E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
W.A. Clark Memorial Library
Huguette Clark with one of her dolls.
NEW YORK — The nurses, doctors, hospital, attorney and accountant for the reclusive heiress Huguette Clark coerced or influenced her to give them more than $44 million in gifts, the executor of her estate claimed in a remarkable legal petition filed Tuesday in Manhattan. The executor asked the court to order all the money to be repaid.
The executor doesn't deny that Clark authorized nearly all of these gifts, relentlessly writing hundreds of checks in her own steady hand until her eyesight gave out at the age of 102.
The accusations were vigorously denied by Clark's attorney, whose representative said, "To suggest that these gifts were not from Mrs. Clark's generous heart is to denigrate the person who gave these gifts, as well as the recipients who cared for her with their love."
The most-favored object of Clark's generosity was her registered nurse, Hadassah Peri, an immigrant from the Philippines who had been randomly assigned in 1991 by a home healthcare agency. For 20 years Peri was the daytime private nurse, working 12-hour shifts, five or six days a week, taking care of Clark's health, her hygiene and her purchases of dolls at auctions. She was paid at an annual salary of $131,040. In addition, she and her family received $31 million in gifts, including the money to buy five homes, jewelry, dolls and a Stradivarius violin (though not Clark's best Stradivarius).
Another $6.3 million, including a $6 million painting by Manet, was given to Beth Israel Medical Center, which allowed Clark to live in the hospital although she was quite healthy for most of her last two decades.
Clark's two physicians and their families received gifts of $3.1 million.
The night nurse and her family got $1.1 million.
The accountant, $375,000.
The attorney, just $60,000 — in addition to $1,850,000 given after the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, for a security system for the attorney's daughter's Israeli community on the West Bank.
All of these amounts were gifts on top of salaries.
If the judge in Surrogate's Court agrees with the executor, all will have to be repaid.
The legal petition filed late Tuesday afternoon, available here from NBCNews.com, is an attempt to claw back into the estate millions that the executor claims was bled away by undue influence or fraud.
Update: On Wednesday the executor filed another petition, accusing Clark's attorney of malpractice and breaches of fiduciary duty, possibly opening the door for some of the claims to be covered by professional liability insurance policies. The executor asks the court to require the attorney and his law firm to return all legal fees paid by Clark from 1997 until her death.
Huguette (pronounced "oo-GET") Marcelle Clark, born in Paris in 1906, inherited her fortune from William A. Clark, a U.S. senator from Montana who was among the richest men of the Gilded Age, a copper miner, a banker, a builder of railroads, and founder of the city of Las Vegas.
His youngest daughter attracted the attention of NBC News in 2009 because of her vacant but well-manicured mansions and questions about the management of her money. She lived her last 20 years in spartan hospital rooms in New York City, dying in May 2011 just weeks before her 105th birthday. (The archive of Clark stories, photos and videos is at http://clark.msnbc.com/.)
'Virtually no visitors'
The executor's petition draws a picture of a woman isolated and controlled by others from 1991, when she was admitted to Doctors Hospital, until 2011, when she died at Beth Israel Medical Center, 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.
"Mrs. Clark had virtually no visitors other than persons who were on her payroll," wrote Peter S. Schram, outside counsel for the Public Administrator of New York County. That official, Ethel J. Griffin, was appointed by the court as the temporary executor of the Clark estate after questions were raised about the actions of Clark's attorney and accountant, whom Clark had named as executors.
"Mrs. Clark," Schram wrote, "was completely dependent for her physical and emotional needs on a small group of individuals, who were her only contacts with the world outside of her hospital room."
The executor claims that this close circle of caregivers exerted undue influence and control over Clark, making her unable to make free and intelligent decisions. The executor claims that the attorney and accountant never fully informed Clark of the tax ramifications of her gift-giving. The executor also says that Clark suffered from various unspecified "physical and mental infirmities," and by 2009, at age 102, she was suffering from severe loss of sight and hearing along with episodes of "hallucinations and confusion."
Those claims will be countered by documents showing that Clark, while a recluse who saw few visitors, was never diagnosed with any mental illness, paid close attention to her financial affairs through the years, and rebuffed or ignored the advice of attorneys and accountants, even as they warned her that the gifts were making her cash poor, running up a tab of millions in unpaid gift taxes.
The petition's claims were rejected by Clark's attorney, Wallace Bock, whose own attorney issued a statement.
The filing by the executor "reflects a total disloyalty and lack of fiduciary care to Mrs. Clark," attorney John D. Dadakis of the firm of Holland & Knight said in a written statement to NBC News. "Our client, Wallace Bock, has honored Mrs. Clark's wishes during his career and handled her affairs with the utmost duty of loyalty to her. Mrs. Clark understood each and every gift she made, and they were made with the love that she had for those who were close to her.
"To suggest that these gifts were not from Mrs. Clark's generous heart is to denigrate the person who gave these gifts, as well as the recipients who cared for her with their love," Dadakis wrote. "All of the records reflect that Mrs. Clark actively enjoyed her generosity and fully understood what she was giving. Mr. Bock will vigorously defend the acts of Mrs. Clark and we fully expect that the record will prove that all the gifts of Mrs. Clark were made by her, being fully aware of what she was doing."
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."
All the parties named in the court papers have until Aug. 8 to respond in Surrogate's Court.
The gifts claimed by the executor as not valid include the following:
- $17,117,326.03 given by Clark to the nurse, Peri, in more than 200 personal checks written by Clark from 1991 to 2001.
- $5 million paid to Peri, funded by a line of credit from JPMorgan because Clark had insufficient liquid assets. The executor acknowledges that the attorney, Bock, had a signed authorization from Clark for this payment and nearly all the others listed here, and by 2009 she had signed over to him a document called a durable power of attorney, giving him authority over certain financial affairs.
- $3,883,685.78 given to Peri to purchase five homes: a co-op apartment on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, two condos on the Upper East Side, a house in the borough of Brooklyn, and a vacation home in Ocean, N.J., as disclosed by NBC News in 2010.
- $1,935,200 in other tangible gifts to Peri, including 84 pieces of jewelry worth $667,300, a doll worth $64,400; a Stradivarius violin worth $1.2 million (not Clark's $6 million Strad, which was sold); and three harpsichords worth $3,500.
- $60,000 in a check written by Clark's attorney in 2009 to Peri.
- $3.4 million to Peri's family, including $1,503,813 to her husband, Daniel Peri, $706,550 to her son David, $628,250 to her son Abraham, and $632,450 to her daughter, Guela.
- $685,000 given to Clark's licensed practical nurse on the night shift, Geraldine Coffey, who also worked from 1991 to 2011 at an annual salary of $131,040.
- $358,327 to help Coffey buy two condo apartments on the Upper East Side.
- $85,554 for tuition of Coffey's children.
- $30,000 given to Coffey by the attorney.
- $10,000 given to Erlinda Ysit, a licensed practical nurse for Clark for seven years.
- $6 million Manet painting sold to benefit Beth Israel Medical Center, which allowed Clark to live in the hospital, even though for most of her two-decade stay "there was no medical need." This gift, and $295,000 in other gifts, was made on top of the $300,000 to $400,000 a year she paid to the hospital to live there. "At no time did Beth Israel, its staff, or any other physician or expert conduct a neurological examination or psychological examination of Mrs. Clark or otherwise ensure that she possessed the capacity required to make a gift to Beth Israel," Schram wrote.
- $500,000 given to the Corcoran Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C. The executor did not yet ask for this money to be returned, but asked for the court to order an inquiry.
- $1,168,000 given to Dr. Jack Rudick, one of her physicians, and his wife, Irene Rudick.
- $1 million lent by Clark to Dr. Rudick, on which he made no payments, and which she forgave.
- $667,951 given to Dr. Henry Singman, her primary treating physician for 20 years.
- $33,857 paid by attorney Bock to cover Singman's professional liability insurance premiums. (Not authorized in writing by Clark, the executor said.)
- $200,000 paid to Singman's family.
- $1,850,000 paid to an Israeli community on the West Bank where the family of attorney Bock lives. Documents show that Bock asked Clark in 2000 if she wanted to contribute to a security system. The total amount to be raised was $1,850,000, and Clark wrote in that amount, agreeing to pay the entire cost. Only five days earlier, according to the court records, Bock and accountant Irving Kamsler had written letters to Clark, warning that her gifts were out of hand, that she would owe $12.5 million in gift taxes, and that she might have to sell assets to raise cash. The executor accuses Bock of failing to remind her, when he solicited the gift benefiting his family, of this earlier warning about her financial situation, as well as failing to advise her of the right to seek independent counsel, nor arranging a medical evaluation to confirm that she had sufficient capacity to make the gift.
- A $60,000 check written by Bock to himself in December 2009. Bock testified at his deposition in March that this check was authorized by a letter signed by Clark a month earlier. That letter was prepared by Bock, who gave $48,000 of the gift to his law firm, in line with his partnership agreement. The executor wants that money back as well, claiming that Clark never intended to make any gift to Collier, Halpern, Newberg, Nolletti & Bock.
- $375,000 in checks written by Clark to Kamsler, a felon and registered sex offender, from 2000 to 2008, on top of his monthly salary, and a $60,000 check written by Bock to Kamsler in 2009, authorized by a letter from Clark. (Bock at the same time wrote checks to nurses, doctors and others, mostly in line with payments that she had made previously.)
Other gifts are not being challenged by the executor. For example, Clark gave $10 million in 2000 to her friend Suzanne Pierre, now deceased, but Pierre might not be considered to have a confidential or fiduciary relationship with Clark.
Update: An attorney for Kamsler, the accountant, issued a statement on Wednesday: "Mr. Kamsler provided dedicated service to Mrs. Clark, a very private person, for over 30 years," said the statement by attorney Marci Goldstein Kokalas of the firm Lazare Potter & Giacovas. "Unfortunately, the Public Administrator has misconstrued Mrs. Clark's generosity and made unfair allegations that have, yet again, brought her affairs to public scrutiny. The instant action dishonors Mrs. Clark's memory by casting a shadow on the gifts she bestowed throughout her life to those she cared for and trusted. Mr. Kamsler is confident the facts will reveal that Mrs. Clark always acted of her own volition and free from the influence of others."
Criminal investigation
Originally the executors of the Clark estate were Clark's attorney and accountant, but the court revoked the accountant's authority, and suspended the attorney from his role, leaving only the public official to manage the estate. The judge, Surrogate Kristin Booth Glen, acted after the public administrator's attorney revealed that Kamsler failed to file gift tax returns from 1997 through 2003, and falsely claimed on later returns that all taxes had been paid, leaving Clark owing millions in gift taxes plus interest and possible penalties. (See the earlier story.)
Though a criminal investigation was launched in August 2010 into the handling of Clark's finances by Bock and Kamsler, no one has been charged. Both men have maintained that they did nothing more than carry out the wishes of a woman who wanted to protect her privacy. The investigation continues by the Elder Abuse Unit of the New York County District Attorney's Office. The investigation was prompted in part by reports by NBC News about the sale of property owned by Clark, including a Stradivarius violin and a Renoir painting.
To direct her $400 million fortune, at age 98 the heiress signed two wills.
The first will favored the relatives from her father's first marriage. They were not named: The will left the money to the "intestate distributees," legal language for the people who would inherit her money if she died without a will. (Clark had been married only briefly, and had no children.) And the will gave $5 million to the nurse, Peri.
Just six weeks passed before she signed a new will, cutting out the family, which claims that this will was the product of fraud. The new document leaves the largest share of her money to a museum for her art collection in her oceanfront estate in Santa Barbara, Calif. Millions more (an estimated $27 million after taxes) and a doll collection will go to Peri, and lesser amounts to a godchild, the hospital, and doctor, as well as $500,000 each to the attorney and accountant. (See the earlier story and read the documents: A twist: Heiress Huguette Clark signed two wills.)
The $400 million heavyweight battle over the wills is about to begin, with the $44 million in gifts providing the preliminary bout.
Clark's jewelry collection sold in April for $18.3 million. That money will be held by the estate during the contest over the wills. Her three apartments overlooking Central Park and Fifth Avenue, a total of 15,000 square feet, are on the market for $55 million; one of the three has found a buyer. Her country estate in New Canaan, Conn., is for sale for $17 million. Her $100 million estate in Santa Barbara, which the Clarks had not visited for half a century, is being carefully maintained, awaiting the court's decision on the will's plan for an art museum.
A twist: If the executor is successful in recovering for the estate millions from the nurse, doctor, hospital, attorney and accountant, and if the second of Clark's written wills is the one to be upheld, those same millions can then be paid out to the beneficiaries, including the nurse, doctor, hospital, attorney and accountant.
The full story
More on the Huguette Clark mystery is at http://clark.msnbc.com/.
Do you have information on the Clark family?
Reporter Bill Dedman is co-authoring "Empty Mansions," a nonfiction book about the Clark family. If you have documents or information, you can reach him at bill.dedman@msnbc.com.
Leave a Comment:
They are a bunch of thieving ingrates. Shame on them!
Most hospitals have a policy that forbids staff from accepting gifts from patients. I was in the hospital for an extended period following an accidents and when my parents wanted to give a gift to one of the nurses who had really taken very good care of me she said that hospital policy kept her from accepting it.
People working for someone in a professional capacity such as an attorney or accountant should definitely not be allowed to accept large gifts like this from their clients. It calls into question their professional ethics. The amounts given to the nurse and her family are completely absurd. Their is no way that I can see these gifts as being legitimate and I wonder if some of the money as not kicked back to the attorney and accountant. the relationship between the lawyer, the accountant, and the nurse definitely should be investigated. The whole lot of them strike meas being a bunch of greedy thieves who manipulated an elderly, infirm lady and stole from Clark.
While it's true that Clark gave away a small portion of her net worth, I have to wonder what her mental state was like. Will the medical records tell the truth? Hard to know if the nurses and doctors were given "gifts".
If she didn't give away the money of her own free will, it will be very difficult to prove. The executor needs to come into the foreground here, too, as it sounds like he/she just wants more money as well. What is the executor's motive? Greed, plain and simple.
This whole case would have been different had Ms. Clark died destitute. Elderly abuse could have easily been proven then. Since she's gone, good luck trying to get this money back.
It doesn't seem ethical to me for nurses and doctors to take so much money, especially the nurse with 5 houses (really - one wasn't enough?). The hospitals are allowed to receive monetary gifts, so I don't see much of a problem there - I guess the gifts were payback for her not really having to be there. However, I wonder if Medicare money was involved at all here, too?
If fraud is found, how will this money ever get paid back? It's a shame that someone has to die and vast amounts of money are in play. This is when people show their true colors. This may have been true in her case, but is also true whenever a person with money dies.
Whatever the case, this woman lived a good life. I just hope everyone involved realizes what a good-hearted, generous woman Huguette Clark really was. I, at least, hope everyone who received a monetary "gift" was there at the funeral and paid tribute to her.
Now the lawyer...not much good you can say about lawyers!
The article reads that Ms. Clark gave these monies as gifts, writing the checks herself. She lived a reclusive life and these people she hired in a professional capacity were probably treated as friends since she knew them for so many years. Her nurse was assigned through a home healthcare agency and wasn't a part of a formal hospital entity. Even though the amounts of money seemed excessive, given that the woman was a multimillionaire-ess she could afford to be as gregarious as she chose to be. Let them investigate it all they want- bottom line, they were the lucky recipients of exhorbitant gifts from a wealthy, eccentric heiress and good luck proving any deception. Even if these people broke some ethical rules accepting gifts they still laugh all the way to the bank at the end of the day.
I hate the idea of scumbag lawyers getting their hands on the money, but if she was not mentally incapacitated, she can spend the money the way she wished. It always amazes me that people are always telling others how to spend their money, or how they should live their lives. I was taught to mind my own business and that discussing other people's money was considered extremely rude. Perhaps I am old now and times have changed.
This is obviously a case that needs to be resolved by the courts. It could be reasonable to believe that she was generous with those who actually took the time to know and care for her. It could also be that some or all took advantage. I can understand where a lady her age might choose a reclusive life and why Attorneys or Accounts might be serving her wishes by working over the phone. I can also find it plausible that she cut family out of the will in lieu of her staff if they took no interest and did not visit or offer the least of kindness...but, maybe they did and that would come out in court.
We will see as the case goes through the system. Perhaps she gifted big in her lifetime because she expected the family to object to the second will.
And you and the executor know that how?
There is documented evidence that she authorized most, if not all (but one I read in the article) for all these gifts, she wrote all but a few checks herself and signed them.
The ONLY people who know what HER intent was is HER.
The executor has no proof that these gifts were not given freely. The executor mentions that no one decided to administer a competency exam. Since when do you adminster that exam without a reason. Advanced age is NOT a reason. Many advanced age people are of sound mind and body all the way up until they take their last breath.
Sounds to me like the executor is fishing...no way will they be able to PROVE coercion.
This is just a waste of the state's taxpayer dollars pursuing this. And the FAMILY ought to be ashamed. They rarely saw her, never took care of her but yet the moment she died they have had their hands out...that is what is shameful.
Miss Clark reminds me of another heiress who was taken advantage of and that was Doris Duke. Again, neither woman were exceptionally pretty, "Handsome" they are called which was a nice term for saying they were unattractive.
Miss Clark probably felt any suitor was only after her fortune, and she was probably right so for her the best course was being a recluse. Unfortunately even the most carefully hand picked people can become blood suckers where a huge fortune is concerned. The Filipino nurse saw dollars signs and probably worked the poor woman to get every dime she could. Come to America the land of Gold and get your fortune, that is probably what she saw. The same is true with the others, and like Doris Duke she thought they were her friends and confidants.
It is a shame, she would probably have been better off with a bunch of false friends, who only befriended her for her money then the leeches that ended up running her life.
hang them all
wow I think there is a lot more to this story that is not being told. Where was her family during this time? I think that people did take advantage of her she sounded lonely and like she wanted to buy friends or people to care for her. Everyone in this case should be ashamed of themselves. It is sad that it took her dieing for her family to even look in to anything that was going on with her, and it is even sadder that the people she trusted to take care of her did this to her. I have a feeling that her mental state was not all they are making it out to be, especially if she sat in a hospital that long.
I know many Filipino home care workers; their job is the worst and they are under paid. In every case, a good live in caregiver are the only ones that actually give true dignity back to the patient. Also in every case they become the best lifelong friends of the patient because it truly is an intimate relationship. These caregivers literally take care of the elderly like caring for a baby 24/7 so what else would you expect other than gratitude from the patient, especially if she is wealthy. One question off topic, this lady has no heirs, so the greedy one here is the government appointed executive of the estate (the lawyer); he is no doubt pulling in a percentage of the money he is dealing with and therefore wants more of it; starting this litigation he can now charge an exuberant amount for court time and just take from the pot as he drags this out. There is no other purpose or use for the remaining wealth it may just return to the government coffers but the Executor does not want to give up his control of the money, its plain to see.
They took advantage of this(poor rich soul) they should return it all and given to Charity and make sure it even goes there, They fed off of her, Make them pay!!!!!!!!!!
Her attorney(no other clients) her CPA(a convicted felon); were grossly incompetent, that is why the court has thrown them off the case; the State of New York, looked the other way, even though they had been warned for years; I do not know if there was a trustee over her estate, if so the Uniform trust act, would kick in and force all fees and gifts to be forfeited; what a scam crime and outright theft!
I'm a human services professional and see two points here rules are in place forbidding acceptance of these large gifts to avoid accusations of fraud or manipulation. However it's been my experience elder people have actual family they already know doesn't care for them or have the time to visit except for money,this person had long term care givers and they probly were like family to her and if no one ever called in to question her mental state including the family or executor prior to her death it only makes me suspicious of the executor at this point. I know a person who cared for an elderly couple was a live in care giver for years family never called to check on them,spend time and rarely visited prior to their death they went to an attorney and had documents executed that the care giver was to recieve a bulk of their estate and stated the reasons why,but the family contested the documents in the end care giver had to split estate with family to keep estate from being eaten up in legal/court fee's. So dont be so quick to judge the care givers in this case but all should be looked into but in the end i think her wishes should be honored she rewarded those who cared for her over the years.
Maybe all that money should be used to help repair the wasteland of a legacy her father left for Montana in a big poison filled hole in Butte, when asked about the future he said "that is a problem for the future generations to figure out". He leveled a mountain and kept digging until now the berkley pit and surrounding areas are a wasteland. The trees in that valley still cannot grow normally because of the smelting process, pine trees that look like little mushroom shaped hedges.
I say if the Huguette gave away the money maybe it is because she was ashamed at her fathers ill gotten gains.
This whole greedy story is sickening indeed. One doesn't have to think for long how dedicated any of her caretakers would have been if she was poor. So, don't even go there. The legal ramifications are unbelievable and the attorney, convicted felon/child-abuser accountant should be spending some time in prison. The day nurse and the rest of them should be stripped of their remaining ill-gotten assets which should be bestowed to her family as she wished in her first will. Seems the family wasn't allowed to see Hugette while all the switching the walnuts was done. This story makes me realize why I prefer my dog's company to most people's. Left to their own devices (as clearly this attorney and accountant where) they almost always do the despicable next wrong thing. The hospital's play in the matter make a whole huge statement about the healthcare system in this country. Hugette wasn't sick. The best thing for her would have been to have her in a situation where she wasn't isolated and hospitalized for no reason. There should have been many overseers in a fortune of this size and no apparent heirs. Shame, shame, shame. I wonder how long the hospital would keep any one of us if we simply wanted to live the life of a recluse!
This is absolutely ridiculous. It doesn't make alot of sense. I do believe there was fraud- based simply on the information in this article. Huguette Clark may as well have been a kind hearted and giving person- most people like to think t...hey are- I didn't know her. But the thing that strikes me as odd, is all of these large amounts of money were given as "gifts" during a period in time when Huguette Clark was drastically aging. Both physically and mentally. I also find it quite contradicting that all these gifts were given out of love and kindness, when this woman obviously was a woman of high economic status therefore if she truly new the full consequences of her actions in this "gift giving" I do not believe that she would want to assume such a financial deficit to the United States government -IRS- Even low educated, law breakers don't pull this kind of scheming. I don't think she would want to leave behind that kind of legacy. The fact that this issue is occurring makes me want to remove the carpet and clear out the dust and dirt beneath. Somethings not right. And my gosh! Who in their right mind needs 5 homes? Or that much money? They want to help the world? and give back? How about paying their portion back to Clark, so that her debt is forgiven, take what they *need* to live off of, maybe even a little more to help friends and family- then donate the rest to help our U.S.A. or even overseas to all the millions of children who die in Africa each day of AIDS and starvation or the kids in India and Russia who learn to steal for money and food at age 6. Ha! Absolutely obscene.
Unfortunately, her staff knew her condition better than she ever did and were at an advantage to play her regarding her generous side. The amounts and items in question are well above and beyond what would be considered reasonable as a gift even for a woman of her wealth. That being said, the dedication of several of her aides seems admirable. Unless, their dedication came as a result of her being played by them. Still, the gifts seem way over the top for those who cared for her.
And do take note of how her fortune was amassed by her father as noted in the comments here. A shining example of capitalist greed at the expense of the little people and the environment, leaving a mess for future generations to deal with.
Sounds familiar in today's political/corporate/social climate of profit at any cost.
Maybe it's poetic justice that the little people in her life have taken advantage of her/his wealth to counter the sins of her father?
Recluse getting what they deserve.
First off, there was probably criminal activity. But its going to take a court to figure out what was, and what wasn't, and the burden is on the prosecution. Paying a high price isn't a crime, it means you were foolish. At a certain point, you cross into ripping someone off and then, yes, its a crime. But really, if you look at how much money this woman had, what kind of weird solitary life she CHOSE to live, and that her affairs were in order, I'm sorry, its going to be one tough burden of proof for the prosecution.
If you want to pay your nurse $1 mil annual salary, its your right. If your nurse makes you sign something you didn't agree to, then yeah, she's stealing from you and needs to go to jail. But that has to be proven, and would have to be linked with that Clark had no decision making ability at the time. Kind of sounds like, however, she was mentally intact and did what she did purposefully.
You know, this definatly deserves the investigation. It deserves appropriate prosecution. But its going to be a helluva mess.
If anyone who has been following this story from the very beginning, as I have thinks any of these lowlifes deserve or even earned these so called gifts then you are probably of the same type of moral standing as the attorney, accountant, nurse, doctor and hospital involved. The Bible has it right, the greed of money is the root of all evil. Makes me sick to think all of these shysters let this women die a lonely and isolated death away from any and every family member so they could cash in on what was never theirs to begin with.
I hope the two main ones and the nurse get a good long prison sentence.
Unfortunately...good luck getting the money back if it's spent.
I'm glad MSNBC reported this and kept on it...otherwise these crooks would have gotten away with a lot.
Plain and Simple:
It is called professional ethic people. No one in a professional field should take monetary gifts beyond being paid for ones services. As a nurse and law student, all of the people involved committed a crime except Ms. Clark. The nurses were paid a very generous salary for LPN's and if the payments were actually gifts, should not have had a problem taking it in as a salary over the last 20 yrs. These people all worked together to take advantage and to be sure they were not caught, each got a piece of the action, keeping one from reporting the other. The lawyer, accountant and doctors could not take the large bulk of so called gifts, so they gave it to the nurse Peri and she logged some of it back to them, to cover their tracks. The doctors never did an exam on the woman because they didn't want her to be declared unfit and unable to make these gifts. She went blind in 2009, she surely did not sign checks after that. Then someone please explain to me why her accountant was a felon? Had he done this before?
As far as the New Executor, trust me she was assigned to the case, she does not stand to make as much as everyone thinks, there is a fee but that fee is usually across the board.
When the new will was written, it should have clearly stated that it super-ceded all previous wills and those wills were now voided. It also should have said the will is incontestable in any court in the United States, or if her lawyer was smart enough, should have at least told her as long as she leaves a certain amount to her family left, they could not contest the will. But he didn't which proves how greedy and ignorant these people were, leave the family 1 million dollars each, then they couldn't contest the will. Now they can for sure. Did this lawyer get his degree from Sears and Roebuck or what? As far as the accountant he was probably hired by the attorney and I am sure she knew nothing about him IE felon. Not saying everyone doesn't deserve a second chance, but that was the idiot that got everyone caught up in this because he tried to cheat the government and not pay his taxes. Needless to say he didn't change. I'd love to see them all have to pay back every dime. They were all paid excellent salaries for their positions in the first place. Who the heck can't live off of over 100k a yr. It's not that bad, and I can say if they had an avg LPN job the salary would be between 35k-45k, they received 3 times that.
They are all guilty of fraud and unethical practices.
Take it all back and then give them all 20 times their annual salary or the number of years they actually worked for her times their annual salary. Then give the rest to a good charity. Anyone who really cared anything for her would take it and let her rest in peace.
Would you be so harsh to a waitress that someone dropped a G note on the table or more? Or how about as some have done and split the winnings of a lottery ticket with a server out of a whim, would you expect them to give it back after it was freely offered? It may be different for some but a live in caregiver is not a professional trade, she is only a full time babysitter and with a limited income; in this case her wage was boosted by the patient. I have many friends that are living care givers and the good ones do get their pay boosted to keep them around, they are treated more like family than help. I cannot believe that all these years this woman was incapacitated to not understand what she was doing, for one thing the gifts started 40 years ago, this was not a recent occurrence. Its a free country, those given gifts for above and beyond should be allowed to keep it.
MEP(CSM),
Since you make allegations of dishonesty (crime) by the beneficiaries of Ms. Clark's largess, you come dangerously close to libel. You actually scream "Crucify, Crucify".
And all in regards to the affairs of a woman you never met (Had you, you would have mentioned that fact.), conducted by her and others whom you have never met. In fact, you know only what Bill Dedman has chosen to tell you in his articles and what the temporary executor alleges. You have no real foundation with which to judge why Huguette behaved the way she did, or gave the gifts that she gave. You don't know me. Do you want to tell me how to distribute MY money? And as a somewhat jaded church treasurer, I can tell you that many charities are as rife with crooks, charlatans and self-servers as any business or trade in this country.
Please note that the temporary executor has his/her personal and profession agenda in this case. By maximizing the size of the estate, they maximize the size of their fees. By dragging things into court, they add billable hours for some law firm. Likewise by maximizing the estate, they maximize the estate tax dollars the federal government and the State of New York will receive. And finally, just as Bill Dedman has a book to sell, being Huegett's executor with lots of courtroom time will enhance that person's political capital.
Sounds like a lot of jealous people. She gave money to the people who she was around so what?
She seemed to keep certain types of people out of her close proximity and she enriched those she allowed to care for her and confided with with money. That seems a pretty good indicator she knew exactly what she was doing. It is very consistent?
Somebody else wants the money! why else would this be an issue?
Good gracious--have you all looked at pictures of these guys? They even LOOK like crooks! "Scofflaws" is the word that comes to mind!
All this talk about Ms. Clark's family not caring enough to see her over the years . . . how do we know Bock and Kamsler weren't the ones preventing others from seeing her?
I think there are some professional ethics that should prevent the lawyer and accountant from receiving such gifts. Someone asked about a waitress receiving a "G note" as a tip. That would be amazing! I hope this happens, and often! However, I don't think waitresses are in professional associations such as the American Bar Association and the AICPA, which is the American Institute for Certified Professional Accountants. There are strict standards of honesty and integrity for people in these professions and these organizations. Please do not misunderstand--I think waitresses are awesome, and many of them are very professional and have high standards of honesty and integrity, they just generally aren't members of similar associations.)
Anyway, I still think they look like crooks!
How do we know the family isn't a bunch of crows pecking at the old lady's decomposing corpse, hoping to hit a few hidden gems? They weren't there for her at all, these people were, the family is just digging for gold they never deserved in the first place. I can't believe all of this nonsense I'm seeing spewed here. Can you honestly say it's better to die greedy clinging to your money, than to have a warm, giving heart to those that care for you, even if they're not your blood?
Still, I'm discounting jealousy. You'd rather see her rich family get richer, rather than these people get what they earned. I don't even know why I come on here anymore, as it seems the mass majority are in favor of punishing good people, and in enabling and even rewarding crooked, evil people that treat others like crap. When the heck did I end up in Bizarro World?
Why is a lawyer taking gifts from their clients, why are doctors taking gifts from their patients? They charge a fee for their services and that shoudl be it. These supposed gifts are not small they are more than generous and looks bad, very bad, taking advantage of an elderly lady.
At least she didn't give the dough to her dog, a la Leona Helmsley.
DB2. It would have been better -- certainly more honorable -- for a dog to take the money rather than this thieving lawyer, who seems to be the worst of the worst of a bad breed.
There is a couple of huge extended Filipino families doing far better than they could ever have hoped. $131,000 a great salary, but if gift tax returns were not filed will all these bonuses be taxed as income?
Let them laugh all the way to the bank at the end of the day.
But charge the whole bunch with medical malpractice.
If no family cared enough to be in the position of caring for this woman and monitoring her health care and finances (except when she died at 102), then allow the woman's position in gift giving stand. She gave from her heart and her real family didn't come around until the end.
She could have been living in an in law appt. close to them, cared by nurses - if they had really cared....or moved in with her. The heirs only love, is for her estate.
Her family cared. They were denied access to her by the lawyer and accountant who claimed she wanted nothing to do with them.
You should read the entire section of stories on this instead of making snap jugdements based on this most recent stort.
This is not the first time that this story has appeared on this cite. Evidently B. Powers has not seen the others, babina is correct the family was denied access to her due to influence of all the people who were supposed to look out for her well being and at the same time robbing her blind.
It appears you are fast with the keyboard but have not been reading WHY her family did not visit or see her more often.
Because of blocked access by the "accountant" and "lawyer" they could not contact her personally...........perhaps that's so they wouldn't find out about how her estate was evaporating because of "generosity"
I agree no family insight until her death coming in like vultures .They didnt care when she was alive to busy or not wanting to be bothered at all.She gave gifts and paid a very generous salary to those around her i propably do the same if i were rich and my family wasnt around.
did you read it phoenix145? the family did come around..repeatedly but were turned away by the attorney. what part of that don't you understand??? it's amazing to me how people will comment but not read the article. the attorney, the doctor, the caretaker ...they all made sure no one else was in communication with this woman. She was isolated...granted she did that herself but prior, the family would check in on her. That changed towards the end. Read prior articles to this one and you will read in those as well that they refused family members. That's when another will was written up. I hope they have to return all of that money. Her care would be so different if from the get go they weren't allowed to receive any kind of money. I doubt if they would have been so caring. I wish they would go to jail for manipulating an old woman.
You summed it all up- quite nicely!
For all those saying that one attorney and one accountant blocked all family access on their own account, consider this.
Huguette had NO close family remaining. She inherited this money through her mother, the SECOND wife of the Senator. The Senator, after setting up all his children from his first marriage in successful businesses and funding fairly liberal 20 year annuities, left the bulk of his fortune to the second wife and her daughter, in a will with a poison pill. That pill totally disinherited anyone who contested the will. To make such an arrangement suggests that the Senator did not trust his own children. I doubt several generations improved family warmth. I find it hard to believe that second, third, or fourth half-cousins had much real attachment to Huguette, but perhaps did have an affection for her money.
It will stand because each individual situation can not be proven now.
Still, medical malpractice charges are in order.
Its about time citizens got something from a Senators bribing, kniving, and lying........
"IF" the money is returned who gets it, the executor and his family?
Greed and immorality are taking over America. Very sad, the dream is dying.
The last days of Rome, decency barely exists.
Pathetic.
DITTO!
Everybody's got their hands out, this is Obama's America. The attorney's are going to come out the best on this one. Years and years in the courts.
What are you talking about? This had been going on for twenty years. What the hell does Obama have to do with it?
Your post is absurd.
Obama didn't create America, America created Obama. A civil rights attorney who professes go after the rich. I am merely saying this is Obama's America because Americans want something for nothing. I blame the people of this Country, Obama is just the representation of the vast majority of our people.
WHAT THE HELL? How the hell did you manage to put obama in this story? SHUT YOUR PIEHOLE!
Weird... Your thinking is similar to your screen name......
....what does Obama have to do with greedy lawyers and accountants that are likely in the 1% of Americans that the Republicans represent?
What the heck does Obama got to do with this topic absolutely nothing!! Oh i get it blame him for all thats wrong or corrupt in this country,get a grip!!!
this is just another case of elder abuse. they all took advantage of her. they scammmed her. they stole from her. i, personally, fear the day i must be in the care of strangers. i think i will commit suicide first. actually, for several years now i have been stock piling pills so that when the day comes that i have to go into care i can just take all the pills and die. i have no faith in people after being a waitress for almost 40 years. in my tenure as a server, a position that i take seriously and regard as as a nobile profession taking care of others, i can tell you people are just so mean. pick on the the little lady server. make fun of her, say stupid stuff to her, hurt her feelings, swear at her, complain about her, take all the slips out of the guest check presenter leaving no tip (believe me, it happens so often i know its on purpose). i guess my point is people are awful and will do anything to someone they percieve to be in a weaker position than themselves. scam, steal, murder, impuning reputations, etc. the courts should make all these people give the money back. this is a clear case of elder abuse. give the money back. these people are despicable.
Classic momma, i am really sorry you feel that way about people. I think being a waitress is a difficult job. There are so many possibilities of things can go wrong in a restaurant, and for the most part you are the only person people see. So, for a few examples, if the people have to wait too long to be seated; or you are too busy to take their order within 30 seconds, refill their water, bring their food, take their plates away, or anything else; or the kitchen messes up and doesn't clean the silver properly, or someone spills the salt in a dish, or the customers just don't like the food--YOU are the one who gets all the grief. That is of course not fair, but it definitely happens a lot of the time.
There are people who can behave in despicable ways; sadly, I too have experienced that at different times of my life. Fortunately not everyone is like that. I am appalled about some of the things people say and do, so I'm not surprised to hear that some people have been cruel to you. I agree that some people are are awful, as you stated. My problem is that you are making a sweeping generalization about everyone.
In no way am I a "Pollyanna" who thinks everything is right, or even can be made right. However, I think that there are many wonderful people in the world, too. I wonder if, in part, our attitudes have to do with where they live. I find big city people on the whole to be less tolerable, whereas small town and rural folks seem to have a streak of decency that probably has to do with their own life circumstances. When you're in a small area and everyone has to rely on each other, people do tend to be nicer. Of course, this is a pretty broad generalization, too.
I hope that in the near future you will find some people who will love and respect you in your daily activities for the kind, warm, and wonderful person I suspect you are.
In addition, I am in agreement with you that this is a CLEAR case of elder abuse.
Keep something in mind as you react to this story. The court appointed executor receives a percentage of the estate, thus, he has a monetary interest to prove these GIFTS were the result of fraud!
Well terry...I was named executor of estate of a dying person. It was my responsibility to make sure that his will was carried out and the shady relatives didn't steal him blind. He had a legal will, a trust fund and I was only to receive money for incurred expenses only. Like gas money to take care of his requests, which had to be accompanied by a legal receipt. His son and new wife moved in unexpectedly when he had a turn for the worse, I could not have them removed because the paperwork, copy of the originals didn't have the notary stamp on them. They influence him enough to get me and the other POA removed, and that was 5 months ago. They suddenly left him stating they could not control him. I had authorities check well being and found that son had sold everything that wasn't nailed down and used it for their drug habits. Man now has no cemetery plot, funeral money is gone, his extensive gun collection along with his musical instruments sold. PS. I went to his lawyer earlier and stated my concerns over welfare of his client, his suggestion, let them be and let the chips fall as they lay. In our town our prosecutor made it his goal to put into prison those who take advantage of a vulnerable person. Disbar the lawyers who took advantage of Huguette Clark's 'misguided' generosity.
Great point to make ,im really suspicious of the exucutor as well beleive its an attempt to gain financially by reversing all this woman has given.
The ones who voted to give it back are just jealous. They should be made to pay gift tax on the money but as for keeping it, as long as she was in her right mind, she had the right to give her money away to whomever she wanted. They even said she used a steady hand to write the checks. It would be a different thing if she was made to write out checks and I didn't read where things were stolen from her, so let it go people unless you have evidence to the contrary. If I was a multi-billionaire I would make sure all the people who cared for me were taken care of and the other ones could go to ____.
Maybe you missed this part of the article:
"The executor also says that Clark suffered from various unspecified "physical and mental infirmities," and by 2009, at age 102, she was suffering from severe loss of sight and hearing along with episodes of "hallucinations and confusion."
No one is jealous here. I think everyone who stated that her staff give back the money is out of a concern for elderly abuse.
Elderly abuse runs rampant and occurs in all families, regardless of income - although, if the elderly person has money, there is more opportunity for abuse. It's difficult to prove financial elderly abuse and by the time it is found, it is often too late.
Kris,
The key phrase is: "The executor also says that Clark suffered from various unspecified "physical and mental infirmities," and by 2009, at age 102, she was suffering from severe loss of sight and hearing along with episodes of "hallucinations and confusion."
If the executor is going to allege infirmities, they should be clear and specific. "various unspecified" infirmities could be alleged against anyone in the country. What were they? How did they affect her judgement?
Yet, we are asked to question why a fit woman would be kept in a hospital room. I find it odd that two different stories emerge depending on what malfeasance is being alleged. As post-60, I also find it a bit condescending that there is obvious agism in the executor's allegations. Since she was old, she had to be incompetent, addled, insane. I guess this is why we have such young people on the Supreme Court and in Congress.
To be blunt, Huguette Clark had been closing herself from family and society for decades, to say that the last five years of her life were so different, belies negligence or potential abuse dating back decades. Are we investigating those doctors, lawyers and accountants?
Some were vastly over compensated, others--not so much. Find a fair compromise. The woman had no real heirs, and she knew it. What else is she going to do with her money? I know I would want to direct my affairs for as long as I could, but clearly some took real advantage of Ms. Clark in this situation. Others didn't.
Ultimately, it was Ms. Clark's money to do with as she wished. I understand that she had control over her mental faculties for most of her last years, and she wasn't a dumb woman. However, I think the regular nurse got waaayyyyyy too much. A lot of people donate to hospitals, and getting to live in one with around the clock care? Hospital care isn't cheap--enough said.
Giving gifts is quite okay. Being taken advantage of is a whole other ballgame. I think this case touches on both ends of that spectrum.
zapper. You're not taking advantage of someone who gives you money of their own free will. To this lady millions are like hundreds to you. She was a multi-billionaire. One billion is a thousand million. So she gave away a few hundred million. It was her right and what nut would say to her, "oh you're giving me too much money".
As I said, it was her money to give as gifts. I just think (and it is my opinion) that some of these gifts were a bit extravagant. I do not know if she was manipulated into giving such largess to others. Other gifts were more in realm of reality.
The executors are VULTURES. So damned greedy. Did they wipe her butt or provide her with care for the last decades of her life??!!
Ok. Doctors and nurses don't need THAT much money. Gifts are one thing, but I'm hoping that they knew this woman was not always in her right mind.
If Clark were alive and you were a patient in that same hospital, if a code blue was called, who do you think would get more attention and more medical care in that situation (provided staff was limited and only one person could be saved)? You or the person who gave her doctor and the hospital monetary gifts?
That's why it should be ethically immoral to accept such large monetary gifts.
HOTNTX - The executors are "Vultures"? Are you sure? Ms. Clark's staff received pretty hefty salaries for wiping her butt and taking care of her. That should have been enough. I'm pretty sure you would be more than happy to wipe someone's butt, etc., if you knew you could get "gifts" just for the asking.
Some of these people receiving gifts wanted to make sure their futures were secure before anything happened to Ms. Clark, which is why they kept her from her family and took the money.
How do you know that her medical records were accurate? Was she really healthy, mentally and physically? If it was reported by the executor that she had physical limitations and hallucinations, was this noted on her medical records from her doctor? Where did this information come from?
Since there are numerous lawsuits involving her, we may find the truth some day...or not.
True GIFTS are rarely based on need. Most of us give gifts from the heart. She just has a LOT more money than any of us can even imagine. So, her family gets 80 million instead of 120 million? How much do THEY need, eh? If I have any little pile of money when I go, there a number of "family members" who I purposely won't want to get a dime of it!
She had real heirs, her family. They were kept away by the attorney and lawyer.
Read the entire section before posting please.
I did read it, she had some nieces and nephews who were not close to her.
Also, there was AMPLE left over money for any heirs, even after these gifts. Perhaps you should read that as well. I've been following this story for the past couple of years. It's been very interesting, and it should have been investigated while Ms. Clark was still alive. AMPLE opportunity existed for that investigation, too.
Blood Sucking Lizards!!! All cap letters apparently not allowed. Loud, belligerent, screaming, vicious noises, disgust and everything else that comes to mind in the absence of all caps!!!
The next time you find yourself dreaming of being rich remember stories like this. The rich carry a common burden, their children are destroyed by it. You see, like it or not, both our physical and mental health require a good dose of stress to remain strong. Money removes alot of the stress necessary to keep us fit. Millions of years of engineering I guess. Be very careful what you wish for.
Karma
We all have to live together. Older people have the legal and moral rights to be treated with dignity and respect. If this lady was in her right mind,that what she did was her Right. If she had ANY type of mental impairment put them all in JAIL.You do not cheat and steal from older people. What kind of world are we living in. What these people were paid 130,000.00 for a heath care work speaks for it self. I have done this type of work . Here in N.C. i would have to work for 10 years to make her yearly check,much less the 30,000,000. Is that million dollars she got. Hum i think there is a rat in the nursing home.
I want speak of the doctors who i think are supposed to be morally , well do they have any respect or What is the word honesty. Are is Money every body's god. Any way I just think it is wrong to lie cheat and steal from old people.Hell the law says any body. If guilty do not just get the money back society DEMANDS they go to jail every body involved.
Mu humble thoughts Harry Johnson the silent majority
Just how much of this money is left to return if the courts say it must be returned. The Lawyers fighting this case in court will get the most of her money.
You are correct. Now the REAL VULTURES have swept in. The liars (British pronunciation of lawyers) will take it all.
25sed, I believe you mean "solicitors" for the British lawyers. That word has its own negative connotations, doesn't it?
I still think Bock and Kamsler LOOK like crooks!
I walked down her block once. Don't I get a gift too?
I didn't read that she had any family members and I'm sure her lawyers couldn't keep them away unless she wanted them to. On top of that her executor is probably someone who was appointed by the state and they look out for the states interest in the money. There are a lot of families who don't want their family to get their money. If they wanted money so bad they should have visited her when she was younger and had her make out a will. To this lady the people who took care of her was her family. Period. You're all just jealous. A guy who was a truck driver where I worked help a man around his house with gardening. He worked for a few months and died and in his will he left the truck driver his 8 million dollars because he had no family. My stepson worked for a man for a few years. The man promised my stepson his house because he didn't like his family and said they never visited him. He died without a will and his kids swooped down like vultures and took everything. My stepson got nothing. I told him "well you should have had him make out a will".
They all took advantage of a feeble old lady. They all belong in jail the rest of there lives.
And she was a saint? Most likely she was greedy and self centered, most people with that kind of money are.You hear stories about people like this leaving everything to their pets. Typical rich wacko.
The money will have to be considered to be gone. Rich Wacko or not, the medical staff should be charged with medical malpractice.
Her estate will never see any of the money these PARASITES stole from her.
Money talks, and bull@!$%# walks. *yawn*