Startin’ Somethin! Michael Jackson’s 93-Year-Old Mom Fires Back in Court After Grandson Blanket Fights Her $500k Demand From Pop Star’s Estate
Katherine was back in court.
Mar. 26 2024, Published 10:30 a.m. ET
Michael Jackson’s mother Katherine demanded her six-figure legal bill be paid in full despite objections by her grandson Blanket and the executors of her late son’s estate — claiming the estate has over $1 billion available.
According to court documents obtained by RadarOnline.com, the 93-year-old asked the court to grant her motion to be reimbursed $561,548 in legal fees.
Michael's Will was to take care of his three children and his mother Katherine for the remainder of her life.
Katherine racked up the fees as she fought the executors, John Branca and John McClain, over the recent $600 million sale of one-half of Jackson’s music catalog.
For months, Katherine tried to block the deal from being finalized. She testified in court that her son wanted to keep onto the catalog as security for his family.
Blanket opposed his grandma's $500k reimbursement request.
Jackson’s children Blanket and Paris supported their grandmother’s fight. The pop star’s oldest son Prince backed the executors’ deal.
The court ended up signing off on the deal despite Katherine’s objections. She quickly filed an appeal.
As part of the appeal, Katherine scored a series of small victories. The battle has yet to be resolved. As a result of her small wins, Katherine requested the estate pay her $561k for fees associated with the appeal.
The estate scoffed at the request.
Katherine is fighting the estate over the recent sale of one-half of Jackson's music catalog.
- REVEALED: Michael Jackson's Mother Katherine Paid $55 Million From His Estate Since Pop Star's Death
- Michael Jackson’s Family War: Estate Executors Reveal Katherine’s $3.7 Million Tax Debt in Fight Over Music Catalog Sale
- Michael Jackson’s 93-Year-Old Mom Demands $561k From Late Pop Star’s Estate as She Fights to Block Secret Deal
They argued, “The Petition does not indicate the source from which Mrs. Jackson’s counsel seeks to have the requested attorney’s fees and expenses paid. It is not clear whether she is seeking payment from the probate estate or from the Trust.”
“To the extent Mrs. Jackson seeks payment from the probate estate, the Petition lacks merit because it relies on provisions of the Trust, claiming that payment of legal fees is required by provisions of the Trust authorizing the Trustees to make payments “in [their] absolute discretion, for [Mrs. Jackson’s] care, support, maintenance, comfort and well-being,” they said.
Blanket filed his own opposition. He argued that Katherine should be reimbursed for fees associated with fighting the catalog sale BUT only fees charged BEFORE the appeal.
He said he didn’t agree with Katherine filing the appeal but was on board with her initial fight. “[Blanket] did not appeal the Court’s ruling. It was apparent that the Court was acting within its discretionary powers to grant the Petition for Instructions. The chances of a reversal on appeal were quite slim and [Blanket] did not wish to incur further expense in pursuing an appeal,” his lawyers wrote.
“Despite the expense and long odds, Katherine decided to pursue an appeal,” the motion read “[Blanket] prays that this Court deny Katherine’s fees and costs incurred to appeal. It would be unfair to make those beneficiaries shoulder this burden when they expressly decided an appeal would not be in their best interests.”
In her newly filed motion, Katherine said despite the executors’ claims her petition did identify the source from which the requested payment should be made.
Michael being supported by Katherine.
Her lawyer added, “It seems clear to her that the Executors are holding all of the assets in the Estate in order to keep control over them, and to avoid the more liberal distribution requirements of the Trust.”
In addition, Katherine argued the estate is “currently holding something in the range of $1.5 billion.” She said, “this vastly exceeds its potential liabilities and leaves hundreds of millions of dollars available for the remainder beneficiaries.”
She claimed the executors cannot “in good faith contend that the Estate does not have sufficient funds to allow the Trust to make the request payment.”
The judge has yet to rule.