Her father the senator died in 1925. Huguette inherited one-fifth of his estate, which in today's dollars would have been worth about $3.6 billion -- her share being about $700 million in today's terms. She also inherited nearly all of her mother's estate in 1963.
The Clark name was largely forgotten, except to the occasional question on Jeopardy! and to historians in Montana and Arizona, and in Nevada, where his railroad spawned the city of Las Vegas and where Clark County is named for him.
Neither of the wills signed by his daughter leaves any money to those states.
---
If you have information on the Huguette Clark mystery, use the links below to contact Bill Dedman. Add your comments to this story at the bottom of the page.
---
Documents (PDF files)
Family motion to intervene in the estate case, Nov. 28, 2011
Huguette Clark's last will and testament, signed April 19, 2005
Huguette Clark's previous will, signed March 7, 2005
Family's petition seeking a guardian for Huguette Clark, September 2010
Attorney Bock's sworn statement to the court, September 2010
Judge's ruling rejecting her family's guardianship petition, September 2010
Kamsler letter informing Clark of his guilty plea, February 2009
Kamsler's criminal court file and investigator's report
---
Previous stories in the Huguette Clark mystery on msnbc.com:
Archive of all stories, photos and videos
Photo narrative, "The Clarks: An American story of wealth, scandal and mystery," Feb. 26, 2010.
Printable version of the photo narrative, Feb. 26, 2010.
Clark family notes and sources, Feb. 26, 2010.
Investigative report, part one, "At 104, the mysterious heiress Huguette Clark is alone now: Relatives are kept away. Only her accountant and attorney visit. Who protects Huguette Clark, with 3 empty homes and no heirs?" Aug. 19, 2010.
Investigative report, part two, "Who is watching Huguette Clark's millions? Reclusive heiress's assets are sold by two advisers, one an accountant with a felony conviction. Another elderly client signed over his property to the same accountant and attorney," Aug. 20, 2010.
"Criminal probe begins into the finances of reclusive heiress Huguette Clark: Manhattan DA's Elder Abuse Unit is on the case. The same unit prosecuted the Brooke Astor case — though Clark has about four times the wealth," Aug. 24, 2010.
"Report sparks welfare check on heiress Huguette Clark," Aug. 25, 2010.
"Generosity of an heiress: four homes for a nurse, gifts for attorney's family," Sept. 1, 2010.
"Huguette Clark, the reclusive heiress, has signed a will, attorney says," Sept. 2, 2010.
"Family of copper heiress asks court to protect her from attorney, accountant," Sept. 3, 2010.
"Attorney for 104-year-old heiress defends his handling of her finances," Sept. 7, 2010.
"Judge leaves pair under investigation in control of heiress Huguette Clark's fortune," Sept. 9, 2010.
"Huguette Clark, the reclusive copper heiress, dies at 104," May 24, 2011.
"Family excluded from Huguette Clark burial," May 26, 2011.
"The 1 percent of the 1 percent: How Huguette Clark's millions were spent," Nov. 19, 2011.
Art museum at her estate in California, run by her crooked attorney & accountant?! It will be bankrupt and closed within a year and all the money and those two crooks nowhere to be found...
Actually, the facts seem to imply that her accountant and lawyer have done a very good job managing her estate. Most estate managers will charge upwards of 5% per year, and all indications are that they were charging far less than that ... plus the fact that her estate has continued to rise in value over the years, and the houses were properly maintained (which is a lot of work). It appears that they have been abiding by her wishes, which is exactly what they should have been doing.
The Lunatic, yes NY is starting criminal probe of these two scoundrels b/c everything was just so on the up-and-up.
These guys are perfectly skilled at making everything look legit when it is anything but legit.
.
No jury would give anyone outside of the family even one thin dime, as it appears that the lawyer and accountant were trying to get money from her and did not have her best interests at heart.
They (the folks outside of her own family, tried the "divide and conquer" strategy, which is why they cut her off from her family.
Don't be so sure! The laws aren't written for the little guy - they're written for the 1%.
Part of the estate was given to people outside the family, her caregivers, besides the accountant.
If that will is upheld by the courts, it will have to be contested, and by the time it's over, the attorneys will be the ones walking away with a fortune.
Just goes to show you, money does NOT buy happiness (but I'll take the house in Santa Barbara).
The lawyer and accountant are as crooked as they come. I strongly suspect that the first will represents her true wishes and that the second is due to some underhanded moves. The large amount going to the nurse in the second will makes me wonder if she did not drug Clark in order to make her compliant and get her to sign the second will, possibly working in cahoots with the attorney and accountant. My guess is that they decided the first will was not giving them enough and they wanted more. I would not be surprised if there is some under the table deal between the nurse and the other two where to nurse would give a part of her inheritance to them after the will cleared probate. Leaving $43 million to a nurse who you have already given numerous generous gifts seems a bit extreme. If the family had abandoned her it might make more sense to cut them out, but for her to refuse their attempts at contact and then cite their lack of contact as the reason for cutting them out sounds suspicious. It sounds more like the lawyer was preventing the family from getting in contact with her in order to work the scam. Allowing the accountant and lawyer to get anything should be stopped. The two of them have demonstrated extremely questionable ethics if not down right illegal behavior.
Suzq-1497446 normally I would agree, but there is a slight error there...the laws are written by the lawyers. In most cases, the 1% and the lawyers have coinciding interests, but keep in mind that clark was in the .1%, not just the 1%.
The sad fact is the lawyers will end up with most of this money, and even if they don't, a large portion of it is money made by a pretty literal Baron. This is what the American dream looks like when it plays out. I've given up wondering why "Satisfied" is no longer good enough.
The legality of a given will shall be decided by the Probate Laws of the State in which the will was written, and the location of the principle residence of the decedent. The Law is very familiar with estates, little old ladies, relatives, and lawyers. There is nothing new under the Sun, to them. In most States, the fees that a lawyer may charge are pre-determined by that State.
As a "survivor" of multiple wills and probates, once the wheels begin to move, the process of distribution as per the decedent's will, is at minimum a 1-year process, although, with current budget cuts in County and State jurisdictions, 18-months might be closer to the mark.
Typically, the most recent will takes precedent. However, where much money is concerned, it might be worth the time and money of those of whom were discarded in the most recent will, to take action. In the case of my own Executor duties, my aunt made two wills, and within 1-week of each other. Her 2nd will was used by the court. But in my aunt's case, it was very clear that her hand was never forced; and that her 2nd will was made of her own intent, and in her right mind.
Rest in peace Hugette. Im sorry for the way your life was. Your heart must of been broken by the loss of your mother. Im sorry you never recieved the kindness you needed to help you through that time. How awful it must of been for you to have so many people after you for your money. It would be so hard to trust, I might of hidden to.( although Im not a hundred percent sure that way was your decision) Im sorry that something happened during your final months that you were not protected or guided with care. May the lord hold you close and bring you out of your sadness and show you love that everyone deserved in life. Wish I could of cared for you and known you and helped you out of your sadness.
It's interesting that the two recent wills, supposedly signed within weeks of each other by a 'recluse' that never left her room, were signed at two different addresses.
If probate court in NY is anything like AZ, the family will be penalized by the court, and the lawyers will be given a few extra million for the 'harassment' from the family.
This has happened many times in AZ. Probate lawyers have a sweet deal going. They drain estates, and then charge more if the families complain. These lawyers are the reason that lawyers are hated everywhere. Remember the Bob Dole joke (when he was running for President): What do you call a busload of lawyers going off a cliff? A good start.
aall blood money sucked out of the mines in Butte. I say cut everyone living in Butte a check for $15,000, it is the only just thing to do.
All that wealth and she had no real friends or family. I keep telling you people, you cannot take it with you. Just think of the good she could have done. There are so many stories of people in need, hungry, homeless, hard working people who lost their jobs. She could have shared her wealth with children with illnesses, or even animals who need care. Now the money will be eaten up by lawyers and fees.
I hope the Koch brothers read this. No, I hope the Koch brothers get the message, along with the other 1%, you cannot take it with you. When you are dead, you are just as equal, as that homeless creature, you look down at, every time your limousine passed he/she on the street. You know the "lazy deadbeat" who never has done a days work. The person, just like you except, you happened to be born into money. How odd it will seem, when after you elitists will be judged, for your contributions to mankind.
Oh, you heirs will place a mountainous stone over your grave. Only it will be a reminder of the wasted life, that lay below. I know I will never inherit a fortune or have the life of leisure, the 1% enjoy but one thing I do know, I will not have to worry about taking anything with me. And what I will leave is a loving supportive family and a great deal of friends, who will miss me because, I love them and shared whatever I had, to help make their life a happier one.
Huguette Clark will be just as forgotten in death, as she was invisible, in life.
I wish her well.
Simple solution. Phone records show who spoke to whom, when, and for how long. If it is shown that there was even semi-regular contact with any or several family members, then there is a lie found out. One lie makes it all a lie.
Best solution of all- The inheritance should go to the city of Butte Montana where Clark destroyed the environment, thousands died as a result of the mines- whether in accidents or from illnesses as a result of working in the mines, the diseases that pervade the citizenry as a result of the mining activity..... She had so much as a result of what her father did- surely she should have remembered where the money came from.
Take that back.
Just because you don't like the Koch Bros. do not forget to say the same thing to the rich(very rich) Democrate Senators, or is it all right because they think like you? Also you have G. Soros tied around your neck. If you are going to name names, name them all.
Herb,
You don't live in Montana. You haven't seen the destruction of what mining has done and the BIG HUGE hole that is left due to these practices. You haven't seen the lives that were destroyed and are still being destroyed as to what was put in the water and land. I love how people who aren't aware of where things come from assume that the environment left behind is pretine and perfect. FAR from it. Her estate should do something to compensate what comes from being a robber baron....and not caring where the money came from. Karma ....what goes around comes around. What a rough life being a socialite! Now the family will fight and fight over blood money of the irish, chinese, and polish workers that toiled in the mines from which he made his fortune and killed so many and the practices that continue to kill. (look up Montana superfund sites just for fun and see how mining killed the environment here)
I just sat and cried after reading the legal documents attached to the article. I cried for Ms. Clark, for her family, and for the evil greed of Bock, Kamsler, and so many others. Basically every single person who had contact with her over the last 15 years of her life (including her physician, how truly sad) was guilty of the greed for money, which is the root of all evil. Did they believe it was okay to steal from her because she had so much? Is this the same kind of thinking and self-serving justification of the OWS crowd? That it’s okay to take someone else’s money and give it away or to yourself because you think they have too much or more than they should have? All of this has had a profound effect on my once held belief that people are basically good. My new beliefs: people are basically evil, this world is inherently evil, and trust no one. I have great fears for this country and this world and for the future of humanity.
MTgirl26
What Ms. Clark's father did was 100 years ago (a century) and those it directly affected are dead. You sound like all of the other greedy people in her life, standing there with your hand out. Even if she gave millions back to Montana and Arizona, as so many have suggested do you really, honestly think the politicians in those states would have shared it with the public? You people who live in your fairytale world really make me want to scream at the top of my lungs, "Stop the world, I want to get off!" Or as another poster put it, "when is satisfied going to be enough?"
Huguette Clark was obviously controlled and manipulated by these two professional thieves.
There is such a vast change in her will within a one month span of time as to defy credibility.
I hope that her family is successful in seeing these two scoundrels prosecuted and jailed.
.
Well damn, now all the seedy lawyers out there will know how to rig a fake will so the government fights for them.
Funny, I have the 'real' will and it names me as the beneficiary, really i have a copy right here.
Can't be. I gave her a lift when I found her on the side of the road with a flat tire. She wrote her will on a napkin at the roadhouse while waiting for a tow truck. She was so thankful, she left her entire fortune to me. I didn't think anything of it at the time, just a scatterbrain, I thought. Such a nice little old lady.
haaaaaa...good one...but, I am her secret granddaughter from an affair that she had long ago...yeah, that's it!
With all these twists, whatever Hollywood producer was ready to make a movie about this will need to go back and plan for a trilogy.
She should have hooked up with Howard Hughes-two real party animals!!
Too funny!
How much did she spend on these "loving" relatives while she was alive? She seemed to spend plenty on other people during her lifetime but i don't recall much said about what she spent on the relatives. This should give a clue to her true wishes as I am sure the lawyers didn't dictate what she spent in earlier times. I am equally sure both her lawyer and accountant probably stole millions from her through the years.
You're sure of an awful lot considering you have no clue about what really took place.
Clark's lawyer and accountant have done the same thing to her that many lawyers and accountants have done to this country. They are playing a shell game with the money. The money goes into one side of the "machine" and you never find it again.
Just with the circumstantial facts known so far, it is pretty evident that these two scumbags manipulated Clark and the families access to her. Now, no one will know what actually happened. It appears that these two broke as many ethics rules as they could. I wouldn't be surprised if they go on to be politicians.
I doubt that the family will ever see a dime, as this will be battled out in court until the end of time, or the government will find a way to get their filthy hands on it.
Floyd: which way do you want it? To the 'scumbags' or 'government will find a way to get their filthy hands on it.' Sounds like an R/Tp, from both sides of his mouth, neither side having any credibility.
"earthgirl" you are clearly liberal judging by your screenname as well as your comment
Your attempt at calling Republican and Tea Party members unintelligent as a whole severaly hurt your credibility as being petty normally does not get a point across.
The topic was Hugette, not politics. Taking any chance you have to insult someone in a different party than you is not only annoying, but degrading to yourself rather than the other person (like you intended it to be).
Huguette Clark: Poster child for the 100% inheritance tax. What a waste of America's resources she was.
Am I missing something in your comment or are you really advocating that all estates should, at death, go to the government and not the descendants?
Exactly how she was a waste fo America's resources...you sound confused.
That seems a bit skewed. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with giving your child everything after you die or even before that. And besides that point, Huguette is not like your typical socialites you see today, she donated her money and even restored valuble wetlands behind her California estate.
I keep hearing a myth that rich Americans are the Job creators, that government spending is the bane of our economy. $400,000,000 will buy bridges, roads, Park improvements, energy research, grant money for teh sciences etc... For Hugette Clark it bought a couple money grubbing lawyers and accountants, it bought a maid a personal nurse, a few grounds keepers, some dolls for her collection, and not much else.
I am told that the rich work for their money, but I see the poor, illegal Mexicans picking the fruit that feeds my family. Hugette never served another person her entire life.
What a farce. Let the government spend and Hugette rot in a big pile of money.
The vultures are starting to fight over a rotten whale carcus. They're too greedy to see that there is enough for all.
I think the lawyer and accountant too great advantage of Miss Clark. She was so secluded by everyone I believe by her lawyer and I honestly believe that all of Miss Clark's money should go to her relatives. I believe that it the only fair thing to do and I do hope that the Judge that hears this case will find in favor of Miss Clark's relatives as it honestly should go to them not a crooed lawyer and accountant.
That's a radical interpretation of this news item. Envious?
It's HER money. Saying the government should get to have it and spend it is a total socialist comment and not something that flies in this country. Money can be passed down from generation to generation. Why? It's THEIR money they can do with it whatever they choose. How would you like it if you didn't get to choose what happened to any of your money? What you're speaking of is redistribution of debt, and it's NEVER going to be an okay idea.
AmericanManNYC banned for calling for the death of all Jewish people.
Yuck.
The fact that these con men received money from her, and $2 million for his daughter in Israel should be a red flag that these men were unduly influencing her.. why give $2 million to a daughter of the attorney?
As my boy Gomer would say: "Surprise surprise." The bees are circling the honey pot and make no mistake about it, there is a lot of honey here.
A sad, sad situation to live a life like this. She is surely at peace now. If she had a penny in her pocket when she died - she had more than she needed to get where she was going.
A very wealthy woman "manipulated" by scoundrels.... is an understatement.
Cut off from family.... is unconscionable.
None of these people did ... what was in the best interest of the lady.... who never left the hospital...
On the contrary..... they served.... their own best interests....
Very sad.
I agree, perhaps it would be better for all involved that her estate be left to help those in need in the art community. We will never know what she really intended because the people who stood to inherit never took the time to know what that would be. I am sure that most of the individuals involved are already wealthy in their own right. Feed some people and create some jobs while they are at it.
That charity art museum is sure to be depleted of all of it's assets just as soon as it is turned over to these two thieves. That nurse thief was paid to keep her mouth shut. They sure are sorry this reporter got in their business. B/c if no one would have said anything they would have gotten away dirty and extremely enriched.
Give it to NASA
Good idea! That money might buy 1/4 of a satellite. Or a toilet seat.
Give it to them anyway
"IRV1040"? Trolling for teen girls by night, doing their parents' taxes by day? I am SO glad my kids were not allowed to use AOL chatrooms! The accountant is 64, the attorney is 79, so they might not be able to enjoy Ms. Clark's cash at all, by the time this wends through the court system.
Monet's "Water Lillies" should go to the art museum. The rest should go to the living relatives.
If she didn't freely donate the painting, it should go to the relatives. I'd like to see the painting, too, but it is still private property until it goes through the court system.
Why do you get to decide what goes to a museum? It states that at least one home is to be made into a museum........ Problem solved...... I adore how some people truly believe they always know best.......... Bless your heart!
@essie: Then the relatives should donate or loan the painting. It truly is a treasure, and its companions are all in art museums all over the world. It would do better in an art museum than in a private home.
@MyOpine85: Yes, in the lawyer and accountant's version of the will. They're crooks, both of them. Why should they know what is best for Hughette Clark?
This is a joke, but it fits well with the way this absurd amount of money falls in the hands of one person. Number one is how much did she leave to the american indians that her ancestors and others stole the land from? Number two how much money did she leave to a miner's widow and children's fund for the thousands of miners who lost their life for this foutune and recieves a lesser pay? THE point is that to hear this fight over enough money to help soooo many people in the world and you have the bitter fight with greed and dishonesty at work...Hmmm the same greed and dishonesty that the founding fore fathers agreed to or went along with...This is hopefully an Indian curse come to haunt the hold group
Say, are you referring to the Koch Bros.?
Being from Montana Tex, the Clark family along with the rest of the mine owners did steal the land, and when the Clark family was in Butte making their millions there were no UNIONS or safe working conditions or retirements. Lots of good working folks died or left crippled for the Clark fortune.
It's THEIR money. They can do with it what they wish. Whoever earns the money has the right to decide what they do with it. It was decided to be passed down to her. Now it is her decision what to do with it. NEVER is it an outside party's decision just because you think people deserve money. It doesn't matter is one person hold 979823427 trillion dollars, if it is THEIR money it is THEIR decision. If someone else wants that much money, EARN IT, then you will have a say in what happens to it.
See, there's the rub, she didn't earn it. I have no problem with people earning any amount of money. I think it's absurd that CEO's are paid vast sums of money for doing who knows what? But I won't try to stop it. She didn't earn anything! It was all given to her, and that I have a problem with. 100% Estate taxes are too high, but I believe they should be high. I won't quote a percentage, I'm not in any position to provide specifics, but do believe estate taxes should be high. Earn all that you can, but remember you can't take it with you.
Tex,
Clark stole the land, worked the people till they died and reaped the rewards for the awful behavior and conditions. There were no unions and several people in Butte and Anaconda have died as a result. They have also died due to the toxic legacy left behind. Until you have seen the Berkley Pit up close and read a little about how 20 years of mining has done 200 years of damage to our streams and land. YOU are paying to clean it up. Perhaps this estate should be put towards reclaimation efforts in Butte and Anaconda? That fortune would restore several acres of land and maybe put a dent in the streams.
Sounds suspect to me. I've recently been involved in a Power of Attorney Abuse situation with the PoA ending up with the entire estate over the years and not one cent for the heirs. Dispite this being against ALL PoA rules, I cannot find any litigation that shows PoA's are held liable for this abuse of their fiduciary responsibilities. My suggestion to anyone with $$$ is NOT have a PoA or one with two agents who watch each other. But then again, that didn't work out in this case did it? So how does one ensure their estate goes where they want it.
"So how does one ensure their estate goes where they want it."
An iron-clad will. If such a thing exists.
It doesn't.
What do you think is going on now?
To paraphrase Patrick Henry: "I smell several rats."
I think an irrevocable trust is pretty iron clad. My step-mothers father made one because he didn't like my dad. So he left his millions in a trust so my step-mother and her daughter receive an allowance and at the end of their lives his chosen charity gets it all. They tried to change the terms, break the trust, something, but they were unable to.
Its a shame to marry someone thats going to change the way your parent may make out their will. Then again, if you love the person why is the parent worried about it for, they don't have to live with the person. Still I have a son and it scares the heck out of me thinking the ex will end up getting some of my money out of him again, this time when I'm dead. She's a damn thief and I hate the idea of her getting another penny of mine, but yet I do love my son and I'll will it to him and whatever he does with it is his business, I can only hope he's smart enough to use it himself.
The Attorneys will wind up with most of it anyway...fees upon fees and those "billable" hours...
The estate will be cared for and the caretakers will live rent free for another 50 years!
Please ...it will never matter to anyone who matters.
I am due! Reply here...you know who you are and who I am!!!
If you want to know..you can find me with a little work...hell you have control of the money now!
Is this comment about Miss Clark or something else. Curious. No one will ever know the real truth behind why she lived that way. It's sad that she had to. Not all people with money are selfish. The only thing good about this story is she had a warm place. a bed, food and medical care. Some families would rather put there relatives on the street and homeless. The lonliness must have been unbearable. Not knowing what is going to happen tommorrow is unbearable for some people when everything is so uncertain. As for your last sentence it shouldn't be work to find someone i tried that Can you answer that ? Thanks and hope you too find all the love and peace you deserve too.
I will apologize for that comment sounding harsh it was not meant to be that way. Bad things do happen to the most loving. giving. caring people. I know that well. Life is so much easier when the right things are done
And money buys what? This woman may have had an enjoyable life had she not had this money. She probably would have married for love, had children, and lived happily into her 100's. What a sad thing to live that long and the way she did. Too many greedy bastards were at her feet--shame on them all. Hope her attorney flushes her money down the toilet by mistake.
Doubt it. From her actions and social avoidance, it sounds as though she had a social adaptation disorder or some other mental disorder. Money likely had nothing to do with it.
Or she may have been smarter than any of us; staying to herself. And, let's face it people, lawyers and morals are oxymorons and lawyers and accountants are mostly just morons. I hope the family gets the judgment, because the inheritance should go to them. The accountant is an admitted perv, who doesn't deserve anything, and the lawyer obviously knew about the accountant's antics. So they were most likely both as crooked as the proverbial dog's hind leg. It would seem atypical that she would make the second will so close in time to the first one, without undue pressure. The family should have the inheritance. Her father earned the fortune, and it shouldn't go to strangers.
One thing is sure: Neither this lady nor any of the rest of us will take anything with us (except that which is eternal). No pockets in the casket.
Sounds like something is "rotten in Denmark".
UNITEDSTATES1776.....you are absolutely correct. PROFESSIONAL THIEVES.
My family has had this done to them......the money in a much smaller scale. Atty and a greedy family member took it all for themselves. These attorney's know how to do it and the courts let them get away with it because they are considered "officers of the court". I hope the family screws the acct. and atty. to the wall.
The government will say all wills are null & void. No will, no inheritance. It will go to the St of New York
In the absence of a will, or in the instance of an invalid will, the estate passes by way of intestate succession. Each state has laws regarding intestate succession, but the gist is that the estate is divided among the heirs. It will NOT go to the state of New York.
Thanks for the clarification, JD.
What? The government not the villian in this case? How can that be, the government is always the villian. Not greedy relatives, not opportunistic lawyers.
This whole thing isn't even worth of daytime soap. It's pretty obvious that the attorney and accountant played this whole sordid mess for everything it was worth and in the end made a move to "get it all".
How very sad for this woman who did nothing to anyone besides be born with the name Clark. The millions killed her before she even had an opportunity to live. Greedy blood sucking scum destroyed her and now it's time to destroy that which destroyed her. Sadly, before this case is settled, the two who manipulated this entire scenerio will probably be dead. Where, in all of this, were those "CLOSE" family members who were or should have been concerned about her welfare.
This is just sick. Not to mention the fact that they (certain unscrupulous individuals) had to keep her alive and kicking as long as possible. This is worse than Ed Gaines.
If you look at both wills, the handwriting on the first will is slightly different, her hand is slightly shaky and she signs HMC on each page. The newer will has a more steady hand and is very straight on the bottom almost as though it were cut and pasted. The initials on each page are HC and the H's are different. I think if they got someone to come in and review the handwriting it will prove one of the wills is a forgery. That poor lady. It doesn't make any sense at all.
Have you ever considered a career in forensics. Very astute observations. We need more like you! Think about it.
The saddest part of this story is that she lived so alone...I pray that Ms Clark had a close relationship with our Lord so she wasn't lonely. It sure goes to show a person that money does not make a person happy, and that it can be the end-all for family affairs. I must say altho I really am intrigued by her story, I believe her wealth is not shown in these stories; rather, there must be some journals or something sharing her life.
Don't assume that because she didn't have many or even any close ties that she was lonely or unhappy. There is a desire among middle or lower class people to believe that people with money are unhappy.
I believe, generally speaking that assumption is false, money creates happiness and lessens worry...
I wouldn't say that middle class people want to think that wealthy people are unhappy. If that was the case, why would they spend so much time chasing money? This is an extreme case. It is not being said that she was unhappy because she had money, but that she was unhappy because she is so alone. Still, she may have thoroughly enjoyed being alone as some people do- but I definitely don't think it was being insinuated that she was unhappy because of her posession of money.
CHuckline, I agree. And notice it's always the ones who never had any money who seem to think it brings unhappiness. Notice those with no money are often very stressed, come on people admit it, and stop quoting what someone else told you. Money would definitely make life a lot easier and less stressful. We weren't there with her, how the heck do we know if she was happy or not??
Why isn't the hospital, doctor(s), & nurses under investigation as well? Seems like ethics are in question for that angle as well!
Investigation for what? She lived to a 104!
OMG, it makes you realize just how fragile life is. If she can go at this early age, it could happen to any one of us!!!
125 for me Jim ... 104's just TOO young! LOL!