0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

aliveTopic starter

Well, Well, Well!!!Check This Out!!!!
December 13, 2009, 08:51:02 AM
Found this on MJHD.net Credit goes there  :)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by MizBliss ยป Sun Dec 13, 2009 3:47 am

01/28/2010 at 08:30 am in department 5 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Revocation of Will

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

WTH???
I found this while looking at the cases coming up on MJ.
Case number-BP117321


I'm not an attorney, so I can't say what is up with the revocation of the will. I did search around and according to California laws, it can't be revoked unless there is a newer will revoking the old one OR the person who wrote it wants it revoked.



Very interesting !!!! Hang on everyone...It ain't over yet!!! :)
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: Well, Well, Well!!!Check This Out!!!!
December 13, 2009, 09:08:54 AM
wowwwwwwwww!january is going to be a very busy month!
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: Well, Well, Well!!!Check This Out!!!!
December 13, 2009, 09:16:09 AM
Can someone please brief me on what this means? I am not a lawyer nor do I understand legal talk. What is the BAM from this  information regarding the Will?
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

aliveTopic starter

Re: Well, Well, Well!!!Check This Out!!!!
December 13, 2009, 09:23:55 AM
Quote from: "GirlSaturday"
Can someone please brief me on what this means? I am not a lawyer nor do I understand legal talk. What is the BAM from this  information regarding the Will?


It basically means there is a hearing to throw out MJ's will. According to California law, this can happen only if 1)There is a more recent will found or 2)The person who wrote the will wants it revoked.  I hope it's number 2  :D
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: Well, Well, Well!!!Check This Out!!!!
December 13, 2009, 10:08:44 AM
Quote from: "alive"
Quote from: "GirlSaturday"
Can someone please brief me on what this means? I am not a lawyer nor do I understand legal talk. What is the BAM from this  information regarding the Will?


It basically means there is a hearing to throw out MJ's will. According to California law, this can happen only if 1)There is a more recent will found or 2)The person who wrote the will wants it revoked.  I hope it's number 2  :D

I hope you're right. But why would the person who wrote the will wants to revoke it? What would that mean if it happens. I'm confused... :?

What happens if they find a more recent will? I herd that they're might  be one. But that was from Ian Liar Halperin, so who knows if that's true. I guess we'll have to wait till the end of January to find out. :?  
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions


Keep the faith. The truth will prevail! :lol: it could mean it is soon gonna be party time mj getting ready for the return :D
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: Well, Well, Well!!!Check This Out!!!!
December 13, 2009, 01:55:11 PM
:shock:  :shock:  :shock:
oh my! this is a very good find!!!!!
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: Well, Well, Well!!!Check This Out!!!!
December 13, 2009, 02:29:52 PM
I have NEVER believed this was Michael's official will.  As I stated on another thread, I sincerely feel he would not have completely left his father out (though I could see why he would) plus I just don't see him seriously considering Diana Ross as an alternate guardian for his children or giving the Executor ship to those folk who seem to be in charge.  But as always family, this is MY OPINION.  So please don't get it twisted.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"Don't stop this child, He's the father of man
Don't cross his way, He's part of the plan
I am that child, but so are you
You've just forgotten, Just lost the clue.โ€

MJ "Magical Child"
Still Rocking my Worldโ€ฆ
   and leaving me Speechless!

โ€œTrue goodbyes are the ones never said

*

lisap27

Re: Well, Well, Well!!!Check This Out!!!!
December 13, 2009, 02:31:33 PM
oooo if its option 1.. he might have changed it after watchin everyone make a mess of everything and revealing stuff clues etc or not doing enough!!

or adding people into it for helping like his dad for not even talking about it, an basically ignorin what has happend even acting like it hasn't.. an just promoting his record label instead!! you never know!!  :shock:
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Serenitys_Dream

  • Guest
Re: Well, Well, Well!!!Check This Out!!!!
December 13, 2009, 02:40:13 PM
Here is the actual file information:

Case Summary

Case Number: BP117321
JACKSON, MICHAEL JOSEPH - DECEDENT

Filing Date: 06/29/2009
Case Type: Letters of Administration (General Jurisdiction)
Status: Judgment by Court-Petition denied 11/17/2009

Future Hearings

01/11/2010 at 08:30 am in department 5 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
STATUS HEARING (RE FAMILY ALLOWANCE ORDER)

01/28/2010 at 08:30 am in department 5 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Revocation of Will
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 A4V DIGITAL INC. - Claimant

ABRAMS MICHAEL L. ESQ. - Attorney for Petitioner

ADU NONA - AKA

AEG LIVE LLC - Petitioner

ARNOLD & PORTER LLP - Claimant

ATKINS GRAHAM - Claimant

ATKINS THOMSON SOLICITORS - Claimant

AYSCOUGH & MARAR - Claimant

BENNETT ROBERT E. ATTORNEY AT LAW - Attorney for Claimant

BONDER TODD W. ESQ. - Attorney for Petitioner

BONE WILLIAM - Claimant

BRANCA JOHN - Petitioner

BRAVADO INTL GROUP MERCHANDISING SVC INC - Petitioner

BUA JOSEPH D. SR. - Probate Referee

BUIE CHARLENE - Objector

CANNON & COMPANY CPAS LLP - Claimant

CHARNLEY RICHARD L. - Attorney for Claimant

COHEN JERYLL S. ESQ. - Attorney for Petitioner

DANIELSON NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY - Surety Company

FEINSWOG KENNETH A. ESQ. - Attorney for Petitioner

FELDMAN MILES J. - Attorney for Claimant
 GRIM LERUE - Attorney for Petitioner

HANSELL DEAN ESQ. - Attorney for Petitioner

HARRIS-SCOTT HELEN M. - Claimant

HOFFMAN PAUL GORDON ESQ. - Attorney for Petitioner

HORNBERGER NICHOLAS W. ESQ. - Attorney for Claimant

IGLESIAS ANER - Claimant

IN PRO PER - Attorney for Petitioner

JACKSON BILLIE JEAN - Petitioner

JACKSON JOSEPH WALTER - Petitioner

JACKSON KATHERINE ESTHER - Petitioner

JACKSON MICHAEL - AKA

JACKSON MICHAEL JOSEPH - Subject Person

JACKSON NONA PARIS LOLA ANKHESENAMUN - Claimant

JACKSON NONA PARIS LOLA ANKHESENAMUN - Petitioner

JACKSON PRINCE MICHAEL MALACHI JET - Claimant

JOHNSON DANIEL ALBERT - Attorney for Claimant

JORRIE KATHY A. - Attorney for Petitioner

KLEIN ARNOLD W. M.D. - Claimant

LAINER SIDNEY ESQ. - Attorney for Petitioner

LANDIS JOHN - Claimant

LAPOINTE RICHARD - Claimant

LEVITCH BURT ATTORNEY AT LAW - Former Attorney for Pltf/Petn

LEVITSKY PRODUCTIONS INC. - Claimant

LODISE MARGARET G. ESQ. - PVP Attorney

MALINGAGIO PAUL S. ESQ. - Attorney for Claimant

MAYER & M&J INC. DBA VIDEO & AUDIO CNTR - Claimant

MCCLAIN JOHN - Petitioner

MILLER-GINSBURG CATHY S. ESQ. - Attorney for Claimant

MILLET PATRICIA A. ESQ. - Attorney for Petitioner

NEWT RONNIE L. - Petitioner

OXMAN BRIAN - Attorney for Petitioner

PARRISH LYNDA L. - Claimant

RANJACK GROUP INC. - Claimant

RAY OLA - Claimant

REIMANN NANCY B. ESQ. - Attorney for Claimant

RONAY PETER E. LAW OFFICE OF - Attorney for Petitioner

SCHREIBER JOHN E. - Attorney for Petitioner

SEGAL LAWRENCE ESQ. - Attorney for Claimant

SHERIDAN LYNDA - Claimant

SMITH LAVELLE JR. - Claimant

STABLER & ASSOCIATES INC. - Claimant

STINKYFILMS INC. - Claimant

STREISAND ADAM F. LAW OFFICES OF - Attorney for Petitioner

SUPERIOR COURT - Court
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

lisap27

Re: Well, Well, Well!!!Check This Out!!!!
December 13, 2009, 02:46:07 PM
here we go again with this MICHAEL JOSEPH JACKSON!!

an who is this     JACKSON NONA PARIS LOLA ANKHESENAMUN

is this his secret wife or not from years ago!! cos he said on his interviews he'd already had two ugly divorces meaning Lisa Marie an Debbie Rowe..

i've seen this name pop up a few times!! JACKSON NONA PARIS LOLA ANKHESENAMUN :shock:

WHO IS IT!!  :?
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: Well, Well, Well!!!Check This Out!!!!
December 13, 2009, 02:49:52 PM
Quote from: "lisap27"
here we go again with this MICHAEL JOSEPH JACKSON!!

an who is this     JACKSON NONA PARIS LOLA ANKHESENAMUN

is this his secret wife or not from years ago!! cos he said on his interviews he'd already had two ugly divorces meaning Lisa Marie an Debbie Rowe..

i've seen this name pop up a few times!! JACKSON NONA PARIS LOLA ANKHESENAMUN :shock:

WHO IS IT!!  :?
:lol:  :lol: ON THE OTHER THREAD SHE MARRIED MJ WHEN SHE WAS 12 :lol:  :lol: ARE YOU STILL STANDING :lol:
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

lisap27

Re: Well, Well, Well!!!Check This Out!!!!
December 13, 2009, 02:51:52 PM
Quote from: "SPAKKLE29FUL"
Quote from: "lisap27"
here we go again with this MICHAEL JOSEPH JACKSON!!

an who is this     JACKSON NONA PARIS LOLA ANKHESENAMUN

is this his secret wife or not from years ago!! cos he said on his interviews he'd already had two ugly divorces meaning Lisa Marie an Debbie Rowe..

i've seen this name pop up a few times!! JACKSON NONA PARIS LOLA ANKHESENAMUN :shock:

WHO IS IT!!  :?
:lol:  :lol: ON THE OTHER THREAD SHE MARRIED MJ WHEN SHE WAS 12 :lol:  :lol: ARE YOU STILL STANDING :lol:

hahahahahahaha.. i actually laughed out loud then!!! thanks for that..  :lol:
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Serenitys_Dream

  • Guest
Re: Well, Well, Well!!!Check This Out!!!!
December 13, 2009, 02:55:07 PM
REVOKING A WILL
A testator may fully revoke or partially revoke their Will anytime before death. Revoking a Will is not as simple as stating that your Will no longer represents your wishes or telling your friend Mary that you no longer wish to leave her your house as per your Will. Instead, certain actions must be taken in order for your Will to be fully or partially revoked. Below is an overview of some of the ways your Will may be revoked or partially revoked.


Testator: One who has made a testament or will

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: Well, Well, Well!!!Check This Out!!!!
December 13, 2009, 02:57:27 PM
Quote from: "lisap27"
here we go again with this MICHAEL JOSEPH JACKSON!!

an who is this     JACKSON NONA PARIS LOLA ANKHESENAMUN

is this his secret wife or not from years ago!! cos he said on his interviews he'd already had two ugly divorces meaning Lisa Marie an Debbie Rowe..

i've seen this name pop up a few times!! JACKSON NONA PARIS LOLA ANKHESENAMUN :shock:

WHO IS IT!!  :?


JACKSON NONA PARIS LOLA ANKHESENAMUN
is some poser who's trying lay claim to MJ's estate. That name isn't even real. It's based on on the Egyptian wife of King Tut.

I've been checking the probate notes for months. It's a good way to keep up on what's going on in court/what has gone on etc.

We don't know which will is referenced there. We know there were 2, so most like they are revoking the original older one, since the newer/most recent one is always the one considered valid and takes precedence. This info can be found in Wills Online:

An old will "remains alive and it will be admitted to probate along with your new will. In that event, the court will try to dispose of your estate pursuant to the terms of both wills, and if there is an inconsistency between the two, the terms of the most recent will take precedence. All the remaining provisions of the old will are still given effect, provided they do not conflict with the new will!" So the revocation of the older will is logical.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.  ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

(Translation = Just because I might disagree with you does not mean I\'m attacking you.)

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
1142 Views
Last post December 17, 2009, 01:48:09 AM
by wilds
6 Replies
1502 Views
Last post February 06, 2010, 12:42:25 PM
by Michaelangela
32 Replies
3897 Views
Last post March 12, 2010, 04:38:13 PM
by loma
27 Replies
3737 Views
Last post March 20, 2010, 11:36:57 PM
by CC
32 Replies
4911 Views
Last post December 14, 2010, 01:10:07 AM
by ibelieveinmj

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal