Rich NYC Art Dealer Leaves Entire Estate To A Deli Employee

Sorry to OP if I’m getting off topic to far .......I loved the Clint Eastwood movie
called Gran Torino ..it showed how his family treated him and deceased wife ( it showed GC chewing gum / blowing bubbles with gum/ playing with mobile phone during funeral service )

The family expected to receive the estate when he died ...however he turned it around and left his precious car to the young next door neighbour who actually schemed to steal it soon after moving into the neighbourhood with the remainder of the estate going to the church.

I look at it as a great example of the consequences of disrespecting your elders


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Torino
 
Last edited:
StarSong said:
I'd think the care giver status will factor in. Surely the family will be able to engage a law firm to take the case on contingency.
Click to expand...
Not likely. Law firms only take personal injury cases on contingency & even then, only when they are a slam dunk win.
And sometimes (depending on the retainer agreement) even with a contingency, there may be fees.
I retained a law firm for incompetent dental work that I had to pay to re-do - with complete medical bills and sworn testimony from other dentists. The firm took the case on contingency, then after a few weeks, they wanted several thousand dollars from me for "Consulting Fees." I told them to stick it & went elsewhere.
 

Last edited:
win231 said:
Not likely. Law firms only take personal injury cases on contingency & even then, only when they are a slam dunk win.
And sometimes (depending on the retainer agreement) even with a contingency, there may be fees.
I retained a law firm for incompetent dental work that I had to pay to re-do - with complete medical bills and sworn testimony from another dentists. The firm took the case on contingency, then after a few weeks, they wanted several thousand dollars from me for "Consulting Fees." I told them to stick it & went elsewhere.
Click to expand...

I'd bet those fees were for experts in dental procedures whom the lawyers consulted about what happened, standarad of care, etc. That's a common practice and sometimes it's the only way to figure out what went wrong. They are usually billed in along with "costs" of litigation, as opposed to fees to the law firm. Expert fees get VERY expensive.
 
Jules said:
Since I can’t read the article, does it imply that perhaps it was a romantic relationship with the man.

I expect changing a will 9 days prior to his death will be questioned. Was he of sound mind? Was he coerced?


Wills can be contested here. Rare, but it does happen. Your medical aid is supposed to be exempt from being the beneficiary.
Click to expand...


Actually, changing a will close to death isn't that odd or unusual, actually it's pretty common. When people figure out the end may be near, they often rethink how they want their property distributed. To prove the testator wasn't in sound mind, the challengers have to prove he wasn't -- which is nearly impossible unless the testator's medical records reflect that he wasn't competent. Coercion is very hard to prove as well, especially, I'd suppose, where the family members weren't interested in how he was being taken care of until they found out how he'd left his estate. Is it coercion to help a sick person out when they have no family who cares enough to help him? I don't think so.

As to the "medical aid" not being able to be a beneficiary, not sure if that's true here or not, but reading the article doesn't indicate the man who inherited was a "medical aid." He helped the old man out daily, but I doubt that counts as being a medical aid anyway, especially since the guy wasn't a medical person, but a friend.
 
One place I worked, we had a wealthy client who, at the end of her life, got fed up with her family's not helping her out and changed her will and left everything to her cat, with an old servant as trustee, and after the cat's death the residual estate was to go half to the servant and half to a cat rescue. It held up.
 
Since I'm viewing this as a spectator with nothing at stake, it's a pass-the-popcorn situation for me.

All I can say is that if I were his relatives I'd be talking to lawyers right now. They may learn that NY has some sort of law about caregivers being beneficiaries, as California does. Or they may learn that the will is probably going to stand as is.

This law firm also discusses the case, and suggests this may be "a case of elder abuse."
https://www.kklawfirm.com/art-dealer-fortune-deli-worker/
 
Last edited:
Butterfly said:
I'd bet those fees were for experts in dental procedures whom the lawyers consulted about what happened, standarad of care, etc. That's a common practice and sometimes it's the only way to figure out what went wrong. They are usually billed in along with "costs" of litigation, as opposed to fees to the law firm. Expert fees get VERY expensive.
Click to expand...
I already had an expert who was ready to testify about the cause at no cost - my new dentist who not only did a thorough exam, but wrote to my incompetent dentist because he was so disgusted. My attorney just wanted to get his buddies in on the money feast - along with him.
 
win231 said:
When I googled "Customer leaves waitress a big tip" I saw many such examples.
Click to expand...
The movie I mentioned the cop won lotto and gave her a HUGE TIP ( as promised he’d share anything he won on the lotto ticket , when he didn’t have a tip to give her at the time )

think it was about million $$$$$ however she lost it to his greedy wife ..who squandered it and spent the lot
The waitress and the cop who gave the “tip “ ended up together
@win231 I have the movie in DVD so I’ll have to watch it again
 
win231 said:
I already had an expert who was ready to testify about the cause at no cost - my new dentist who not only did a thorough exam, but wrote to my incompetent dentist because he was so disgusted. My attorney just wanted to get his buddies in on the money feast - along with him.
Click to expand...

Most courts (read "rules") will not consider your treating guy as an "expert." There are rules for expert witnesses and they have to be qualified by the court as expert witnesses and are supposed to be impartial. No way would a court (at least not here) allow your dentist to qualify as an expert -- because he was treating you and cannot be presumed to be impartial, and, since he had already written a disgusted letter to the old dentist he would presumably be considered biased.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top