I was just watching an interview of Prince's older half brother and his lawyer was also interviewed. The lawyer said since there is not a will, the law sees half and full siblings as the same and one is not more related than the other. I assumed the one sister (there is one 'full' sibling) would be the main beneficiary and the 5 half siblings from various partners of the parents would not get as much.
I am sure had he left a will/trust this would not be an issue. It made me think if Prince's father (not as likely with the mother) impregnated several woman through out his life, these offsprings are equal to the siblings he knew and grew up with. The division of his estate seems like it might become a circus.
Is this lawyer correct that a full sibling is equal to half-siblings when 'next of kin' is determined? I do not have any experience with this, but I am curious if others have gone through a non-trust estate. I recall when my husband and I were filling out our will/trust, there was a section for our children together (vs. children not together). Maybe there is a difference for that (offsprings vs siblings).
700 people are claiming to be Prince's sibling...holy cow!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3577864/The-gold-...
I understood from a news report that the laws in the state where he lived count all siblings as equal. But you can expect that a whole bunch of people are going to come out of the woodwork claiming to be siblings and offspring (and I understand offspring take precedence in his state over siblings). DNA testing is being done on a blood sample of Prince's to save for expected challenges and claims.
And yes, it will become a circus for a variety of reasons. It's not just the assets that are there already, it's the vault of unpublished and unrecorded music that will now have immense value, in addition to posthumous records sales. Think about Elvis - his estate made tons more money (from music sales, Graceland and licensing) after his death than he made during his life, in large part due to excellent management by Priscilla Presley. And Elvis had a known daughter to inherit.
But if you have a will, you can put anyone in it that you want to, whether related or not.
It's also unclear whether there's no will for Prince - supposedly one hasn't been found, that's all. It's way too early and there is, unfortunately, so much to be discovered and so many more claims (legit and bogus) that will present themselves.
Even those of us without 'princely' estates need to leave and update our wills. I am going to double check mine!
It varies a bit from state to state.
http://law.freeadvice.com/estate_planning/wills/who-gets-...
Inheritance laws can be a jungle to navigate and this could be tied up in probate for years - perhaps decades.
While it's in process - you can be sure the lawyers involved will be paid - and things might be settled sometime (maybe just) before the money runs out.
Another thing to fight over besides the money and properties are the songs (probably considered to be intellectual property - I'm not sure - I'm not a lawyer) he wrote but never released/ published before he died.
Someone will want to manage that part of the estate because releasing a dead artists work could be income for a very long time.
Think of Elvis estate.
At the time of his death is was worth an amount - but with proper management it became worth a lot more.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/06/opinions/prince-probate-cas...
I am in the process of updating my will and trust after my husband died. No matter what your circumstances are, it is SO important to have a will.
We had not updated therefore I went through some proceedings that would have been unnecessary if we only had updated.
I had to pay for a lawyer to look for any offspring my hubby may have had when I had been with him over 27 years. It was crazy.
Likely true. In the state of Nevada, my mother's friend was the second wife to a man who passed and did leave a will. Everything went to the second wife. The home they resided in was the home that belonged to his first family with older children. The couple had two more children, then he passed. Years after he passed, the older children sued for the home and property and won. She had to leave the home and they sold it. It was a very large and old piece of property.
The property was sold as commercial and now there is a Walgreen's and small strip of stores on the property.
She got nothing. Slightly different case, but it also depends on what the courts decide.
Hi S.,
I agree with the posters below that laws do vary by state and that having not only a will, but an estate plan as well, are both crucial to the carrying out of final wishes. I can only speak to my family and no single solution works for every situation.
Having said that, in my experience, the parents leave the estate to the children. In my case, when my mom passes, her estate will fall to myself and my brother. She has provisions for our spouses as well as her grandchildren but the majority of it will be divided evenly between me and him. My DH and I plan to leave everything to our son. However, we have it divided into a graduated distribution depending on his age. If the estate passes to him after he's 35, he gets the whole thing in it's entirety. However, forgive the morbidity here, if we pass away when he's younger, he'll be entitled to partial payouts until he turns 35.
My sister in law tried to convince my mother that she should divide her estate unevenly between myself and my brother, leaving the majority to them, since I have an only child and she has two. Mom failed to dignify that with a response. I'm quite sure that I'm not remembered in my brother's will and there's no provision for him in mine.
This is thought provoking for sure and thanks for thinking of it. And I also agree....let the man rest in peace. :-| S.
