E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
W.A. Clark Memorial Library
Huguette Clark with a doll in the 1910s.
NEW YORK — The stakes have been set in the battle over the wealth of copper heiress Huguette Clark. More than $300 million is on the table as her extended family prepares for a court fight with her nurse and others for the last whispers of one of the great fortunes from America's Gilded Age.
At her death on May 24, 2011, in the New York City hospital where she had lived for 20 years, the daughter of one of the copper kings of Montana possessed about $306.5 million, counting all her real estate, stocks, bonds, cash, trusts and personal property. The accounting was filed this week in Surrogate's Court in Manhattan by the office of the public administrator, the temporary executor of her estate.
Clark's estimated property values:
- $84.5 million for Bellosguardo, her California beachfront vacation home on 23.5 acres in Santa Barbara. That value was reduced to reflect $502,000 in property tax liens.
- $53.0 million for her three apartments at 907 Fifth Ave., New York City. Their values are $24 million for apartment 12-W, which has been sold, $19 million for apartment 8-W, which has also found a buyer, and $10 million for apartment 8-E, still on the market. Each apartment has approximately 5,000 square feet.
- $14.3 million for La Beau Château, her Connecticut country home on 51.7 acres in New Canaan.
- $79.3 million in stocks, bonds, cash and trusts, including $4,039 in unclaimed funds received from the state of New York.
- $75.4 million in personal property. Details are not given, but this includes a Monet and other paintings, jewelry, furniture and her doll collection.
John L. Wiley, http://flickr.com/photos/jw4pix/
Bellosguardo, the Huguette Clark summer home in Santa Barbara, Calif. Her executor estimates its value at $85 million. Other estimates have run to $100 million. It could go to a new arts foundation, or to her extended family.
The net value of the estate will be less. Federal and state estate taxes must be paid, and unpaid federal gift taxes are due to the IRS.
And the estate could increase in value if the executor is successful in efforts to claw back more than $44 million in gifts that were given to Clark's nurses, doctors, hospital and others in her later years.
Huguette (pronounced "oo-GET") Marcelle Clark, born in Paris in 1906, inherited her fortune from William Andrews Clark (1839-1925), a U.S. senator from Montana who was among the richest men of the Gilded Age, a copper miner, banker, 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, dying just weeks before her 105th birthday. The archive of Clark stories, photos and videos is at http://nbcnews.com/clark/.
Rahul Kadakia of Christie's Auction House displays jewels discovered in heiress Huguette Clark's safe deposit box, including a pink 9-carat diamond ring that could be worth up to $15 million and a flawless Cartier diamond worth up to $4 million.
Signed two wills
To direct her fortune, at age 98, Huguette Clark signed two wills.
The first will left $5 million to her private-duty registered nurse, Hadassah Peri, leaving the bulk of her estate to her relatives from her father's first marriage. The family members were not named in that will, which left the estate to her "intestate distributees," legal language for the people who would inherit if she died without a will. Because Clark had been married only briefly, and had no children, her closest relatives were the descendants of her father from the first marriage. These were Huguette Clark's half great-nieces and half great-nephews, and their children. Huguette and her four half-siblings had each received one-fifth shares of W.A. Clark's empire in 1925. Huguette's mother, Anna, received Bellosguardo, which then passed down to Huguette.
Just six weeks passed before Clark signed a new will. It specified that she intentionally left no money to family, with whom the will said she had little contact. The family is claiming that this will was the product of fraud. The newer document leaves the largest share of her fortune to a museum or art foundation to be set up at her oceanfront estate in Santa Barbara. Specific bequests are made to her attorney, accountant, doctor and others, and the remainder is split among the nurse, a goddaughter and the California foundation. (See the earlier story and read the documents: A twist: Heiress Huguette Clark signed two wills.)
Originally the temporary executors of the Clark estate were her attorney and accountant, but the court revoked the accountant's authority, and suspended the attorney from his role, leaving only the public administrator to manage the estate for now. The judge, Surrogate Kristin Booth Glen, acted after the public administrator's attorney revealed that Clark had not filed gift tax returns from 1997 through 2003, leaving her owing millions in taxes plus interest and possible penalties. (See the earlier story: Judge bounces attorney, accountant.)
Preparing for trial
The parties have been collecting evidence in the case through depositions of witnesses. Judge Glen put the attorneys on a fast clock, saying she hoped to begin a jury trial this year, before her term ends on Dec. 31. The judge recently acknowledged in court, however, that such an early trial date seems unlikely, leaving the case for her successor, perhaps early in 2013.
Though a criminal investigation was launched in August 2010 into the handling of Clark's finances by her attorney and accountant, no one has been charged with any crime. 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.
Clark's jewelry collection was sold at auction in April for $18.3 million. That money will be held by the estate during the contest over the wills. Her country estate in Connecticut is for sale, recently marked down to $15.9 million. Her estate in Santa Barbara is being carefully maintained, awaiting the court's decision.
Do you have information on the Clark family?
Reporter Bill Dedman is co-authoring "Empty Mansions," a nonfiction book about Huguette Clark and her family. If you have documents or information, you can reach him at bill.dedman@msnbc.com.
The full story
More on the Huguette Clark mystery is at http://nbcnews.com/clark/.
More from Open Channel:
- Homeland Security 'fusion' centers intrusive, ineffective, report says
- Ex-Penn State football aide McQueary files $4 million whistleblower suit
- Energy firm uses 'land grabs' to obtain fracking rights, pays landowners zero
- Environmentalists, Persian Gulf oil barons have common enemy: fracking
- Wild horses sold by US later ending up at slaughterhouses?
- Class-action suit against FEMA trailer makers settled for $42.6 million
- RNC cuts ties with firm over voter registration allegations
- Big GOP donor among 2 indicted in Dominican resort scam
- Black youths exposed to more alcohol advertising, study finds
Follow Open Channel from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
Yes!!! As usual the lawyers will be the big “inherited winners”. Everyone will fight over the money and the lawyers will happily encourage the fighting and the lawyers will happily eat up the inheritance.
Revocable Living Trusts people. Get it NOW if you don't have it already.
AVOID PROBATE. Saves tons of time, money, and fighting.
The only winners:
The attorneys.
The losers:
The people and communities of Butte and Anaconda, Montana, from where her corrupt and parasitic father extracted his riches and left the people with almost nothing.
Ah, the 1%. Same as it ever was!
The lawyer, accountant, and nurse were all in cahoots to make themselves rich off of Clark. They set up walls to prevent family members from seeing her. Many of them tried to see her and were refused access at the direction of the lawyer with the aid of the nurse. This was so they could pull off their scam of bilking her estate of millions while she was alive and set up this will to get a nice chunk of it after she died. Not only should they not get a dime, the nurse should be forced to return the millions she has already received. The only reason someone with the money this nurse already has would have continued working was because there was a big payday at the end. I hope that all three of these bloodsuckers end up in prison for fraud and theft and that the family gets to decide what to do with the money. I would be great if they went through with setting up the art museum, although they may not end up with any legal obligation to do so.
Another reclusive wealthy person with more money then they could spend in a lifetime.Money aside,I don't think that she lived a very happy life.I'll take happiness over money.
peteMT,
You want to cry on the shoulders of Johnstown, PA? You probably don't remember, but some 1800 dird in the flood from a failed PRIVATE dam of the rich elite (Carnegie, Rockefeller, et al). Who were told of problems some two years earlier. Or maybe we should think higher of locals who got rich and left for the East?
The rich always manage to forget those they step upon going up, or staying up. It is only when they start going down that they consider the victims, if then.
Let's demonize this woman because she had more than the rest of us, we are apparently better people than her because we aren't wealthy. When's the next occupy event that we can gather at and complain about people being successful?
Another example of greed at work. I felt bad for Ms. Clarke. I wish I could have known her in life. It seems to me she understood human nature very well and this is why she was reclusive. I admire her ability to accumulate beautiful things. She obviously had a good eye and understood value. I too am a colector of unusual and beautiful things and have never looked upon them for their "intrinsic" value but on their ability to demonstrate the best that human beings have to offer. I hope the people who cared for her get the bulk of her estate and the family is kind to eachother and shares. This is the ONLY way the lawyers won't win and they have nothing but dollar signs in their eyes. I don't have much faith that this will happen but I always hope for a positive outcome. I recently sold my mothers home for less than it was worth to a friend trying to rescue her daughter from Moscow..It was well worth it to both families...Maybe that is why we have everything we need and most of what we want... Be generous. It is definitely worth it. RIP Ms. Clarke.
Bill Marvell,
I don't understand your point. Are you somehow interpreting my post as support for other robber barons?
I stuck to the subject. I wouldn't give those you listed a pass either. All equally vile.
What do you call 10,000 dead lawyers at the bottom the Atlantic???? A GOOD Start
Oh, Auntie Huegette. I'm sure she would remember me !
LOL,
What's the old saying, where there's a will, there's a lawyer,
waiting to break it.
Isn't it the truth. Wills no longer are valid. There is always some judge that will say "oh, she/he didn't really mean that, or "well the state says he/she can't do that", or "I've decided to give this SOB half of the estate regardless of what the Will says". Wills are rarely taken as they are written when they are contested thereby eliminating their purpose. The courts lose site that the Will puts down the wishes of the person executing it and think they know better. It's disgusting.
sounds like the Itchy and Scratchy show
What I don't get is where was the "extended" family when she was old, sick and dying? Why did they not come forward and take care of her when she was 80-90-100? Now everyone wants something.
My grandfather was in Montana as a young man and he once worked with her father and even partied with him and help him out. Does that qualify me as a relative?
I could sure use a couple of hundred thousand. That is all I would want. I am not greedy.
Steven - As I recall from reading about her, she was immensely reculsive, to the point that she trusted very few people - family not being part of the few. But there is also the bit of unknown when it comes to the lawyer and accountant who were more than happy to setup "walls" around her, so no one could see her or make contact with her unless they were directly involved. Quite an intruiging story.
You don't suppose that has anything to do with the borderline abusive act of naming an infant daughter "Huguette"?
If I remember correctly, in earlier reports about MS Clark's fortune, her lawyers encouraged her to move into the hospital and helped cut ties to her family by not allowing them access to her.
But I read this over a year ago, so don't quote me.
What a miserable end of her life she must have had, surrounded by lawyers and greedy family members.
Auntie Huguette, is that you?
I bet some of this extended family had never laid eyes on the woman. Maybe have never even thought of her except for the money.
She was pretty well isolated from anybody. Now whether that was truly her wishes or the lawyer and accountant's wishes - who knows. Her nurse is in it deep as well. I find the whole story of Huguette's life very sad and tragic. For a filthy rich old broad, that is.
Agreed completely. These stories annoy and sadden me. I cannot stand people who want to "claim what's rightfully mine" from a person they spent no time with in life, after their death.
I would much rather see distant relatives inherit her fortune than the greedy bloodsucking lawyer and accountant any day. If you will read the stories in Bill Dedman's archives on this story, you will see exactly what I'm talking about.
You are entitled to nothing.
From what I read her family attempted to visit her many times over the years and her attorney claimed she didn't want to see them. They sued believing it was the attorney trying to keep them away and not her wishes.
That's what the family "says." But there is no proof other than relatives that want her money.
I'm not sure I believe anyone, except the people at the hospital who said she was well taken care of and wanted to be where she was (the ones who were left NOTHING in the will, not her doctors).
Those are the only ones that don't have a dog in the hunt.
Why is it people believe they are "entitled" to other relative's money just because they ARE a relative?
I can leave my $ to whomever I wish--a dog if I want to--my family is entitled to nothing that I do not see fit to give them. I don't live for them--I live for me.
No Steven,
You are not a relative and you make a good point... Just WHERE were those family members when Ms Clarke was alive. They should be ashamed to show their faces with their hands out if they didn't care about her in life... I never wanted anything from my wealthy mother. I did all I could for her eventhough she was often abusive and inconsiderate. She was my mother, she gave me life and eventhough she was a businesswoman and a terrible mother, I always respected her role in my life. When she died, I honored her, did the whole funeral/wake etc and am settling her estate. I am thankful that we were both only children and there are no other people able to contest her will...I only wish we could have been closer in life...That is my true grief...sad situation all around.
300+ Million??
seem as though the original Lawyer and Accountant, both of whom are alleged to have bilked the estate while Ms. Clark was alive, have in fact protected a massive estate. That Ms Clarks' wishes and directions were followed as she desired, while still leaving behind and amazing family legacy.
The challenges to the will should be interesting to observe.
Talontbo, if you will read the archived stories found on this website about this whole situation, you will see plenty of questionable actions by the attorney and accountant in question. I wouldn't trust my rich grandmother to these crooks in a million years. Don't you find it odd that a will was created when she was 98 benefiting her distant relatives, and 6 weeks later another one was created to benefit the attorney and accountant? Smells fishy to me.
Talontbo -
What the lawyer did if you have been keeping up with these articles about Hugette's death, is 100% unethical and is grounds for him to lose his license.
300 million
and more than a few years being this woman's attorney..
She, by all accounts was perfectly capable of making her wishes and demands. This from all accounts post over the series of articles, all of which I read;
Pleas note: I am a Gemologist and was more than aware of the jewelry collection she owned. Which by the way, was note pilfered in the least. Nor it seems was an amazing art collection or the numerous estates. The Pink Diamond alone is a national treasure, but she owned it and could have handed it any one of you if she wanted.. but she didnt and the lawyer and account didnt snatch it either.
Why should it matter that she was 98 or 38,, it was hers and she was mentally capable by all accounts.
This woman was an eccentric recluse of sound mind and body up to the point she passed. She had the right to make whatever last will, she may have wanted and the right to change it daily if she so felt inclined to do, as you all have the right to do as well.
The lawyers, according to the articles and for which there has never been offered an tangible evidence otherwise, only acted on the direction of Ms Clark.
The court stepped in and took control based on the interests of the State and with meager testimony based on an investigative news article.
And again I reiterate, it will be interesting to see the ensuing, legal battle...
It's best to set up living trusts but it's a hassle too. Wills are so yesterday.
Excellent point. No one should have to go through probate.
There are some gotcha's though. You are correct - it is a pain and must be kept current. My mother had a trust, but didn't keep it current. New assets had dependencies outside the trust instrument which takes precedence over the Trust.
The added leg work is more than worth it though.
When it comes to Andrew Carnegie I am a capitalist
When it comes to Bill Gates, I am a capitalist
When it comes to Steve jobs, I am a capitalist
When it comes to Hugette Clark and her money grubbing lawyers, I am a communist/anarchist.
The gov't should just seize the assets, liquidate, then use them to build a park for kids, petting zoo, etc. Then the greedy grubbers go home with nothing & serve them right.
Pro
Sounds like a plan to redistribute the wealth. Perhaps you have good intentions with the end of that sentence,
and I commend you for the altruistic thought, but it still is not legal.
enter: snark.
Thank you.
Pro
Sad you took that (Govt should just...) as rude. It was stated altruistically, as your other comment (about parks) was stated by you.
Sounds like a good idea...
But obama may want to use the money to buy free phones to trade for votes...
Jack- gues I have to spell it out- the entire comment was snark, y'know, not meant as anything serious...
Gordo- maybe use the money to bring over more illegals from Mehico to get those Latino votes coming... sorry Jack, just more snarkiness. Never mind.
Sounds like a giant money grab for the gov, her lawyer, account and her family. The gov will be the winner, they will tax it to death and eat as much as possible in court cost.
Actually pro-while just a snark- it is a shame, as jack stated that something more altruistic couldn't be done with the money.
I don't know, it does sound like she was never close to the first family (the great, half-nieces and nephews) and she always was a bit of a recluse. But from everything NBC.com has written about this case over the years, she also had a very unethical accountant and attorney that just wanted to grab her money and left her in a hospital for 20 years. Don't know that the extended family deserves the money, but the attorney and accountant don't either. Thanks, NBC, for reporting on this interesting story!
I never cease to be amazed at all the great ideas some people come up with to spend other people's money.
Why not give your own money for parks and petting zoos if you think they are so important. Miss Clark's money was hers to give away and should go to the heirs she designated. Maybe they didn't earn it, but they have more right to it than the government.
Let's see:
Total Estate: $300 MM
Less: 50% Estate Taxes
Less: Attorney's Fees & Court Costs
Less: Outstanding Debts against the Estate
Balance to be distributed to beneficiaries - $127.32
Unfortunately, modern greed knows no bounds. The proliferation of those who feel entitled will do nothing but grow, in my opinion. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the court system. Expensive though it be, let's hope justice is served.
Is it greed or is it stopping others from stealing what is not theirs but which legally is suppose to become yours? That's what the courts will decide. This broad was a loonie like Howard Hughes and not just when she got old. More money than brains. She drove everyone from her life but her employees long ago.
Yeah, why is it greed? Theoretically, if her extended family members did nothing the estate would have an obligation to seek them out and give them some amount of money which the court would authorize anyhow. Is it better for them to remain silent and let more lawyer's fees, accountant's fees, executor's fees, and so on, be paid?
I think the better claim is that her extended and distant family really didn't care enough about her to remain in contact with her, or that she didn't want them to contact her. Either way probate law isn't erased in the process.
The vultures (aka lawyers) will eat up most of the fortune. Trust me, they'll be billing for $298 million.. it'd be just like a lawyer...
Actually, that money should go to clean up the environmental mess left in the minind areas of Montana.
And it should go to the people and communities of Butte and Anaconda.
I agree with the comments about lawyers representing contesting family members and lawyers representing family members mentioned in wills. All they do is take $$$ out of the estate. Believe me.....this is from experience. I don't know why we pay attorneys to set up a will if it isn't any good after we are dead! It's all about their fees, not our wishes.
Just like the greedy CEO's , attorney should be barred from charging 30-40% of whatever the client is owed. It's pure theft! As for the relatives , if they didn't show up while she was alive they don't have to show now either. If her nurse took good care of her and probably was her sole company and Yvette wanted to reward her, more power to her. They are all sharks, wanting something they did not earn, not even in kindness toward the deceased!
I would like to think that about the nurse. But if it was only the nurse, and the nurse cared so much, why did she not take care of Huguette at home, instead of in the hospital for the last 20 years? Maybe everyone in the hospital should be in the will.
The heiress choose where she wanted to be and I'm sure that the hospital made a good deal of money on her 20 year stay. This is not a poor hospice but a very expensive outfit!
I do hope that the Santa Barbara estate will eventually morph into a public arts center. Those kinds of museums really enrich the community, and making it available to all would be nice. Look at the millions who have toured San Simeon - great idea for the tourism industry.
I agree with Sarita, not only will the museum enrich the community, but it will also keep her memory alive!
Several estates in that area would also be outstanding museums if ever converted. Though I doubt if many of them including Huguette's mansion, are really comparable to the Hearst Castle, or to the nearby beautiful Lotusland. It is a nice idea, but the reason to make one should still be thoroughly investigated.
What you guys don't understand, is that although the museum in the second will seems like it would be a nice thing, the will also states that the lawyer and the accountant would be the ones to run the museum. Why do you think a lawyer and an accountant would want to run a museum? That would mean using money from the estate. It's just doesn't seem right.
I want to do some private duty nursing ;-)
I have been following this story for a while. I am fascinated.
From what I have read she was Happy being a recluse. I understand it. If I had millions I would love the same. Some of us are happy with our own company. Some of us like having time to pursue our own interests. Many of us do not feel we have to have some form of communication with another every 10 seconds to be happy. When I take vocation time, it is not unusual for me to take 2 weeks and never leave my property, never talk on the phone, never speak to another person. It is wonderful! I have such varied interest that I am never bored and get the opportunity to reboot, refresh and reflect.
She hadn't any close family members for decades. She has been very generous to her step relatives to the tune of millions, which many would not be. She seemed to have cared for them.
If her second will was on the level, it should be followed to a T. No one else should be able to determine what anyone else does with their dime when they die. If she wanted it distributed in Mars atmosphere so be it. There are 2 wills, so which ever one is proved to be legal go with it. No one involved actually earned any of this money. It is a wind fall. Just how many millions of a wind fall do people think they actually deserve?
As far as death taxes and lawyer fees. The percentages are just plain theft. The tax shouldn't be anymore as going rate for income tax. It is income, that is it. The lawyers should not get over 20% for Any settlement.
As far as the money going to rectify how her father made his income: it should not be vested on her. I don't like the fact that the Rockefeller's and Kennedy's made their money off the backs of people losing every thing in the 30's depression either. Yet many believe they walk on water.
I can't wait to see how this all ends.
I like your post, especially where you say; No one involved actually earned any of this money, and; lawyers should not get over 20% for Any settlement.
Let them keep the 'windfall', but may be some of the caretakers should never be allowed to practice medicine again.
the estate is not "up for GRABs" the estate is in court and going to legal heirs...how is that up for grabs
Thanks, "monie." Well, it's an American idiom: "The election is up for grabs." It means the winner has not been decided, that there is more than one contestant. In this case, the estate may go to the heirs named in the second will (no family), or the wills could be invalidated, leaving all the money to the family. It is up for grabs.
FIRST! Haaaaa, it's mine! I was the first one to say "first".
Life is so amazing how one person can be so filthy rich, but most have barely enough to get by on.
So Randall, does that put you down for the govt should grab and disperse is amongst all?
It's old wealth that's been sitting since her old man died. Don't remember when that was but I know he was already an old man when Hugette Clark was born in the early 1900's.
The answer to that riddle is the element of pride, not only greed.
Karen, I believe Huguette's father was 68 (born in 1839) when she was born, and he died in 1925.
The old lady is dead, but the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ lives on.
?
I wonder who will get it anyone?
The gov has first dibbs.
Lawyers, accountants, investment consultants will eat up as much as a judge will allow.
But really, $300M? The newly rich Chinese biz moguls and government dogs laugh at that figure.
Ah, the true nature of man at it's worst. Greed.
100% estate tax, neither she nor the parasites did anything to earn this wealth.
Neither did the government.
I wish that the courts would address the possibility of medical malpractice amongst Huguette's caretakers. It is an issue that could be considered with, or separately from, the 'trail of will' issue.
She lived to 105. How does that justify medical malpractice?
Have been reading this story for a couple of years....Miss Clark was a recluse like Howard Hughes....she was also VERY childlike....smart lawyers figured it out years ago and kept the family from Miss Clark...and then the smart lawyers cut out a nice portion of her fortune for themselves and hired "nurses/caregivers" that kept family away...and rewarded those "caregivers" a nice portion of the money. We are talking about a woman that spent more time with dolls than with people....HERE IS a case where the government should have stepped in YEARS ago and taken over Miss Clark's management...from caregivers, to medical and psychological care. Sad all around, like Howard Hughes...and many other rich people...bottom feeders come out of the woodwork...
I've been following every detail of this story for several years also, and I TOTALLY agree with you!
Yes I too have followed the story . What those 'caregivers' did to her was obscene! I heard that the family did try to see her but were turned away. Blood suckers all! The lawyers, nurses and all. I hope they rot in jail and have to get back ALL they spent.