Re: Update: Hearing date set to October 6th / Joe Jackson appeals to remove estate executors
Oral Arguments Presented in Joseph Jackson's Appeal Over Denial of Hearing
(CNS) Posted Wednesday October 6, 2010 - 3:43pm
Michael Jackson's 81-year-old father deserves his day in court to challenge the appointments of two men named executors of his son's estate, the Jackson family patriarch's attorney told an appellate court panel today.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff erred when he denied Joe Jackson a right to a hearing last Nov. 10 to show his disapproval of the judge's naming of former Michael Jackson attorney John Branca and music executive John McClain to oversee the singer's estate, lawyer Brian Oxman said.
He also told the three-justice panel of the 2nd District Court of Appeal that both McClain and Branca are hostile to his client.
"They just don't like him ...,' the lawyer said.
But attorneys for the executors, Michael Jackson's three children and family matriarch Katherine Jackson all said Beckloff was correct in finding that other than his claims of entitlement to a family allowance, Joseph Jackson was excluded from assets from the estate under his son's will or the family trust and therefore had no standing to object to McClain or Branca.
"I think Judge Beckloff gave Mr. Oxman every opportunity to give sufficient offers of proof,' said Howard Weitzman, attorney for Branca and McClain.
Michael Jackson was pronounced dead at UCLA Medical center the afternoon of June 25, 2009, hours after being found not breathing at his rented Holmby Hills mansion.
At the time of his death, the 50-year-old singer was rehearsing for a planned series of 50 concerts in London.
The July 2002 will that McClain and Branca say reflects the true intentions of how Michael Jackson wanted his property distributed leaves his assets, worth an estimated $500 million, in a trust for his mother, his children and various charities.
His father, with whom the singer had publicly acknowledged he had a difficult relationship, is not mentioned as a beneficiary.
Oxman maintains in his court papers that Michael Jackson was in New York City at the time the will states he signed it in Los Angeles.
He also argues that although the will does not leave Joseph Jackson any assets, his client is a "statutory beneficiary' under the state Code of Civil Procedure and that both Branca and McClain are "statutory trustees.'
According to the attorney, Joseph Jackson was financially dependent upon his son while the singer was alive. When the entertainer died, McClain and Branca had the obligation to bring a wrongful death lawsuit against those who allegedly caused his death in order to replace that lost income, according to Oxman.
Joseph Jackson ultimately was forced to bring the action on his own behalf in U.S. District Court, on the first anniversary of his son's death, against Dr. Conrad Murray, the physician charged with giving the pop superstar a lethal dose of sedatives.
His client "was placed in the intolerable position of paying for the wrongful death proceeding himself, which would cost him hundreds of thousands of dollars,' Oxman's court papers state.
Justice Laurie D. Zelon asked Oxman why he made no mention of the possible bringing of a wrongful death case while arguing before Beckloff.
The attorney replied that Beckloff never gave him the chance to explain that right or any others he believed his client was entitled to.
Justice Fred Woods inquired why the Jackson patriarch did not bring a creditor's claim against the estate.
Oxman replied that his client would have had to show he had a valid contract with his youngest son instead of the informal agreement the late entertainer had with his father to maintain him financially.
"He just did it as he had money available,' Oxman said.
Attorneys for the estate argue in a brief filed in July that Beckloff's ruling should stand.
"The probate court thoroughly analyzed the issues, even performing its own research,' the estate attorneys' court papers state.
Even when examined from the point of view most favorable to Joseph Jackson, Beckloff correctly concluded he did not have standing, Weitzman and the other estate attorneys say.
Margaret G. Lodise, an attorney for Jackson's three children, states in her court papers that their grandfather's current effort hurts them.
"In fact, the beneficiaries, particularly the minor children who are the major beneficiaries of the estate, are only harmed by the continued procedural wrangling in the administration of the estate,' Lodise wrote.
Justice Frank Jackson -- who is not related to the Jackson family -- did not pose any questions to the lawyers.
The justices took the case under submission and did not indicate when they would rule. They have three months to render a decision.
Weitzman, when asked about the justices' possible impressions concerning the arguments, said they presented a "tough read.'
However, both he and Adam Streisand, who represents Katherine Jackson, said they expect a decision sooner rather than later.
http://67.59.172.92/article/Local_N..._Jacksons_Appeal_Over_Denial_of_Hearing/71844
Let's all pray Joe & Oxman never come near the kids' money.
***Notice, Oxman DID NOT ARGUE the will was fake. He mentioned the mistake, but he did not say the will was fake, something he is been hammering in the media. Even though Oxman is an idiot, he knows he cannot make a false claim in front of the judge.***
