E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
W.A. Clark Memorial Library
Huguette Clark as a child, with one of her dolls. Her family is battling her nurse for the lion's share of her $400 million fortune.
NEW YORK — The relatives of copper mining heiress Huguette Clark have gone to court to challenge her last will and testament, claiming fraud by her attorney, accountant and nurse.
The longtime private registered nurse, Hadassah Peri, already received about $26 million from Clark while she lived, according to court documents, and is left more than $30 million more in Clark's last will. The attorney and accountant were left $500,000 each.
A previous will, signed just six weeks earlier, left $5 million to the nurse, and all the rest to Clark's family. The family was cut out of the second will entirely. Despite years of pleading from attorney after attorney, Clark had 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.
Her nurse, an immigrant from the Philippines, had been assigned to Clark by a home care agency almost 20 years ago. Now she owns a $200,000 Bentley Arnage luxury sedan and five houses. Money for four of those houses was given to her through the years by Clark, who died last May at age 104.
The reclusive Clark has been the focus of a series of a series of reports on msnbc.com about her vacant properties and the management of her fortune. She lived out her last decades in modest hospital rooms in New York City, leaving empty a $100 million home on the Pacific coast in Santa Barbara, Calif., a $20 million country estate in New Canaan, Conn., and three apartments with a total of 42 rooms at 907 Fifth Avenue in New York City, soon to go on the market at about $75 million.
Nineteen of Clark's relatives filed an objection to the second will this week in Surrogate's Court in Manhattan.
Clark "was not competent to make a Will," argues the family attorney, John R. Morken, "in that she did not know the nature, extent or value of her assets, was not of sound mind or memory and was not mentally capable of making a Will." He goes on to argue that the will "was not freely and voluntarily made," that it was "procured by the undue influence of [attorney] Wallace Bock, [accountant] Irving Kamsler, Hadassah Peri, and/or by other persons acting in concert," and that the same people obtained the will by fraud.
Document: Read the family's objections to the will (PDF file).
A key issue in the case will be the close timing of the two wills, just six weeks apart. If Clark was not competent to sign a will in March 2005, then how was she competent to sign a will in April 2005? Of course, from the family's perspective, it doesn't matter if the judge throws out both wills. In that case, if she dies without a valid will, the family inherits everything under state law.
Another key issue will be the extent of contact between the relatives and the reclusive Clark. Her attorney and accountant portray the relatives as distant, having no contact with Clark. The relatives have said they and their older relatives had contact with Clark through the years, exchanging letters and telephone calls while respecting her desire for privacy, and that those contacts were cut off abruptly by her attorney about the same time as the wills were signed.
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 19 relatives are descended from the first marriage of Clark's father, the former U.S. Sen. William Andrews Clark (1839-1925).
Huguette Clark, born in 1906, 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. Of those 21, 19 are challenging the will in court.
A public official investigating Clark's finances, the Public Administrator of the city of New York, has accused the attorney and executive of fraud in handling Clark's taxes. The attorney and accountant, also the subject of a criminal investigation by the Manhattan district attorney, have said they handled Clark's finances appropriately and according to her wishes. No criminal charges have been filed. A judge has suspended thm from being executors, a role which would have earned them about $8 million each.
Speaking for nurse Peri, attorney Harvey E. Corn argued in court documents on Dec. 7 that Clark gave the money, and her doll collection, to her out of "gratitude for Ms. Peri's devoted service." Corn says that "Ms. Peri saw or communicated with the Decedent almost every day" during her nearly 20 years of service. And he says that hospital records from the six months around the signing of the wills show that Clark was in good health, "conversant, cheerful, well read and engaged in taking care of her personal affairs."
Hadassah Peri has not spoken publicly about Clark, but a press agent issued a statement on her behalf in June after she was named in the will: "I saw Madame Clark virtually every day for the 20 years. I was her private duty nurse but also her close friend. I knew her as a kind and generous person, with whom I shared many wonderful moments and whom I loved very much. I am profoundly sad at her passing, awed at the generosity she has shown me and my family, and eternally grateful. Just as Madame Clark demonstrated kindness toward others in her actions, so, too, will I and my family devote a substantial portion of this bequest toward making the world a better place for all people."
The public administrator's office has said in court papers that it might seek to "claw back" into the estate some of the gifts given from Clark's accounts while she lived. The administrator said the powers of attorney that Clark signed over to her attorney and accountant did not include the authority to give gifts, including a $5 million check written to Peri in 2009, after Clark herself stopped writing checks on her account.
If that clawback effort is successful, and if the second will is thrown out, Peri could not only lose the large bequest but could also have to pay back some of what she now has. The public administrator also has filed challenges with the court, objecting to gifts and bills paid out by Clark's attorney and accountant, suggesting that a judgment could later be sought against them for return of that money to the estate.
The New York attorney general has also 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.
Huguette (pronounced "oo-GET") Marcelle Clark lived quietly, 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 on the phone and 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.
Previous stories in the Huguette Clark mystery series 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 HuguetteClark, 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; 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.
"Heiress Huguette Clark's will leaves $1 million to advisers," June 22, 2011.
"The 1 percent of the 1 percent: How Huguette Clark's millions were spent," Nov. 19, 2011.
"A $400 miillion twist: Huguette Clark signed two wills, one to her family," Nov. 28, 2011.
"Tax fraud alleged in estate of heiress Huguette Clark; accountant resigns," Dec. 21, 2011.
"Nurse, in line to inherit millions, battles family of heiress Huguette Clark," Dec. 22, 2011.
"Judge bounces attorney and accountant from estate of heiress Huguette Clark," Dec. 23, 2011.
"Book coming on reclusive heiress Huguette Clark and her family," Feb. 3, 2012.
"You can move into heiress Huguette Clark's building, for $25 million," Feb. 6, 2012.
Leave a Comment:
it should go to the family..this is not the only case..in the USA..this happens all the time.
The lawyer, accountant, and nurse are all in cahoots with each other. My bet is that there is an agreement that the nurse is going to give a large portion of the $30 million she is to receive under the second will to the lawyer and accountant. The only reason they did not have the will leave it directly to them is that they knew it would send up red flags with the courts. They cut the nurse in and used her as an intermediary to try and avoid suspicion, which thankfully did not work. The lawyer cut off the family from having any contact with her so that he and the accountant could manipulate Clark. The lawyer should be disbarred and the accountant should have his license pulled as both are nothing more than crooks. The money should go to the family. Let the family decide which charities they wish to give money to. I wish there were a way to uphold portions of the will but not the whole will, but that is not possible. The establishment of an art museum to exhibit the extensive art collection at the estate on the west coast seems like a good use of some of the money. I would hope that the family would follow through on something like that should they prevail in the court battle over the wills.
Of course the "nurse" communicated with her every day because she was stealing Ms. Clark blind and needed to keep good tabs on her "mark".
The attorney, accountant and this "nurse" should be behind bars for intentionally hiding Ms. Clark from her family and then stealing all her assets.
.
Money the root of all evil !!
Dano - you are wrong. The proper quote is "THE LOVE OF money is the root of all evil". There is nothing good nor bad about the money itself, it simply is (or is not)
This is fishy, in previous stories I read the lawyer denied the family access to Mrs Clark and that should have sounded off the alarms right there, that trio is a ring of thieves, probably kept the old Gal sedated or at least when she signed the will, glad its in the open and the courts have a say in what will be.
Maybe they should take all the money and use it to clean up the mess the old man left for the states to deal with, (that's a load of the rest of us) he raped the hell out of the land. and left billion dollar cleanups that will take another half century to clean up. not to mention he was sort of a crook in his own right.
Yea like that's not an obvious case of people looking for a pay day.
I don't think the family deserves a penny of that money.
I don't think it's about the family wanting her money. I think it's about making sure that she wasn't taken advantage of and making sure the people who did take advantage of her do not receive anything further. I think all three of them took her for everything they could get their hands on and now that she has passed they are STILL trying to get more. Very sad story.
A few family member filing would be concern. 19 of them making sure their name is on the document is looking for a payday. I'm 38 and I doubt I could remember the names of 19 family members. And this woman supposedly had nothing to do with family for decades?? I'm sorry but the family went looking to make sure they were all included. Kinda like the office pooling money for a lottery ticket. As if they think the judge will feel more pity if they come to him showing him all the mouths they have to feed.
That being said, I do believe, from the info avail so far, that the lawyers did take advantage of her big time. I know little about the nurse's situation, so I can't make the call on that. But it's not unheard of to have a caregiver be the beneficiary of large sums of money. All this needs to be sorted out in court. They need to freeze the funds till then, before it all poofs into overseas accounts.
But one thing I do strongly believe, she has the right to give her money away to whoever she chooses to, as long as she was competent. So many recent cases of family coming out of nowhere contesting wills and winning.
Problem is she has no family - she was only briefly married to the father of these kids who are suddenly taking interest in her only because of the money. If the the first will was concidered valid by these sudden family members, then the 2cd will made a month earlier is valid. Sad legacy for this woman who lived a secluded life.
The later Will is obviously a fraud and should be overthrown by the courts. The family should inherit everything equally. Competent or not shouldn't be the thought here. Fraud is fraud. Obviously the nurse had been milking the woman's finances for many years. Fraud is clearly obvious here. I am sure that the Judicial system will clear this matter up for the Clark family. My condolenses to the Clark family for their loss and the unwarranted pain caused by this legal matter. My prayers and thoughts are with them.
The family shouldn't get a thing. Look at their behavior. For years which of these family members gave a damn about her empty houses? Which of them visited her in the hospital? None. She probably wrote the second will and stayed the hell away from these louses because she knew they were reprehensible gold diggers.
so true it should go to the family no matter how distant as from what i can see and read between the line the attorney and the accountant are in kahoots to get it all i can understand if that nurse had taken care of her... for her to leave her something substantial but the lawyer and the accountant with thier manuvering and know of laws are trying to weasel every penny they can ... i am sure they were getting paid very well for what she thoughtl they were doing.... to have a felony count of white collar crime shouldnt that tell the family and the court somebodt is doing no good and leopards dont change their spots. two wills with in 6 weeks hummmm sounds and looks and smellls FISHY .if i was the judge decideing this the family would get it all and the lawyer and accountant would get nothing for they have already been paid and probaly been skimming all these years. and far as the nurse she had to do everything for her (many a elderly ladies are very hard to please)— so more than likely she deserved the most that she already got. what does every one else think ????lawyers and accountants you have no say in this...why ????what is a lawyer and accountant with cement up to thier neck????.......... not enough cement.
sour grapes; she was kept in isolation for over 25 years, her lawyer and CPA (a convicted felon), have been removed from her estate by the courts; her nurse, CPA, attorney all made hundreds of millions in fees from a old lady, who lived in a nursing home surrounded by a doll collection; and now the family that was ordered by the administrators not to have any contact with her for 30 years are claiming something is wrong, sour grapes; ( WHERE THE HELL WAS THE d.a, atty, general OF new York ALL THESE YEARS).
The attorney and accountant made millions off of her over the years, but not hundreds of millions. Also, she was not in a nursing home. She lived in a hospital in NYC. That was her choice and she paid the hospital well for allowing her to live there. Read some of the other articles that have been published about her.
Convicted felon or not, this whole deal is a shiest. I am not sure how they can prove that Ms. Huegette didn't want this nurse to have what she gave her. Now this should be fun watching a government entity make a decision on what happens with the millions in the estate.
I think she stated her desires very clearly. Her lawyer and accountant were just doing their job as the client wanted - which is what they are supposed to do. The fact that the will didn't leave more to them is a good indication that they did not have undue influence over her choice of heirs. And the fact that her estate is worth as much as it is is a good indication that they have properly managed her finances over the years.
So you take the word of a QUESTIONABLE lawyer and accountant along with the word of a "private nurse". WHY? When the family was denied access at first should have FORCED for access and have the old bag tell them to their face that she wanted to be cleaned out by other shysters. Dishonesty is easiest when isolation is prevalent, and in this incidence it seems an old lady was taken advantage of again and again. These crooks should not be allowed to do this to anyone else!
Since when are they "crooks" and "shysters"? She was in charge the entire time, her lawyer and accountant did nothing wrong - except for abide by her wishes. If I had a nurse that treated me that well for twenty years, I'd reward her handsomely.
The attorney, accountant, nurse, and about 25 people from the hospital have all testified that Ms. Clark was of sound mind, and did indeed wish to be left alone. She would only see her doctor, her nurse, and on occasion, the lawyer. From what I have read, most of her dealings with the accountant were over the phone.
All of the NY people are throwing a lot of accusations around, without any proof. It has been almost a year since they got involved, yet no charges have been brought. of the 19 " family " members suing, only 3 have ever had any contact with Ms. Clark, and none in the last 10 years. No attempt until the MSNBC articles were published. Ms. Clark then indicated she did not want to communicate with any of them.
The most likely explanation for the original will is that the lawyer convinced her she needed a will for her estate, and he asked her who her relatives were. After it was written up, she stewed on it for a few weeks and decided that it was her father's wishes that no one else in the family ever got the money (which is well documented) so she called up the lawyer and had him change it.
The administrator said the powers of attorney that Clark signed over to her attorney and accountant did not include the authority to give gifts, including a $5 million check written to Peri in 2009, after Clark herself stopped writing checks on her account.
This stinks, the money should go to her family.
fact: why should the money go to her family? They probably haven't seen her in years. Maybe she didn't want anything to do with them either.
I have relatives that I haven't spoken to in years, yet one of them hit me up for money when I received my trust fund. The balls of the guy. There is a reason people don't want to have contact with other members of their family!
But for the sleezy lawyer and accountant? really? Good grief...
so when you die you wouldnt want that family member you had limited contact with to receive your money? what you would rather it be buried with you? geeze people are as greedy in death as in real life.
fact: why should the money go to her family? They probably haven't seen her in years. Maybe she didn't want anything to do with them either.
Because from the sound of it her handlers have been pilfering money for years:
did not include the authority to give gifts
Yet they authorized gifts without the authority to do so, that doesn't sound fishy to you at all?
I think the nurse is good, why would her attorney and accountant give the nurse so much money???? I think it came from the little old lady from Pasadena. But the attorney and accountant should be looked at.
Seems reasonable to me that she might not have wanted what looks like a money-grubbing, not-related-by-blood family to get their hands on her vast estate. After all, she spent all those years in hospitals under assumed names, hiding out from nearly the entire world.
I'm not surprised at the greed of human beings. But it bums me out all the same. RIP Hugette.
How is that "not-related-by-blood"? Any children from his first marriage are her half brothers and sisters. Their kids are nieces and nephews, etc. How is that not by blood? The blood connection is on her father's side. It's the attorney and accountant who were greedy throughout the entire time that they worked for her. Try reading the other articles to see what they did over the years.
Frankly, her lawyers and nurse have already made plenty of money from her, and their motives are certainly suspect. Leave the money she left to charity as it is, then take the money she left to her nurse and lawyer and give it to the family. The family's motives are suspect too, but not more so than her attorney or nurse.
And the attorneys get rich.
I am fascinated by her story and REALLY want her doll collection.
Sounds like the attorneys and the DA had an agreement but that may be about to come tumbling down around them. If they fraudulently got the old woman to sign the will then sell everything they have, disperse it to the family members according to relations---first cousin and so on, and put them in jail.
i don't think the attorneys or the nurse should have accepted gifts in the first place or should they be allowed to but the old lady did'nt give a cent to her family most went to charity she did'nt like her family so they should get nothing as she wished
zuksam - how do you know that she wanted her family to get nothing? Sheer speculation. But what is NOT speculation is the way all of her so called advisers ripped her off! Why should the nurse get one other dime? She was being paid by the company that hired her to watch over 'Madame Clark'. So yes she was paid. A Christmas gift would not be our of order - a one time check - a Christmas Bonus if you will. But to have enough money to buy what she has! OUTRAGEOUS! How many nurses out there have enough money to buy a Bentley? A one %er if there ever one was one. SHAME ON THEM!!!!! Oh yeah - to do good for all the people - my a$$.
Jaedor, the "money-grubbing, not-related-by-blood" family are actually related by blood through their shared father. However, since the lady led a reclusive life, I wonder just how much face to face contact these 19 family members had with the lady. According to the article she spent the last years of her life in various hospitals. The lady did what she did for a reason, but in the end the desire for money will always win out.
The nurse is supposed under ethical and criminal investigations for nurse cannot receive any gift higher than USD 25.00.
One could argue that it is certainly unusual for a person to want to live in a hospital. That could be taken as an indication that the person has mental issues or perhaps she was being hoodwinked by the nurse and her cohorts. The nurse should not be seeking compensation beyond her agreed upon pay. This indicates unethical behavior. But then nursing school starts at age 16 in her country of origin.
Who wins? The lawyers of course! There won't be anything left when they're done.
The cpurt should invalidate both wills and divide the estate among all family members as the law provides. It is clear to us non-legal minds, that Clark was manipulated by the three stooges who cut her off from family contact.
BW -267706 - Totally agree with you. Well said, short and sweet.
She deals with her lawyer, in those last years, over the phone or thru closed doors? Come on. Hope the judge easily sees thru all this and throws the last two wills out. Let the heirs be heirs and the criminals be gone.
What you want, isn't always what "huguette"
branxoz. Now that's funny. I think the Obama administration should confiscate the money, and bail out some failed green energy company.
Teddy Roosevelt's fault
branxoz, is funny :) not politically correct but who really cares? I don't know who should get the money. What I see with money is it brings out all kinds of friends and relatives... 104 years on the planet, good for her.
too little info and written vaguely to make a conclusion as to what is going on. sounds like she was duped by the 3 but who knows the whole story.
Come on this 104 woman was not kept from her family by these greedy care takers??? They riped enugh of her money whle she lived... the rest should go to her FAMILY!
More like EXTORTION if ya ask me - theres no tellin what they conspired to tell that ol' woman,, they all should fall under under the RICO Act, and be proscuted accordingly, either that or somebody throw them all a .357 shell, and maybe they'll get the hint ~ !!
"The relatives have said they and their older relatives had contact with Clark through the years, exchanging letters and telephone calls while respecting her desire for privacy. One of her former attorneys represented her for 20 years without meeting her face to face, instead talking to her on the phone and through a closed door." Sounds like no one met face to face with her except the lawyer, accountant and nurse. I might watch to many crime dramas, but wonder if they did a DNA test on this poor woman. She could have died years ago and they just substituted someone else to in order to keep control of the money.
leesmom, never thought of that, but I find it very believable. Find someone that kinda looks like her, sounds like her & if they happen to be forgetful all the better.
How hard did her family try to be in contact and a part of her life?
This is not the only case, this happens all the time.
I know someone this happened to, the people that worked in the retirement home -that my friends mother was dying in- cut a deal with the estranged sister (who never gave a #$%^ about her mom) and they stole ALL the moms money, not one cent went to the daughter who had taken care of the mother for over 30 years.
The sad part is that if your poor in America (and my friend is) you don't have the money to hire a lawyer and fight the crime that was just committed: they all drew up a will with all the moms money going to them and had her sign it 2 weeks before she died.
But all I hear on these posting boards is how our President is a bad person for realizing the health care industry needs to be fixed, this a perfect example of what goes on every day in that industry, the people who work in health care know you are broke, they know you can't afford a lawyer so they steal all your mothers money before she dies and no one cares: except Obama.
And you know who in America is trying as hard as they can to slander our President: conservatives who make their living off stealing money from poor and decent people, even in death.
Avarage Guy - get a grip. No one is blaming anything on Obama in this discussion. You are trying to turn it into something political that doesn't even apply in this situation. Liberals steal just as much as conservatives.
BTW, that should be "you're", not the possessive "your".
No, you are wrong!!! Democrats steal, not liberals.
Hitler was a Christian, all the Nazis' were Christian, not only were they Christians but they were very religous Christians. They were Right-Wing Conservative extremists. But, they were not members of the Republican Party, they were members of the National Socialist Party.
Don't confuse Democrats with real Liberals.
The Nazis were avowed atheists and cultists . they were exposed to christianity as youths , that does not make them christians . Same with Stalin , Lenin, Trotsky , etc !
You are so far off the mark your comment is laughable ! Practicing christians running death camps ? GIVE ME A BREAK !!!!!
Nice try but no cigar ! Why do you hate christians ?
This whole thing sounds weird. From all angles. It's going to be very very hard for any of them to prove who did what and who said or exchanged what now that she's dead. It's pretty much the families words against the lawyer/accountant/nurse. And I don't see those three giving up anything easily.
As a Licensed Practical Nurse, I think that if there isn't, or wasn't, a law or rule against accepting gifts worth more than a few dollars from patients, there should be. I consider it totally unethical to take a gift worth more than a few dollars from a patient. If the "nurse" was really such a close friend of Hughette that Hughette felt compelled to gift her large sums of money, the nurse should have asked to be reassigned. She could then continue to visit Hughette as a friend.
The hospital that allowed such a strange employee/patient relationship to continue should be investigated. Anyone that could not be contacted in person by their own accountant, but could be cared for daily by a parasitic leach posing as a nurse, should have had a full mental evaluation done by a disinterested third party. In this regard the accountant, hospital, medical personel, attorney, and her family failed to act responsibly. As for the "nurse agency" that assigned the "nurse", it should also be held accountable for unleashing a totally unethical individual on a client, and thus facilitating this fraud.
It is stories like this that make me proud to be an LPN. Although we may lack the intense science background of an RN, we learned this in school: don't take gifts from patients, it is unethical.
If this family was so concerned with her (money) they would have intervened LONG before this woman was dead and UNABLE to defend her actions and really cut them off without a penny. A bunch of whiney ambulance(wallet)chasers who left her in her various hospital rooms for 2 decades rather than risk being cut off.
Man, oh man is this gonna make a good movie someday! And I agree that they were in cahoots for the fortune.
Really, ya think ??? LOL
My question is why should the money go to the family? Just because they are related? That makes no sense...by no means do I think the lawyer, nurse, etc should get it either, but if the "family" has never been or tried to be a part of her life, then why should her money belong to them??? And what if we are all wrong, and the lawyer and nurse are really good people??? There are some of those left in the world you know...I think that maybe this family is just a greedy...give it all to charity...at least then something good will come of it.
It should go to the family, because the wealth was created by the family in the first place. Hugette was a beneficiary herself at one time. I wonder why agency nurses are not rotated out of positions by the nursing agency just to prevent this sort of thing from happening? I'm also wondering what power this nurse had over the accountant and attorney that they only managed to get 500k each out of it all? That nurse is rotten to the core.
Let me guess you are one of those right wingers who whine about family values and personal responsibilities and private charity instead of food stamps etc. Ten a simple right of inheritance is just the family being greedy. You will be very ripe for exploitation in your dotage and there will be plenty of H1b visa caretakers to fill your void of gratitude and loyalty to your family.
Actually, I'm not right winger who whines about any of those things...I have very high loyalty to my family, the family that has been with me, stuck by me, etc...but I have no patience for "family members" who come out of the wood work when money is involved. I have never met my biological father, and if he died a millionaire I would want nothing to do with that money...and would never fight for a dime of it...because I have no tie to him other than blood...what I think is that it is unethical for the family who has never even been a part of her life to think they have a claim on anything that is hers, her father gave it to her...so it was her decision what becomes of the money...If they were so concerned about her, they would have made more of an effort to be a part of her life...this is all about greed...and just so you know, I would give anything in this world to my family, even if it left me destitute...and they would do the same for me...do you think that you should get something even if you don't earn it...??? Would you chase money from some family member that you never had contact with...just because you could be rich??? Or have you had this happen to you...and oh...you poor baby...that distant family member didn't leave you anything? Right of inheritance is given by the person who has passed away...not anyone on the outside...I think you should look up gratitude and loyalty...neither has anything to do with what I said...where are the families comments about this? There are none...where are the defenses from them? There are none...She might have been duped by the lawyer and the nurse...and by God I think they both got more then they deserved...that's why I say spit in all of their eyes and give it to charity and maybe to the few family members that she had in the previous will...not the 19 that have all of the sudden raised their hands...
The family tried to intervene years before when they had concerns about her care. The control was with the attorney aided by the nurse and accountant. If the court cannot determine the money should be shared by the family then give it ALL to charity. There is no way the nurse, the accountant or the attorney deserve the huge pay-outs and charges should be considered against the two men and deport the nurse.