Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070829/helmsley_s_pooch.html?.v=1
Just thought this would provide a good chuckle for the day....
Just thought this would provide a good chuckle for the day....
Grandkids stiffed...$12m goes to trouble
- Thread starter Cancel 2016.2
- Start date
uscitizen
Villified User
Umm in a legal sense yes.
No it doesn't. This is ridiculous. Rocks have rights? Rubbish. You can create a fund to save specific rocks, that doesn't give them rights. I thought you had given up on this one. Even the animal rights advocates say that they don't have rights.
No, a trust fund does not give animals or inanimate objects rights regardless of the amount that might be in the fund. It is because of the human rights of the originator that the fund can be set aside, not because of the dog. Without the trust being set up (human agent) the dog can't even legally inherit anything, the suggestion in a will would be rejected and the money would go to an immediate human relative.Umm I could use 22 mil of no rights
T
TRGLDTE
Guest
"Stiffed."
You make it sound as though they were owed something (simply by virtue of being?). They were not owed a thing.
Socrtease
Verified User
This is a completely accurate statement of the law today. Dogs cannot be heirs. They can be the subject of a trust. But the trustee decides how and when the money gets spent on the dogs. And usually the a trust like this must make provisions for what happens when the last dog dies.
The law despises the waste of money. A man, in some jurisdiction that I do not recall now, had a will that stated he wanted to be buried with all his money which was a considerable sum. So when the will was contested, the judge ordered that the man be buried with a check in the amount of his estate and that if, within one year, he did not cash it, that the estate would be divided by intestate succession.
uscitizen
Villified User
it does give them rights the trust fund has to be used in certain ways for thier benefit . right ?
No, the originator of the trust sets rules for the spending of the money, it is not inherent in the dog, it is inherent right of the human making the trust that allows for this.
The dog cannot decide how to spend the money, it is in fact the totally up to whomever holds the trust.
uscitizen
Villified User
so the trust does not endow any rights on the dog ?
Correct. It does not any more than a trust to buy and protect a property gives any rights to the property. The rights belong to the human who created the trust.
Did you read Socrtease's post? A lawyer gives you the answer to the dilemma and you reject their expertise.
uscitizen
Villified User
Sure I can reject anything.
another lawyer argued that the gay senator had violated no laws....
lawyers will argue their case knowing all the time it is wrong. It is their job.
It is the job of the animal rights activist lawyers to argue for the rights of animals, they say that they have no rights but should be given them based on certain arguments.
It is ridiculous to state this based on Jarod's argument that he said he couldn't see what law they broke. Dude is not a client of Jarod either.
Thorn
Member
Hey, old Leona went up a few notches in my estimation with this one! She ensured that her dog would be cared for throughout her life by Mrs. Helmsley's brother, and she dispensed with the remainder of her estate in what appears to be a rational manner. She left money to two grandchildren and not to two others, saying that they would know why. It was her money; she wasn't legally obligated to leave them a dime, and she did what she wanted with it. After Trouble dies, that money in trust will go to a charitable foundation Leona and her husband set up years ago. Good for her!
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Oh please do STFU... friggin word nazi.
T
TRGLDTE
Guest
There must be some provision in the trust agreement that allows the Trustee the power to act without the need for approval of the beneficiary, as that is an impossibility. There was a successor beneficiary named. When Trouble passes, the successor beneficiary is a Charitable Trust.
I am not sure how the dog can be made a beneficiary. If you have enough money, you can hire a lawyer smart enough to figure out how to make it happen.
Last edited:
doniston
Aint I a cutie? HEH HEH
That doesn.t mean they don't have rights. this is just more of your abject stupidity.
PS.I follow the subject, if your idiocy is involved, then so be it.
T
TRGLDTE
Guest
Maybe it is a little picky on my part. Because my wife's (completely useless) nephew thinks he is owed the world by virtue of his ability to breathe, I am probably placing some of that here. Such are the filters of our own experiences...