Latest on MJJC

Michael Jackson Estate, Katherine Jackson Clash in Court Over $600 Million Catalog Deal

CherubimII

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
6,766
Points
113

Michael Jackson Estate, Katherine Jackson Clash in Court Over $600 Million Catalog Deal​

Story by Nancy Dillon

https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/cel...urt-over-600-million-catalog-deal/ar-BB1jAn6R

The not-so-secret $600 million sale of Michael Jackson's music assets to industry giant Sony was the subject of a heated hearing in a Los Angeles courtroom Friday, with lawyers for Katherine Jackson arguing that estate co-executors John Branca and John McClain should be held "in contempt" for closing the deal while she's still appealing a ruling on the matter.

The eye-watering sale, first reported by Billboard and confirmed Friday by Rolling Stone, was negotiated by the executors to take advantage of an asset market that was "by far" the "hottest it had ever been," a recent appellate brief filed by the estate says. The pact purportedly lets the estate maintain "effective control over Michael's music" while diversifying its range of assets, the filing reads.

Though the exact terms of the deal remain sealed, the estate gets to keep control of "all critical decisions relating to the exploitation of Michael's name, image and likeness rights, to protect and preserve his legacy," the estate says. It also will "continue to exercise day-to-day control over merchandising and monetization of the estate's trademarks and related rights," the recent appellate brief reveals.

On Friday, a lawyer for Katherine said he believes the deal, which closed in recent months, represents a violation of court orders because Katherine's appeal of a prior ruling on the transaction is still pending.

"On March 1st, I sent letter to the estate asking for an explanation as to the authority they used as the basis in order to proceed with the transaction, and – crickets. No response at all. We don't understand why this is not contempt of this court," lawyer Robert E. Allen said. He proposed setting a court date to take up the matter of holding co-executor John Branca in contempt.

But Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff, who's been overseeing Michael Jackson's estate since his death in 2009, said the executors had authority to close the deal. He said it was true that Katherine's appeal meant that his "blessing" of the deal had been put on hold, but he said the executors were free to move ahead knowing they would be "personally on the hook" if their actions led to lawsuits.

"I didn't preclude them from entering into the transaction," the judge said. "The estate wanted an order saying they could proceed with the transaction and be insulated from liability. They were asking for a blessing in a sense that they would not be liable, personally, for the transaction if they got sued. So, now, they're liable for the transaction if they get sued."

A lawyer for the estate said her side always knew it didn't need the court's permission to proceed, but it sought such permission whenever possible. She said in this case, timing was important. "The executors have a very, very good reason for proceeding with the transaction," estate lawyer Jeryll Cohen said without elaborating.

In filings, the executors say the estate was saddled with debt and on the verge of bankruptcy when Michael Jackson died. "Exercising the powers granted in Michael's will as confirmed by the probate court, they entered into business transactions involving the estate's assets that skyrocketed the estate's value to over $2 billion," the recent appellate filing signed by estate lawyer Jonathan P. Steinsapir said.

But issues remain, so the probate case is still open, meaning the trusts set up for Michael's three children and his mother have not yet been funded. One problem is a tax dispute with the IRS involving over $700 million in alleged unpaid taxes and penalties. And Michael Jackson's companies are again the defendants in revived lawsuits from two of his molestation accusers, Wade Robson and James Safechuck. The men claim the companies are liable for their alleged abuse as children.

On Friday, Cohen said the executors were objecting to a six-figure legal bill submitted to the estate from Katherine's lawyers. One of her attorneys said the refusal amounted to revenge on Katherine for objecting to the asset transaction.

"We wouldn't be here if the estate wasn't trying to punish Katherine Jackson for having the temerity to challenge their actions. If this was attorney fees incurred to handle some other piece of litigation, they would have paid," lawyer Adam Pines with Glaser Weil argued. "What the executors appear to be doing is waiting for Mrs. Jackson to pass away."

Cohen scoffed at that assertion: "The executors do not pay any beneficiaries' attorneys' fees. This is not a matter of punishing Mrs. Jackson." The judge, who is retiring next month, set a follow-up hearing for March 22.
 
the kids are very strange, michael never wanted to sell his catalogue
 
Bigi Jackson made the right decision.
Katherine should not be allowed to waste the money Michael Jackson left his children on frivolous lawsuits.
Katherine and Joe Jackson have a long history of losing legal entanglements and then requesting that Michael Jackson use his money to pay off their debts. Katherine is 93 years old. She needs to break this bad habit. Her own greedy, self-entitled children probably put her up to filing these court proceedings.
They need to leave Michael's children out of it.
 
Last edited:

Michael Jackson Estate Claims His Mother Has Received $55M Since His Death​

https://www.billboard.com/business/...m-received-55m-since-death-estate-1235639136/
Amid a bitter fight over whether the estate must pay Katherine Jackson's legal bills, the estate's executors claims she's already been paid millions.

By Bill Donahue
03/21/2024

Michael Jackson’s estate claimed in legal filings Thursday (Mar. 21) that his mother, Katherine Jackson, has received more than $55 million since the singer’s death — a revelation that came during an acrimonious dispute between the estate’s executors and the elder Jackson.

The new filings, obtained by Billboard, were aimed at proving that the estate itself shouldn’t have to pay for Katherine’s recent legal bills, which stem from her efforts to block an unspecified business transaction — believed to be the estate’s recent estimated $600 million catalog deal with Sony.

In making that argument, estate executors John Branca and John McClain argued Thursday that “virtually no request of Mrs. Jackson for her care or maintenance has been declined” in the years since Michael’s 2009 death.

“Contrary to claims made by Mrs. Jackson’s counsel, the executors have in fact provided liberally for Mrs. Jackson’s maintenance, care and well being,” attorneys for Branca and McClain wrote. “Since Michael’s death, the executors have expended for Mrs. Jackson’s benefit more than $55 million.”

The elder Jackson allegedly received more than $33 million in cash, including an ongoing allowance of $160,0000 per month, plus a $15 million luxury home, the estate claimed. Branca and McClain also claimed that they provided Katherine with an emergency $3.7 million payment in December to satisfy delinquent income tax liabilities.

“It is difficult to imagine that the trustees could provide any more liberally for Mrs. Jackson,” attorneys for the executors wrote.

Thursday’s filing is the latest development in an ongoing feud between Katherine and the executors over her opposition to the unspecified business transaction. While the disputed deal has not been named in court documents, the Jackson estate recently struck an estimated $600 million deal to sell part of the singer’s catalog to Sony, the terms of which were first reported by Billboard last month.

After the Jackson estate sought court approval for the unnamed deal in 2022, Katherine filed objections with the court. But in April 2023, the judge overseeing the estate rejected those objections and ruled that the deal could move forward. Katherine then filed an appeal, which is still pending.
In December, Katherine filed motions asking that the estate pay for the legal bills she had incurred in making her objections, including the ongoing appeal. In an initial response earlier this month, Branca and McClain strongly opposed the request to pay for what they called her “failed objection” and “meritless appeal.”

Earlier this week, Michael’s son Blanket echoed those objections, arguing that his grandmother’s appeal was an “extreme longshot” and that it would be “unfair” to force him and his siblings to pay for that case.

In their new filing on Thursday, Branca and McClain went even further — claiming that the estate should not have to pay Katherine’s lawyers for filing objections that had caused “substantial damage.”

“Importantly, this petition is not about Mrs. Jackson’s maintenance, care, comfort and support,” the executors’ attorneys wrote. “This petition is about payment of attorneys’ fees for an objection filed on Mrs. Jackson’s behalf, which the court overruled, and the subsequent, frivolous and still pending appeal.”

An attorney for Katherine Jackson did not immediately return a request for comment.
 

Michael Jackson’s Son Says Estate Shouldn’t Pay Grandmother’s Legal Bills In Dispute Over $600 Million Catalog Deal​

https://www.billboard.com/business/...dmother-split-legal-bills-dispute-1235638095/
Blanket Jackson claims Katherine Jackson's ongoing objections to the deal are a "waste" of time and the estate shouldn't foot the bill for them.

By Bill Donahue
03/21/2024

Michael Jackson’s son Blanket is asking a Los Angeles judge to stop his grandmother from using money from the iconic singer’s estate to fund her ongoing legal battles against the estate’s executors over their recent $600 million deal with Sony.

In court filings obtained by Billboard, Blanket argued Monday that the estate shouldn’t foot the bill for Katherine Jackson’s pending appeal, in which she’s challenging a ruling last year that gave co-executors John Branca and John McClain approval to proceed with an unnamed transaction.

While the disputed deal itself is not explicitly named in legal documents, it appears to be the Jackson estate’s estimated $600 million deal to sell part of the singer’s catalog to Sony, the terms of which were first reported by Billboard last month.

Monday’s objections highlight a recent rift between Katherine and Blanket. Both of them initially opposed the estate’s proposed transaction, but after the judge ruled last year that the deal could move forward, Blanket and Jackson’s other children accepted the decision. Katherine opted instead to keep fighting, filing an appeal that remains pending.

In December, Katherine filed motions asking that the estate pay for her legal bills stemming from her objections, including the ongoing appellate case. But in his filing on Monday, Blanket said it would be "unfair" to force him and his siblings to pay for that case, since his grandmother's efforts face "long odds."

"It is readily apparent that a reversal on appeal would be an extreme longshot," wrote lawyers for Blanket, who now uses the name Bigi. "Given those odds, Bigi decided not to waste his resources to participate in an appeal. Nonetheless, Katherine has decided to appeal this court's ruling. That decision is not for the benefit of the heirs."

It's unclear exactly how much Katherine is seeking. In a court filing earlier this month, Branca and McClain said she had asked for more than $561,548 to cover her legal fees for both her initial objections and the current appeal. In that filing, the executors said they strongly opposed any estate payments for her "failed objection" and "meritless appeal."

In his filing Monday, Blanket didn't entirely oppose his grandmother's request. He argued that the estate should, in fact, pay her legal bills for her initial opposition to the deal - arguing that she had presented "essential evidence" about the proposed transaction and that "all heirs and beneficiaries benefited from this court's scrutiny."

But he also argued the actual dollar total she had requested "might be high," and questioned whether she had really needed to hire "four lawyers charging fees of $840 to $1,400 per hour." And he argued any legal fees for the ongoing appeal should be entirely denied, since the ruling allowing the deal to proceed had been "reasoned and detailed."

"Katherine's petition has the practical effect of requiring Bigi and his siblings pay for her appeal," Blanket wrote. "It would be unfair to make those beneficiaries shoulder this burden when they expressly decided an appeal would not be in their best interests."

An attorney for Katherine Jackson did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Thursday. Reps for the Jackson estate declined to comment.


 
Speaking of the Estate….I just read that they supposedly said in the lawsuit about the rights being sold to Sony that ”Katherine has made $55 million since 2009 so she can pay her own lawyer costs” and that she gets a monthly allowance of $160,000. While $55 million and $160,000/month seems a LOT for us average folks…….Wasn’t Katherine supposed to get HALF of the Estate?!!! The Estate has made probably about $2 BILLION dollars by now….so HOW has Katherine gotten only $55 million in the past 15 years??!!!!!!!!! I mean, the Estate pretty much should’ve been debt free right after thr This Is It film. $160,000/month is a little over $1 million a year, so that’s probably just some of the interest the money brings in each year. Something doesn’t add up! I mean, I understand that it probably isn’t a good idea to give all the money at once because they probably are better at managing it. But still…..$55 million out of BILLIONS, when she is entitled to HALF of the money….and them NOT paying her legal costs…..that doesn’t sound right. That sounds fishy. 😳🤔 She owns HALF of the whole Estate!!!!! So why isn’t she getting money for legal fees?!!! The kids own the other half. I understand that the kids have restrictions to their money because they won’t get full access until they are older. But Katherine doesn’t have a restriction, so she should not have to fight to get money for legal fees. I mean..again…of the probably $2 BILLION the Estate has made…she basically owns 35%. That is not $55 million!!
 
zinniabooklover said:
Iirc, the kids got 40% split between them, charities get 20% and Katherine gets 40%. Once she passes, I think her 40% is supposed to go to Michael's kids. Legal stuff is not my superpower, lol, but that was my understanding.

Maths is also not my superpower. I have no idea what 40% of Michael's earnings over the last 15 years would add up to.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
The Michael Jackson Estate is still in probate and; thus, under the jurisdiction of the assigned probate judge.
The judge has read Michael Jackson's will.
He knows she is not named as a direct beneficiary of Michael's assets. Katherine was named, only, as the guardian of each of Michael's children up until each one individually turned 18 years old. After that, she is entitled to only what the probate judge allows her to have as maintenance.
 
CherubimII said:
The Michael Jackson Estate is still in probate and; thus, under the jurisdiction of the assigned probate judge.
The judge has read Michael Jackson's will.
He knows she is not named as a direct beneficiary of Michael's assets. Katherine was named, only, as the guardian of each of Michael's children up until each one individually turned 18 years old. After that, she is entitled to only what the probate judge allows her to have as maintenance.
Click to expand...
False. Michael left 20% for charities… the Estate executors (Branca and McClain) will get 10%, and Katherine and the kids share the rest so basically Katherine gets 35% and Prince, Paris and Bigi share the other 35%. Once Katherine dies, her share goes to the kids to be divided equally. But as long as she’s alive…her share is HER share…and she should be able to do what she wants with it. Or should AT LEAST have her share IN THE TRUST for her. Same with the kids. But apparently the teusts have not been paid ANY money, so the Estate is jolding onto all of it, which concerns me. 🤔 Also, to this day….I can’t remember hearing ONCE that the Estate would’ve donated ANY charity any money or thrm telling which charitirs they are supporting. 🤔 It was Michael’s last will. 😥 Prince is doing his own chsrity work but the Estate is supposed to give 20% to charity. 🤔
 
summer said:
False. Michael left 20% for charities… the Estate executors (Branca and McClain) will get 10%, and Katherine and the kids share the rest so basically Katherine gets 35% and Prince, Paris and Bigi share the other 35%. Once Katherine dies, her share goes to the kids to be divided equally. But as long as she’s alive…her share is HER share…and she should be able to do what she wants with it. Or should AT LEAST have her share IN THE TRUST for her. Same with the kids. But apparently the teusts have not been paid ANY money, so the Estate is jolding onto all of it, which concerns me. 🤔 Also, to this day….I can’t remember hearing ONCE that the Estate would’ve donated ANY charity any money or thrm telling which charitirs they are supporting. 🤔 It was Michael’s last will. 😥 Prince is doing his own chsrity work but the Estate is supposed to give 20% to charity. 🤔
Click to expand...
The Estate is claiming (According to TMZ article) that Katherine has gotten an average of $3.6 million dollars a year. It would be hard for me to believe that she is indeed getting the 35% she is supposed to be getting, if that is the case. That would indicate that majority of the multi billions the Estate has brought in has gone into reinvesting into the business.

While they have made major projects ie. MJ Musical, Cirque, etc., the numbers just seem off outside looking in.
 
KOPV said:
The Estate is claiming (According to TMZ article) that Katherine has gotten an average of $3.6 million dollars a year. It would be hard for me to believe that she is indeed getting the 35% she is supposed to be getting, if that is the case. That would indicate that majority of the multi billions the Estate has brought in has gone into reinvesting into the business.

While they have made major projects ie. MJ Musical, Cirque, etc., the numbers just seem off outside looking in.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I mean it makes sense that they would not just give all the money away so that they can invest and make more money for the family. I get it and that’s fine. And even with the Sony ATV catalogue, I was like.….if Michael was afraid of someone killing him over it or being a target because of it…I’d say….get the money and get rid of it! If selling it takes the target off of Katherine’s and the kids’ back…YES, PLEASE…sell it!! 🙏🏻 And I could even somehow understand them selling the rights to MJ’s own songs (even though…not really….🥲). But to then hear the trust has not been funded and Katherine has to fight to get legal fees paid…That makes me sad and a bit concerned. On the other hands, the executors are allowed to sell assets according to the will so…🤷‍♀️ Genrrally, I think they’ve been doing a great job with This Is It, MJ The Musical and now the biopic, so I’m not really worried yet…But yeah, somehow it feels like the numbers don’t add up though and it feels like Katherine (and the kids) should’ve gotten more. 🤔
 
summer said:
False. Michael left 20% for charities… the Estate executors (Branca and McClain) will get 10%, and
Click to expand...
Is that normal that executes of a will get 10%??? Of millions? I mean they are administrators, right?
I'm my mind a retainer, a flat-rate or a small percentage of 1- 2% would seem much more reasonable. Not an expert. And none of my business either. Just curious if anyone around here is an expert and knows whether this is a normal percentage?
 
I hadn't realised Michael's estate was still in probate after all these years. Obviously it's a massively complicated estate.

Here's a few excerpts from a recent RS piece, dated 08/03/24:

"The not-so-secret $600 million sale of Michael Jackson’s music assets to industry giant Sony was the subject of a heated hearing in a Los Angeles courtroom Friday, with lawyers for Katherine Jackson arguing that estate co-executors John Branca and John McClain should be held “in contempt” for closing the deal while she’s still appealing a ruling on the matter.

The eye-watering sale, first reported by Billboard and confirmed Friday by Rolling Stone, was negotiated by the executors to take advantage of an asset market that was “by far” the “hottest it had ever been,” a recent appellate brief filed by the estate says. The pact purportedly lets the estate maintain “effective control over Michael’s music” while diversifying its range of assets, the filing reads.

Though the exact terms of the deal remain sealed, the estate gets to keep control of “all critical decisions relating to the exploitation of Michael’s name, image and likeness rights, to protect and preserve his legacy,” the estate says. It also will “continue to exercise day-to-day control over merchandising and monetization of the estate’s trademarks and related rights,” the recent appellate brief reveals.

But Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff, who’s been overseeing Michael Jackson’s estate since his death in 2009, said the executors had authority to close the deal.

But issues remain, so the probate case is still open, meaning the trusts set up for Michael’s three children and his mother have not yet been funded ..."

www.rollingstone.com

Michael Jackson Estate, Katherine Jackson Clash in Court Over $600 Million Catalog Deal

Lawyers for Katherine Jackson said the estate should be held "in contempt" for finalizing deal, but a judge said the executors were free to move ahead
www.rollingstone.com www.rollingstone.com
 
PixieJ said:
Is that normal that executes of a will get 10%??? Of millions? I mean they are administrators, right?
I'm my mind a retainer, a flat-rate or a small percentage of 1- 2% would seem much more reasonable. Not an expert. And none of my business either. Just curious if anyone around here is an expert and knows whether this is a normal percentage?
Click to expand...
I thought it was high too but then thought that it’s actually a smart thing to do….but at the same time could back fire too, I guess. 🤔 I mean, if there’s potential for them to make money themselves, it gives them an incentive to make sure the estate makes good business deals and makes money. And I guess that is at the same time the down side of it. They could be so concentrated on making the most out of their percentage, that they sell anything there is to sell. After that they could just bow out and retire comfortably. But I guess as long as there is money to be made, it gives them an incentive to stay. But as we all know…money can make people do all kinds of thins …especially when lots of money is involved..(as seen with what MJ had to deal with all his life with all kinds of bogus lawsuits, etc…)….so I don’t trust anyone!
 

Inside the Fight Over Michael Jackson’s $2 Billion Estate — and His Mom's Battle with​

Her Grandson Bigi​

https://people.com/michael-jackson-katherine-jackson-bigi-jackson-legal-battle-estate-8613146
The estate refuses to pay Katherine Jackson's legal bills, as they say she's already been paid millions, and Bigi objects to covering her expenses
By Danielle Bacher /Published on March 23, 2024 12:38PM EDT

In a hearing in a Los Angeles courtroom on Friday, March 22, Katherine Jackson continued to face legal hurdles with the estate of her late son and music icon Michael Jackson.

In addition to her ongoing appeal of a previous court decision, the Jackson family matriarch is now fighting against her grandson Bigi (formerly known as Blanket) over whether her legal bills should be paid from the estate's funds.

Attorney John Branca and A&R executive John McClain, the co-executors of Jackson's estate, received a favorable ruling last year in probate court. The decision, related to a reported $600 million sale of half of Jackson's music catalog to Sony, allowed them to move forward with the proposed deal — despite Katherine's objection to it.

In a recent appellate brief filed by the estate, Branca and McClain explained that "they believed the transaction is to the Estate's advantage and in the best interest of the beneficiaries," which are Jackson's three children, Paris, Prince and Bigi, as well as unnamed charities.

The executors claim they negotiated the deal to take advantage of an asset market that was "by far the hottest it had ever been," according to a recent appellate brief filed by the estate. The sale purportedly lets the estate maintain "effective control over Michael's music" while diversifying its assets. According to the brief, all three children were consulted with their counsel beforehand and had no objections to the sale.

"I don't think I can resolve this today," judge Mitchell L. Beckloff, who will be retiring next month, and has presided over various Jackson rulings for the past 15 years, said on March 22. "My hope was that maybe you all would be able to resolve it on your own."

However, since that's been unsuccessful, he announced that a new judge will oversee the case.

In the filing, the executors claim the estate was saddled with debt and on the verge of bankruptcy when Michael Jackson died in June 2009.

"Exercising the powers granted in Michael's will as confirmed by the probate court, they entered into business transactions involving the estate's assets that skyrocketed the estate's value to over $2 billion," the recent appellate brief stated. In court, the executor's attorney Jonathan Steinsapir acknowledged this point and thanked the judge for giving guidance over the years to make the estate so profitable today.

"You may not be the judge who finally lands this plane, but we are definitely getting close," Steinsapir said. "We haven't had a dispute like this in years — and it's not that big of a dispute — but we just wanted to thank you."

The estate's brief claims Katherine was the only party to file a written objection to the sale of the megastar's assets. According to the estate, she believed they did not exercise "ordinary care and diligence" and argued that it was better "to wait a few years to maximize the value." Per the brief, the estate also claims Katherine felt that the executors had not sufficiently shopped the "transaction" around to determine fair market value and that the estate should "have obtained a premium payment." According to Billboard, the music assets are valued at over $1.2 billion.

The Jackson estate couldn't be reached for comment. Reps for Katherine and Bigi have yet to respond to PEOPLE's request for comment.
In December, Katherine filed motions asking the estate to pay for her legal bills stemming from her objections, including the ongoing appellate case. In court filings obtained by PEOPLE, Bigi argued that the estate shouldn't foot the bill, claiming it would be "unfair" to force him and his siblings to pay for that case since his grandmother's efforts are an "extreme longshot."


Michael Jackson's Son Bigi Says Estate Shouldn't Pay Grandmother's Legal Bills in Dispute over $600 Million Catalog Deal

However, according to the court filings, Bigi isn't entirely against his grandmother's request. He "does not object to reasonable attorney fees and costs" for her initial objection to the deal as she presented "essential evidence." But he believes "the overall amount for the trial might be high," and he questions if "four lawyers charging fees of $840 to $1,400 per hour was necessary."

After the filing, Jackson's nephew Taj Jackson posted on social media in support of Katherine. "Fair warning: Keep bad mouthing and throwing low blows at my 93-year-old grandma and my gloves will come off. Do you really want me to enter this ring? #FamilyFirst."

During closing arguments in court last year, Bigi — for the first time — opposed the estate's proposed transaction with Sony in support of his grandmother and sister Paris, but it was later revealed by his attorney that it was "simply a semantic device" to enable the probate court to "personally evaluate [the transaction] for my client."

Jackson's daughter Paris briefly appeared on Zoom and said she was "with my grandmother and little brother [Bigi] on this." But after the judge approved the transaction, Jackson's three children accepted the court's decision, while Katherine was the only family member to file an appeal, which is currently pending.


"Given those odds, Bigi decided not to waste his resources to participate in an appeal," his attorney stated in a recent court document filed on March 18. "Nonetheless, Katherine has decided to appeal this court's ruling. That decision is not for the benefit of the heirs." The estate also noted that Katherine opposed the release of the 2009 documentary This Is It, but the film, ultimately approved by the court, became the highest-grossing concert documentary in history (more than $260 million worldwide), a record it held until the release of Taylor Swift's The Eras Tour last year.

Katherine is a life beneficiary of a portion of the trust, and a source close to the estate says that she has received more than $55 million since the singer's death. "Virtually no request of Mrs. Jackson for her care or maintenance has been declined," the estate contends in new filings, obtained by PEOPLE, which argue that it should not have to cover her legal bills.

"There are a couple of points I wanted to make," Katherine's attorney Adam Pines said in court on Friday, once again requesting that the estate pay the half a million dollars in attorney fees Katherine has accumulated while appealing last year's decision.

"The executors' principal argument is that their hands are tied, that the money is stuck in the estate, and it can't be distributed to the trust yet and all these things that might happen. But we also live in reality, and we just received their accounting for 2020 — one year — and they have $35 million in distribution from the estate, including $2.3 million for public relation consultants. Millions and millions of dollars they are paying out," he said, pausing momentarily.

"But when they say, 'Oh, we can't pay this, our hands are tied, and the procedural requirements have not been met,' I don't think it's fair," he continued. "This year, $5 million were paid for Katherine's taxes. I appreciate that they did that, but it's certainly a confirmation that they can pay this amount."

"I didn't say it was fair, and I didn't say it was the right position," Judge Beckloff responded. "I just can't get there because of the state defendant and the facts that are being contested. I don't think it's a situation where we can all say there is no disputed facts involved and the court can just go decide this matter. I'm not saying either side is right in this. I'm just saying I can't get past the procedural hurdles to make a decision. And, you know, Bigi made it clear that in his view, the appeal fees are not reasonable."

The next court hearing will be scheduled on or before May 30, 2024.
 
The indisputable fact remains that Katherine has a legal right, through the trust, to many millions more than what she is allowed access to. No one other than her, in counsel with trusted advisors, should decide what to do with that money.

So estate executors are effectively resisting her independence from them into the last years of her life, very convenient for them.
 

Michael Jackson’s Mother Unlikely Legal Opponent for Estate: Sources Say She’s Being “Encouraged” by Kids Who Need Money​

https://www.showbiz411.com/2024/03/...-shes-being-encouraged-by-kids-who-need-money
March 24, 2024 9:40 pm
By Roger Friedman

Katherine Jackson, Michael’s 93 year old mother, has been in the news lately. She’s been trying to stop Michael’s estate from selling a half ownership in his MJJ Music for $600 million d to Sony.

Having lost the case, she wants to fund an appeal and have the estate pay her legal bills, according to reports. The Estate refuses. Meantime, the sale is going through.

This weekend it was announced that her only ally in the case, grandson Prince Michael II aka Blanket or Biji, was no longer on her side. Michael’s two other kids are out of it, as well.

So, what’s going on? Katherine Jackson’s name may be on the papers, but she’s not actually trying to stop the sale of her own volition. Sources tell me she’s being “encouraged” by her eldest daughter, Rebbie, and son, Randy. Since none of Michael’s siblings are heirs to the estate, when their mother dies the siblings are out of luck for money.

“Katherine wants to leave her kids money,” says a source. “But she doesn’t have any.” Indeed, the estate pays all her other expenses, including use of a grand estate in Calabasas, California. Rebbie — whose husband died several years ago — lives with her full time and enjoys those benefits. Randy is said to be working for sister, Janet, but has always lurked in the background.

Not all the Jackson siblings are involved in this mess. Jermaine, for example, is remaining silent. His son, Jafaar, is starring as Michael in the new biopic, so he’s not going to rock the boat. Jermaine also remains out of the country, I’m told. Jackie Jackson joined the estate some time ago. Janet has her own money, obviously. Tito Jackson is said to be spending his time in Oklahoma pursuing business interests.

Michael — who died in 2009 –did not want his brothers and sisters to get any part of his estate, which is now worth hundreds of millions. The Estate — lawyer John Branca and record executive John McClain — have turned what was a bankrupt business at Michael’s death into a huge money making venture, with the film, a hit Broadway show, a Las Vegas show, and increased sales of records.

The Sony deal — which means MJJ Publishing is valued at $1.2 billion — is not the Beatles catalog. It consists of songs Michael wrote, and others that he bought over the years by artists like Sly & the Family Stone as well as hits written or performed by Jerry Lee Lewis, Jackie Wilson, Curtis Mayfield, Ray Charles, Percy Sledge, Dion and others.

What will happen? The deal is going through, Michael’s heirs — his children — will benefit. His siblings will not. Are there more lawsuits in the future? Without a doubt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top