Latest on MJJC

Michael Jackson’s Family Demands Estate’s Executors Resignation / Estate Responds

Really, is this greed or ignorance?

Do they think they could have done better than Branca & Mc Clain? They haven't accomplished a quarter of what Michael have done and they think they could had run the estate better.

Why blame the estate for AEG wanting information from Katherine and the children? They 82 yrs old woman & the children were the ones who filed the suit. AEG has to do anything to protect themselves. The executors have to follow Michael's wishes, protect his legacy and make money. They don't have to protect the Jackson family.

The estate exploiting Michael for financial gain- this sounds like the Katherine/Mann contract on which Katherine gives Mann permission to exploit Michael & his children for financial gain.

They call Branca greedy. Don't they know that when people work they have to get paid. That's the law.

I don't know what is more shocking the letter or having Janet involved. She always seemed to me not too honest. At least with LaToya, you get what see & hear, but Janet didn't seem to honest. But i'd had never expected this.

Now that the estate is making so much money, these people have come from underwater with so much anger and greed that makes you wonder if there's also some kind of envy.

From The Forbes report I understand the will was not declared valid or invalid. If that's the case, can the Jackson have a case there? I know they can't do it on their own but they can have Katherine doing it for them? I also know if she contest & loses she can be removed as a beneficiary.

This is really a strange and mean family. They can put anyone on cardiac arrest. I think Michael had a healthy heart because he stayed away from his family.
 
Gee I wonder what Randy will come up with tomorrow now that the Estate has responded to the letter. This drama may die quietly, to be restarted again in 3 years.
 
So now Paris is making it clear she only meant the stroke and the rest of the letter stays unchallenged by her?! Well, that will disapoint some I'm sure who thought other wise. But, she is only 14 so let it be. She can't possibly know everything that is going on or not goin on.

And while I am not and never will be happy over the post MJ Album Michael, the rest of the projects handled/approved by the Estate have been either pretty good or great. So I have no issue with them about those other things and frankly rather have them run MJ estate then any Jackson until ofcourse the only Jacksons that matter here MJ kids one day take over.

I Also think it's crazy that there's a tour by some of the Jacksons called "UNITY!" Like for real?!
 
Last edited:
Now that the estate is making so much money, these people have come from underwater with so much anger and greed that makes you wonder if there's also some kind of envy.
Click to expand...

Of course its envy, they are jealous of michael's success
 
bluetopez said:
And while I am not and never will be happy over the post MJ Album Michael, the rest of the projects handled/approved by the Estate have been either pretty good or great. So I have no issue with them about those other things and frankly rather have them run MJ estate then any Jackson until ofcourse the only Jacksons that matter here MJ kids one day take over.
Click to expand...

This is exactly where I stand. I was appalled at the album but pleased with everything else. Hopefully they will not make that mistake again. If Jermaine was in charge we would still be waiting another ten years for anything to happen.
 
:blink:



OMG!
www.MessenTools.com-Humor-pelos-locos.gif
What a hot mess!
kermit.gif
I do not know what to say :unsure: .... This family has exceeded all limits. :doh: Michael would be shocked and very disappointed with the family. Fact! :( I have to strengthen my prayers for PPB, they will need :fear: ... and much. :angel:
 
prettygirlmj said:
This Jackson family has got to be the most embarassing show biz family of all time. Paris should not have tweeted something like that - although she is right - she should have not been the one to have tweeted that. Why can't she just enjoy being a child instead of getting mixed up in public fights with these crazy adults?
Click to expand...

Paris's childhood ended on June 25, 2009.
 
Open Letter On Behalf Of Michael Jackson Fans in Support of MJ Estate

Michael Jackson's fan base is aware of derogatory statements made by certain members of the Jackson family, against the executors of his Estate. We are shocked and saddened that propaganda, rather than seeking avenues to address their concerns legally, have been used to gain sympathy. While we most certainly support the beneficiaries of Jackson's Estate, Katherine Jackson and Michael's children, we equally support the executors, Mr. John Branca and Mr. John McClain.

Jackson's fans understand that the task both Branca and McClain took on when Michael died was staggering. Weighted in nearly $400 million in debt, with an overwhelming amount of pending lawsuits, the Executors took the reins of the Estate and went to work.

Posthumously, the Executors have ensured the highest grossing music documentary of all time, This Is It, two successful albums, the number one tour in the world, Cirque du Soleil's IMMORTAL, sold millions of Michael Jackson The Experience video games, and are planning a huge release for the 25th anniversary of Jackson's legendary Bad album. Although every fan does not agree with all decisions the Estate has made, we agree that overall, the Estate has done well in preserving Michael's legacy. In addition, we agree with the Estate, that "false and defamatory accusations grounded in stale Internet conspiracy" do nothing to promote the positive ethic Michael Jackson espoused while alive.

In three years, Jackson's Estate is thriving, nearly debt free and Michael Jackson's music is still at the forefront of the music industry. We wholeheartedly support Michael Jackson's final wishes; that he trusted both John Branca and John McClain to continue his message through his music. The Michael Jackson fan base thanks the Executors for continuing to do just that, with grace and dignity.

Sincerely,

MJJCommunity, MJJUnderground, MJJJusticeProject, United4MJsLegacy, MJ Fans of NYC, MJ4Justice, Justice4MJ, TributoMJ, MJTruthNow, MJNation, SOMJ, Canadian MJ Fan Club, The Jam Café, Michael Jackson Vindication 2.0, Stop Global Airwave Abuse, Michael Jackson fans of Montreal


---------------------

Note to fan groups: Please sign the letter and post it at your websites,blogs, forums, facebook and twitter accounts. Notify us and we'll add your name to the list.
Note to individual fans: Please post the letter at your blogs, facebook and twitter accounts and help with circulation of it.


http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/123543-Open-Letter-from-MJ-fans-in-Support-of-MJ-Estate
 
<_< SMDH at the Jacksons! Why dont they just let this go? :doh:

Paris tweets earlier today! :ph34r: Whoa. She sure is a mini Debbie. :D

I figured she was going to issue a apology and I bet Katherine made her do it. -_- Fact still stands that the family is greedy liars. I hope Paris sees that some day...
 
8701girl said:
I think randy rang katherine and told her what paris said to him online
Click to expand...

That's what I think happened too. Randy called Katherine and she made Paris apologize. But her words are already all over the media, uncle Randy must be royally pissed :lol:
 
StellaJackson said:
90% of what the Estate has done has been good work. The family have a right to be concerned but it shouldn't be done in public like this. That letter should have been sent privately. It really reflects badly on them.
Click to expand...

Problem is, they are not concerned about anything but about how to get to the money...
 
Read here about standing :



[h=1]<center>ESTATE OF BRANDO</center>[/h][h=1]
<center>Estate of MARLON BRANDO, Deceased.
DEBORAH BRANDO, Petitioner and Appellant,
v.
AVRA DOUGLAS et al., Objectors and Respondents.</center>​
​
[/h][h=1]<center>B209699</center>[/h][h=1]<center>Court of Appeals of California, Second Appellate District, Division Two</center>[/h]<center style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; ">[h=1]<center>July 30, 2009</center>[/h][h=1]<center>Not to be Published in the Official Reports</center>[/h]</center>
Greg J. Venturi for Petitioner and Appellant.​
​
​
​
Larson & Bawden, Charles A. Larson and Elizabeth A. Bawden; Winston & Strawn, Michael S. Brophy and Robert F. Gookin for Objectors and Respondents.​
​
​
​



CHAVEZ, J.
Petitioner and appellant Deborah Brando (appellant) appeals the dismissal of her action against objectors and respondents Avra Douglas, Larry Dressler, and Mike Medavoy (respondents) after the probate court sustained, without leave to amend, respondents' demurrer to appellant's first amended petition for probate of will, to set aside final accounting and distribution, and to reopen the probate of a codicil to the will. We affirm the judgment.
<center>BACKGROUND</center>
Respondents are the discharged co-executors of the now closed estate of Marlon Brando (the Estate). Appellant is the former spouse of Christian Brando, the eldest child of Marlon Brando (decedent), and claims to be the assignee of Christian Brando's rights under decedent's will.
Decedent died on July 1, 2004. His will, dated August 28, 2002, and a codicil, dated June 18, 2004, were admitted to probate on August 25, 2004. The only beneficiaries named in decedent's will are Alice Marchak, Blanche Hall, and decedent's living trust. Although decedent's will named JoAn Corrales and Alice Marchak as executors of his estate, the codicil substituted respondents as co-executors. The parties agree that the only effect of the codicil was to change the identity of the estate's executors.
Letters testamentary were issued to respondents as co-executors of the estate on September 2, 2004. The probate court issued an order approving the first account current and report of administration on October 3, 2005. The probate court issued an order approving and settling second and final account on May 7, 2007. Respondents were discharged as co-executors on September 13, 2007.
On September 10, 2007, appellant filed a creditor's claim with the closed estate. On October 10, 2007, appellant filed her first petition for probate of will, which the probate court subsequently dismissed without prejudice after appellant's counsel failed to attend a scheduled hearing on that petition.
Christian Brando died on January 26, 2008. On January 28, 2008, appellant filed a second petition for probate of will and to reopen probate of the codicil. In her petition, appellant alleged that she had standing based on "her status as an adult, assignee from Christian Brando, of his rights as beneficiary." Appellant further alleged that the codicil to decedent's will was forged.
Respondents demurred to appellant's petition on the grounds that appellant lacked standing to contest the probate of the will and codicil and that her claims were barred by the 120-day limitations period imposed by Probate Code section 8270. In her opposition to the demurrers, appellant insisted that her status as Christian Brando's assignee gave her standing to contest the probate and that the alleged forgery of the codicil constituted "extrinsic fraud" that tolled the 120-day limitations period. The probate court sustained respondents' demurrers but granted appellant leave to amend. In its minute order sustaining the demurrer, the probate court expressly noted that appellant had alleged only intrinsic fraud, not extrinsic fraud, and cited U.S. v. Throckmorton (1878) 98 U.S. 61.
On April 3, 2008, appellant filed a first amended petition for probate of will, to set aside final accounting and distribution, and to reopen probate. In her amended petition, appellant alleged that the following facts constituted extrinsic fraud: "Prior to the probate of the will and Codicil of Marlon Brando, and outside of and prior to the jurisdiction of the Probate Court, Marlon Brando's signature on the codicil and the amendment to his trust were forged, and he did not sign either document. Said forgery was an illegal felony under Penal Code 470." Respondents again demurred to the petition on the grounds that appellant lacked standing and that her claims were time-barred. Following a hearing on the matter, the probate court sustained the demurrers without leave to amend. This appeal followed.
<center>DISCUSSION</center>
I. Standard of Review
"On appeal from a judgment dismissing an action after sustaining a demurrer without leave to amend, the standard of review is well settled. The reviewing court gives the complaint a reasonable interpretation, and treats the demurrer as admitting all material facts properly pleaded. [Citations.] The court does not, however, assume the truth of contentions, deductions or conclusions of law. [Citation.] The judgment must be affirmed `if any one of the several grounds of demurrer is well taken. [Citations.]' [Citation.] However, it is error for a trial court to sustain a demurrer when the plaintiff has stated a cause of action under any possible legal theory. [Citation.]" (Aubry v. Tri-City Hospital Dist. (1992) 2 Cal.4th 962, 966-967.) The legal sufficiency of the complaint is reviewed de novo. (Montclair Parkowners Ass'n v. City of Montclair (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 784, 790.) We review the probate court's order sustaining the demurrers without leave to amend for abuse of discretion. (Estate of Powers (1979) 91 Cal.App.3d 715, 724-725.)
II. Standing
Probate Code section 8270, subdivision (a), provides that "[w]ithin 120 days after a will is admitted to probate, any interested person . . . may petition the court to revoke the probate of the will." An "interested person" is one who has "`"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 benefitted by the setting aside of the will"'" (Estate of Lind (1989) 209 Cal.App.3d 1424, 1430-1431), and includes "[a]n heir, devisee, child, spouse, creditor, beneficiary, and any other person having a property right in or claim against a trust estate or the estate of a decedent which may be affected by the proceeding." (Prob. Code, § 48, subd. (a)(1).) Only an "interested person" is entitled to contest a will before or after probate. (Estate of Lind, supra, at p. 1430.)
Appellant claims to be an "interested person" with standing to contest decedent's will and codicil based on her status as an assignee or creditor of Christian Brando. The record shows, however, that Christian Brando had no rights under decedent's will because he was neither an heir nor a beneficiary under that will. Appellant's status as an assignee or creditor of Christian Brando accordingly gives her no pecuniary interest in decedent's estate, and she alleges no pecuniary interest apart from her status as an assignee or creditor. Appellant lacks standing to contest the probate of decedent's will and codicil. The demurrers to appellant's petition were properly sustained on that basis.
III. Statute of Limitations
Appellant's claims are also time-barred under Probate Code section 8270. Subdivision (a) of that statute accords an interested party 120 days to petition for revocation of probate. Decedent's will and codicil were admitted to probate on August 25, 2004. The period to petition for revocation of probate expired 120 days later, on December 23, 2004. Appellant did not file her petition for probate until October 10, 2007, nearly three years after expiration of the 120-day statutory period. Her petition was thus untimely.
Appellant contends her claims are not time-barred because Probate Code section 8007, subdivision (b), authorizes challenges to a final probate court order premised on "[t]he presence of extrinsic fraud in the procurement of the court order." She maintains that the probate court's orders closing the estate and discharging the co-executors were procured through "extrinsic fraud" because decedent's signature on the codicil was forged.
Probate Code section 8007, subdivision (a) states that "an order admitting a will to probate or appointing a personal representative, when it becomes final, is a conclusive determination of the jurisdiction of the court and cannot be collaterally attacked." Subdivision (b) of the statute sets forth an exception to the rule of finality in the event there is "extrinsic fraud in the procurement of the court order."[SUP]1[/SUP]
Extrinsic fraud, to be a proper basis for relief under Probate Code section 8007, must have prevented the defrauded party from contesting the will. In determining whether such relief is warranted, courts distinguish between extrinsic fraud and intrinsic fraud. Extrinsic fraud is "`fraud practiced directly upon the party seeking relief against the judgment or decree [such] that [the] party has been prevented from presenting all of his case to the court.'" (Caldwell v. Taylor (1933) 218 Cal. 471, 475-477, quoting United States v. Throckmorton, supra, 98 U.S. at pp. 65-66.) "Extrinsic fraud occurs when a party is deprived of the opportunity to present his claim or defense to the court; where he was kept ignorant or, other than from his own negligence, fraudulently prevented from fully participating in the proceeding. [Citation.] Examples of extrinsic fraud are: concealment of the existence of a community property asset, failure to give notice of the action to the other party, and convincing the other party not to obtain counsel because the matter will not proceed (and then it does proceed). [Citation.] The essence of extrinsic fraud is one party's preventing the other from having his day in court." (City and County of San Francisco v. Cartagena (1995)35 Cal.App.4th 1061, 1067.)
"By contrast, fraud is intrinsic and not a valid ground for setting aside a judgment when the party has been given notice of the action and has had an opportunity to present his case and to protect himself from any mistake or fraud of his adversary but has unreasonably neglected to do so. [Citation.] Such a claim of fraud goes to the merits of the prior proceeding which the moving party should have guarded against at the time. Where the defrauded party has failed to take advantage of liberal discovery policies to fully investigate his claim, any fraud is intrinsic fraud. [Citation.]" (City and County of San Francisco v. Cartagena, supra, 35 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1067-1068.) Allegations concerning a forged will constitute intrinsic fraud. (Granzella v. Jargoyhen (1974) 43 Cal.App.3d 551, 556.)
Appellant's allegations concerning the forged codicil constitute intrinsic rather than extrinsic fraud and are insufficient to disturb the finality of the probate proceedings she seeks to reopen. Appellant has failed to suggest how she would amend her petition to correct the defects noted above. The trial court therefore did not abuse its discretion by sustaining the demurrers without leave to amend.
<center>DISPOSITION</center>
The judgment is affirmed. Respondents are awarded their costs on appeal.[SUP]2[/SUP]
We concur:
BOREN, P. J.
ASHMANN-GERST, J.


http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=In+CACO+20090730024.xml&docbase=CSLWAR3-2007-CURR
 
bluetopez said:
So now Paris is making it clear she only meant the stroke and the rest of the letter stays unchallenged by her?! Well, that will disapoint some I'm sure who thought other wise. But, she is only 14 so let it be. She can't possibly know everything that is going on or not goin on.
Click to expand...

No we really dont know what she feels about whole letter. I mean her tweets to Randy were only about her grandma having a stroke.
 
Victory22 said:
Her ADULT relatives are the ones who took this mess public. Michael's child has every right to respond since her low class relatives want the world on their side and not on the side of the men MJ appointed to look after his estate.
Click to expand...

exactly. randy and co are the ones that created this tacky letter and sent it to the tabloids. they are the ones they claimed what they did about kj in order to gain sympathy for their cause. yet when paris calls him out on it its all her fault. hardly surpriding as some will defend the family over mj and kids no matter what. Well done paris. its about time they were called out publically.their wholesome unity b.s went along time ago if it ever excisted at all.
 
Paris Jackso&#951; &#8207;@ParisJackson
at this point i dont care what people call me or if they think i'm a bad person… if it means sticking up for my grandmother i will do it .

Paris Jackso&#951; &#8207;@ParisJackson
fighting fire with fire only gets you burned… well i say maybe we need a little spark in our lives #ComeAtMeBro
 
another fuckery pulled by these greedy bunch of leeches. yet we are supposed to kiss their ass and respect them. NEVER EVER LMFAO
 
elusive moonwalker said:
exactly. randy and co are the ones that created this tacky letter and sent it to the tabloids. they are the ones they claimed what they did about kj in order to gain sympathy for their cause. yet when paris calls him out on it its all her fault. hardly surpriding as some will defend the family over mj and kids no matter what. Well done paris. its about time they were called out publically.their wholesome unity b.s went along time ago if it ever excisted at all.
Click to expand...
Lil' Paris Jackson and her brothers are in for a ROUGH awakening in the next couple of years. May God be on their side, with a ''family'' like THIS. Things are going to turn beyond FUGLY
 
18 Jul Randy Jackson ?@randyjackson8
We ask that everyone respects that this is a serious matter that will be handled by the proper authorities.
Retweeted by Jermaine Jackson

60s Jermaine Jackson ?@jermjackson5
This is a serious matter that has been weighed carefully, including taking into account Michael's thoughts and feelings when he was alive



Jermaine Jackson said:
[...] weighed carefully [...]
Click to expand...
Are you kidding? BS!

Jermaine Jackson said:
[...] taking into account Michael's thoughts and feelings when he was alive
Click to expand...
PARDON ME? Do you ACKNOWLEDGE the thoughts and feelings that Michael himself had incorporated into 2 WILLS???

Randy Jackson said:
we ask that everyone respect this is a serious matter [...]
Click to expand...
A serious matter is what Randy did with MJJSource members' money...

Randy Jackson said:
[...] that will be handled by the proper authorities
Click to expand...
Start reading the law! Any of your silly attempts will be dismissed by any court.
You have all the time in the world to enhance your education.
 
Last edited:
+1000 i was one of the fans premium mjjsource members while Michael was struggling for his life they promised dinners with Michael and silly contests to get our cash !
 
I have the feeling Paris was TOLD to apologize and "clarify" her original message. Sorry, but originally she did not talk about "today".

I wonder where Katherine stands in all this...
 
Tragic to see a family so divided and all about money! Poor Mrs Jackson, hope she doesn't suffer more ill health with all of this going on around her with the press having a field day. Where is the dignity?
 
"WE insist that you resign effective immediately as executors from the estate of our brother , Michael Joe Jackson. For good cause we make this appeal to you, as will be represented thereon in this letter, and further revealed in the coming weeks.

We are going to take every appropriate action to seek justice and to see it that the truth be known. Be informed, we are considering retaining the law firm, Baker Hosteler, who have advised us on potential criminal misconduct in your actions. We will hand this over to the proper authorities."
Click to expand...


Butterfly said:
Jermaine Jackson ?@jermjackson5
Re our letter to Estate: while fans only have limited info right now, we ask for patience because much is yet to emerge in this jigsaw...
Click to expand...

Why have I heard this before? And where is that popcorn gif? :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top