blankyluvdoodoo
Proud Member
it's all ways ME TIME ............with this family.
got that right.. it's also always each and every day exploit,sell and throw Michael under the bus time. No wonder he had enough of themit's all ways ME TIME ............with this family.
got that right.. it's also always each and every day exploit,sell and Michael time. No wonder he had enough of them
Charity is supposed to come from the heart, if it doesn't it doesn't mean ish. Steven has no genuine/giving bone inside of the 400lbs body of his. Behind every move of his, he's got selfish reasons. Someone tell that fella that rambling nonsense on twitter doesn't equal to actually doing something for fans. He should get a job and get over it we don't live in a jungle with the judiciary system we got it ain't possible for him or any of the other relatives to get anything from the estate forget even get a hold of the estate. Why? Because Michael wanted everything to go to his kids. Thanks God those kids will be grown adults by the time they get it, and by that time Randall will be in no position to pull crap. You can fool a 13/12/8 year old u can also fool a 18/21/25 year old but it's damn hard to fool a 30/35/ 40 year old. Michael's estate is for Michael's children and Michael's children's children as Michael wanted. Randy wants money he shouldn't have wasted the past 3 decades impregnating women and beating up on themHow I've had enough of Randy and his stupid 'I did it for the fans' tweets. He did sod all and he's taking the credit for it. And the way he keeps mentioning how he paid for that girl's treatment, yes it was a nice thing to do, but Michael did that all the time and never told anyone as he always said true charity isn't waving a flag saying 'look at me.'
thats true :smilerolleyes:hes so far up his own ass it must be painful for him.
I'm glad he's feeling better. He says he's not in support of the gary trip, i'm assuming he means katherine and the kids.
New tweets from @randyjackson8 June 23rd
Right now, my struggle is trying to get my family together on the 25th of June at Forest Lawn!!!!!
http://www.lawlink.com/research/CaseLevel3/68233that only person interested may contest a will, either before or after probate, it has been held that "An 'interested person' is one who has such a pecuniary interest in the devolution of the testator's estate as may be impaired or defeated by the probate of the will or be benefited by having it set aside." (Estate of O'Brien, 246 Cal.App.2d 788, 792 [55 Cal.Rptr. 343].) In the early case of Estate of Baker, 170 Cal. 578, 586-587 [150 P. 989], it was held that the right of an interested person to contest a will is fundamentally based upon the loss of property or property rights resulting from the recognition of an invalid instrument depriving him that the purpose of a will of those rights; that the purpose of a will contest is to establish a violation of the contestant's right of property; that in its essence the contest is an action for the recovery of property unlawfully taken or about to be taken from the ownership of the contestant.
http://www.lawlink.com/browse_codes.aspx?caselevel3=66263An "interested person" is "defined as one who has such a pecuniary interest in the devolution of the testator's estate as would be impaired or defeated by the probate of the will or be benefited by setting it aside." (Estate of Marler (1957) 148 Cal.App.2d 30, 33 [306 P.2d 105].) Thus, a will contestant must show his or her share of the distribution will be increased if the contest is successful.
http://www.lawlink.com/browse_codes.aspx?caselevel3=66263To contest a will before or after probate, the would-be contestant must be an "interested person." (?? 370, 380.) [4] "The courts do not favor will contests." (3 Koontz, op. cit. supra, ? 22.4, p. 22-8.) [5a] Accordingly, the courts have long and steadfastly limited the right to contest the probate of a will to those who have "'such a pecuniary interest in the devolution of the testator's estate, as would be impaired or defeated by the probate of a will or be benefited by the setting aside of the will.' [Citations.]" (Estate of Molera (1972) 23 Cal.App.3d 993, 998 [100 Cal.Rptr. 696].)
In the seminal case of Estate of Land (1913) 166 Cal. 538 [137 P. 246], the California Supreme Court noted "'the statute contemplates a legal interest and not merely a grievance to the feelings of propriety or sense of justice.'" (At p. 543.) [6] The purpose of restricting who may contest probate is to avoid "delaying the settlement of the estate." (Estate of Plaut (1945) 27 Cal.2d 424, 429 [164 P.2d 765, 162 A.L.R. 837].)
[7a] As "only an interested person may properly be a contestant" (Estate of Powers (1979) 91 Cal.App.3d 715, 719 [154 Cal.Rptr. 366], italics in original), appellant must allege his standing as an interested person. [5b] That is, he must allege he would take under another will or by intestacy in the event of a successful contest to the purported will. (Id., at p. 720.)
Only an interested party could challenge the will (Probate code section 48) :[12] This procedure would be in keeping with the words of Justice Traynor, who wrote in Estate of Plaut, supra: "Although the right to ask the court for an adjudication of his claim to the estate should be denied a person whose interest 'has not even the appearance of validity or substance' [citation], it should not be denied a person who, even though he may ultimately not receive any part of the estate, has at least established a prima facie interest in that estate. Since a proceeding to probate or contest a will is a proceeding in rem [citation], and at the end of the six-month period [now 120 days] during which it may be contested the probate of the will is conclusive [citations], all persons whose interests may be adversely affected should be given an opportunity to be heard." (27 Cal.2d at pp. 428-429.) In that same opinion, Justice Traynor recognized with approval that the probate court could hold a hearing on the standing question before proceeding with the trial of the contest (id., at p. 426) and the contest should be dismissed if the contestant cannot make a prima facie showing of standing (id., at p. 429).
Under case law, the general rule is that the will or trust contestant must have an interest of a pecuniary nature which may be impaired or defeated by probate of the will or benefited by setting it aside (such as an heir or legatee under a prior will).
Case law has recognized standing in the following persons:
Heirs at law: Any person who would succeed to any portion of the estate if decedent had died intestate (without a will) has standing to contest a testamentary document which would defeat or impair that intestate interest.
Pretermitted heirs: Decedent's children, spouse, and registered domestic partner, although omitted from the will (or other 'testamentary instrument'), may have claims to a 'statutory share' of the estate as 'pretermitted heirs.'
Beneficiaries under earlier will: The beneficiaries under an earlier will, whose interests are impaired or defeated by a later will offered for probate, have standing to contest the later will.
Beneficiaries under later will: Conversely, if the interest of a beneficiary under a later will may be impaired or defeated by probate of an earlier will, the beneficiary has standing to contest probate of the earlier will.
Creditors of heirs: An heir's creditors may have an 'interest' in the estate if decedent's will disinherits the debtor-heir. However, such creditors have standing to file a will or trust contest only if they have perfected a judgment lien at the time the property would pass to the heir if the will were set aside. Conversely, an heir's general unsecured creditors (no judgment lien) apparently have no standing to file a will contest.
Executor under earlier will admitted to probate: The executor appointed under a will, duly admitted to probate, has an affirmative obligation to defend that document against subsequent contests.
Proposed executor under will offered for probate: A person designated by decedent to be executor has no 'duty' to defend a contest before admission of the will to probate and his or her appointment as executor.
Assignee or estate of proper contestant: The right to contest a will survives to the contestant's estate; similarly, it is assignable. Hence, a proper contestant's assignee or a deceased contestant's estate representative has standing to pursue the will contest in the original (assigning or deceased) contestant's place.
You have 120 days to contest the will (Probate Code section 8270(a)) and 60 or 120 days to contest the trust (Probate Code section 16061.7)
he doesn't care about that...he wants his 15 min of fame or better infamy...well there are some naive or simply blind or not informed fans who will follow his crap....apparently he's not the only one who had attention issues...thanks god they are numerically irrelevant but it hurts anyway....there are 3 orphans kids who don't deserve their name associate with this cheap shit...poor M if he only knew his brother was trying to expose his kids like this....creating mayhem at a cemetery...even if the kids wanted to be there it would be a circus.2 days to go and he keeps bringing up the family drama on Twitter :doh: When is he going to leave all that cr*p and start remembering and honoring MJ's memory?
No, Randy.. no.
It's probably going to be mayhem at FL on Friday. Why would he want his family, especially Prince, Paris, Blanket, and his mother, to be there with all of the craziness? Being in a quiet/private setting somewhere in Gary is much better.