Strollerderby : inheritance

Grown Kids Try Forcing Dad To Divorce Second Wife In Court

Brett Singer — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:00:00 GMT

The death of a parent can be tough on the kids. So can second marriages. But usually when we talk about things being "tough on the kids", those kids are, you know. Kids.

This case in Dallas, Texas is a little bit different.

The dad, Claude Thomas, kept his marriage to Susana Martinez Ramirez a secret for a while. Like a couple of years. Why did he do that? Maybe because he thought his children would be concerned about the difference in their ages: Thomas is now 87, Ramirez is 45.

But hey, if he's happy, what's the problem? As usual, it comes down to money. According to Thomas' children from his first marriage (there are no children from the second marriage mentioned, and they would be too young to sue if there were), "their father's estate was valued at as much as $1.5 million. It's now estimated at $165,000, according to court documents."

It's possible that the elder Mr. Thomas is not "capable of making his own decisions." The article says that he, "early signs of dementia, but he appears to know what's happening around him. He's said in court that he wants no guardian – he's happy with his wife and her spending habits. And he has disputed testimony that portrays his wife as a villain."

The details are soap opera worthy. Ms. Ramirez "pushed the tea cart" at a local restaurant, and became close with Claude Thomas and his now-deceased first wife, Geneva Thomas. Some are claiming that the first Mrs. Thomas asked Ms. Ramirez to take her place when she died; the children say that's not true. To make matters even more complicated, Thomas works with his kids at a family business he started.

I'm conflicted about this one. Whose money is it, anyway? If the old man wants to let his young wife spend it all, do his children have the right to stop him? Is an inheritance a right? If Thomas is found to be mentally incapacitated, that's different, at least legally (I think). If not, I think the new wife can do whatever she wants to. The family business part makes this legally more complex (again – I think). But the main issue of inheritance and what happens to it when there's a second marriage is something we can expect to see more of, according to Terry Hammond, executive director of the National Guardianship Association. "It's a case indicative of where we are as a society…accumulated financial wealth is a target. And the exploitation and love, or the appearance of love, is one of the first ways to an elderly person's heart." I'm sure that's true. But is it always the case? Is this particular situation Harold and Maude, Woody Allen and Soon Yi (I know, ew, but I don't think she's after his money), Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta-Jones? Or is it Anna Nicole Smith and James Howard Marshall II, Paul McCartney and Heather Mills?

Source: Dallas Morning News

Image: funatiq

Do You Take Your Baby Bar Hopping?

Smokers No Longer Allowed Foster Children

Incredibly Good Homemade Halloween Costumes

About Ann Nixon Cooper

109 Year Old Daughter Of Slave Votes For Obama

The Candy That Time Forgot

The Obamas Are a Great First Family

Woman Swings Crowbar At Trick Or Treaters

Paris Hilton's brother also dangerously useless

Brett Singer — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 16:39:00 GMT

Speaking of rich kids who aren't getting an inheritance, let us not forget the Hiltons. Barron Hilton (his middle really should be "von" don't you think? Barron von Hilton has a nice, obnoxious ring to it) has pleaded no contest to driving under the influence. Ah, youth. You wonder what will happen to the little prince now that Grampa Hilton has cut the grandkids out of his will. Barron even has the same name as Gramps, but that won't help him once all the money goes to a charitable foundation. Maybe he can get a job at one of the hotels. As a bellhop.

image: Gawker.com

Body Shop Gazillionaire Leaves Nothing to Her Kids

Madeline Holler — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 20:07:00 GMT

Oh, those crazy do-gooders! Body Shop co-founder and environmental activist Anita Roddick left exactly nothing in her will to her two children. Roddick died last year of a brain hemorrhage. Her will was published yesterday.

What do her daughters think? "Eh. It's a relief."

Spoken like true, rich kid ... wait, what? A relief?

Here's what Sam, 35, owner of an upmarket sex shop in London, had to say about being sort of disinherited:

"If the money was divided between family members I suppose it would be natural to equate the amount that you were left with the amount that you were loved, which makes it very complicated and emotional.

"So, if my mum had said to me, 'I'm not leaving the money to you but I've decided to give it all to a distant cousin', then I would have found that offensive.

"But giving it all to charity is different. You can't really argue about someone giving their money away, can you?

Wow. Grounded. The other daughter agrees.

Of course, following the sale of the company in 2005, Roddick and her husband each split the proceeds. She gave hers all to charities ranging from environmental causes to relief of third world debt. He, however, hasn't said what he'll do with the money.

Although this is what Roddick said about fortune:

"Money does not mean anything to me. The worst thing is greed - the accumulation of money."

Famed sexy cook Nigella Lawson has also said she won't leave any of her fortune to her two children.

What do you think? Not even a few bucks? A pretty house? Nothing? What's with these rich English mums?