Our TV Shows

Got a Tip?

Call TMZ at (888) 847-9869 or Click Here

Jackson's Mom Keeps Option Open to Contest Will

7/17/2009 9:03 PM PDT BY TMZ STAFF

Lawyers for Michael Jackson's mother Katherine filed legal papers setting the stage for a fight over the singer's estate.

Katherine's lawyers are not willing to accept that the will presented by Michael's lawyer, John Branca, is valid. In the papers, Katherine's lawyer writes about the "purported will" Branca filed.

Katherine's lawyers note that the 2002 will has a "no contest" clause, meaning anyone who mounts a legal fight over the will gets nothing.

Katherine's lawyers want a judge to decide if that clause would apply if she fights the appointment of the executors under the will.

Katherine's lawyers are hedging their bets, saying they are "continuing to collect and review relevant information."


No Avatar

cosmo in texas    

I keep reading where posters feel that Janet should raise the kids. I haven't read anywhere where she has said "I will take and raise the children". Never even seen a picture of her and the kids before his passing or read about her visiting them. If there is a quote from her or a picture online let me know where to see it.

1886 days ago



1886 days ago


I hope the judge is smart enough not to give control to the family for the kids sake.

By the way, to all you people who think Janet is so great why isn't she helping her mom with the 233,000 debt. She is loaded. Why is it always up to Michael?
Janet can throw her mom a few bucks and that is pocket change to her.

She is 80 yrs old. How much does she really need a month to live nicely?

1886 days ago


I have read that Katherine Jackson's lawyer, Londell McMillan, has been feeding her the idea that she should have control of the estate and that the other Jackson siblings are not happy with her lawyer. Does anyone know if this is true?

I do agree that maybe the lawyer for Katherine is feeding her the idea to try to take over, so that what he/she can be appointed as the replacement executor of the estate when Katherine doesn't want to (or cannot) be executor anymore? That is SO coincidental being that it DOES state within his 2002 will that the executor can name a replacement IF the executor cannot serve at that time.

Maybe THAT is the plan, fight to get Katherine as executor, so she can appoint a replacement (possibly a her lawyer?)

1886 days ago

Cali MJ Fan    

40% of over a billion dollars isn't enough? Dayumn! How effin greedy!!!!!!!

Ok, before I was feeling somewhat sorry for Miss Katherine. NOT ANY MORE.

Give the kids to Janet! Leave the estate with Branca and McClain... and get the rest of the family out of the picture!


1886 days ago

Cali MJ Fan    

Beasley-- you said much more calmly what I was thinking. LOL Just absolutely disgusting that they (most of the Jacksons) can be so superficial.

I totally have trust and confidence in the Johns (Branca and McClain). McClain is the one who put both Michael and Janet into a different stratosphere with the groundbreaking record contracts they got early on as solo artists. Branca made some brilliant moves with Michael's estate and holdings, including the Beatles catalog-- even making sure that he retained ownership in it rather than selling it (if I'm not mistaken).

The Jacksons, regardless of the father's ability to screw, err, I mean make deals to get his sons ahead in the industry in that day and age-- they have no idea whatsoever in how to deal with the complexity of Michael's estate... nor does that Londell "character." It is absolutely disgusting and disgraceful to think of what his family is doing.. and I am sure they love Michael.... but those dollar signs have taken over their eyes and heads.

1886 days ago


She is 80 yrs old. How much does she really need a month to live nicely?

Posted at 10:02PM on Jul 17th 2009 by 956fgt
She needs the money to support the other 6 grandchildren that is living with her and she is also is raising...
WHY do all these grandchilden live with her?
Can the parents not raise them???

1886 days ago


Geez....she gets 40 percent and the children have to split 40 percent (which means only 13.3 precent) so what else does greedy Jehovah's Witness grammy want? She and violent Joe just celebrated their 60th Wedding Anniversary in Las Vegas three or four months ago so you tell me these people aren't married and in cohoots regarding the assets of the the "golden - caucasian - children". They have lived in fear since his death of Ms. Rowe getting her children as they know the secrets held by the children will be revealed. What part did the family play in disturbing the crime scene when they hustled that U-Haul truck onto the property within 24 to 48 hours after his death to gather his material possessions (along with looking for jewels and cash)? Quite interesting....

1886 days ago

a total fan    

Maybe the children should go with the mother. We have to remember that she did have these children 12 years ago and people do grown and mature. There are pictures of her with the children and she does seem loving and devoted. But she did volunteer to have two children with Jackson in the condition that Jackson would raise them. But like she said she never left her children they were with their father. Maybe now she sees that the family is not capable of raising her children and is now stepping up to be their for them. The children don't even know that she is their mother. They may accept her with open arms knowing that they do have a parent- a mother ,.. They may just welcome a mother and a mother's love something they have never experienced. But he did leave a will and it has to be honored. The children will eventually learn about all this, with the internet it would be impossible for them not to and then maybe they will decide when they are old enough where and with whom they want to live.

1886 days ago


Joe needs the money so he can play king of the world in vegas.

1886 days ago


I am sure that the family got together and figured that since Kathryn is up in age perhaps her portion of the money won't add up to be significant enough to support the others?? I am certain that her lawyer and of course Joe would love for her to get control of this estate!! JACKOPOT!!!
I wonder if Kathryn's portion will end at the time of her death, or can she leave it to her remaining children???

1886 days ago


...and on it goes. Wow, couldn't someone decent and caring get custody of the kids? I agree with other posters. I hope Katherine doesn't get control of the estate - and neither should Janet. They're all part of the family that puts the FUN in DYS-FUN-CTIONAL (i.e. the J Family). I don't think any lawyer(s) are putting Katherine J up to anything. Let's not forget people: she's the one who did nothing when Joe was throwing MJ around the sitting room, whipping and beating him as a child, calling him fat and telling him his nose was big. Without getting too "shrinkie" here, people do tend to underestimate how ethically off-base enablers can be - and Katherine IS AN ENABLER. Not stopping evil allows evil to happen. Whatever Katherine's reasons were, that is what she did. How does anyone (including a judge) know what choice she'd make today?

Personally - I know this is irrelevant - but I'm not convinced at all that she'd stand up for those kids and their $$$ against Joe or anyone, including her own greed.

Apparently the reason MJ separated the kids' custody from total control of the estate is that he knew the money lusters (including his family) would slither outta the woodwork (as they clearly are). I agree with others - it would likely cause the kids serious damage if somehow that separation (of money and custody) was changed. It means that just as they used MJ as an ATM, now they'd use his estate and his kids.

It's all so awful. I continue to pray for MJ's kids. They're in a really bad situation/environment. They deserve a shot at "normal" lives brought up in a loving caring environment. This latest development continues to prove one thing only.... Sadly, it looks like they don't stand a chance.

1886 days ago


@Posted at 10:20PM on Jul 17th 2009 by glad for thruth

Exactly, why does she have to support them and why the hell isn't Janet kicking in to the family leeches.

Even so, with 6 kids and your house paid for already she can live off 15-20,00 a month nicely for the next few years until she kicks it.
I say the estate pays for her house but puts it in a life estate so it goes back to the three kids when she dies. If she dies before Joe then he won't have a pot to piss in. Good.

1886 days ago


In response to the 'no contest' clause. If katherine gets custody of the kids, then she can contest and also contest on all 3 kids behalf, and no judge is going to take all the money and say that the kids and katherine forfeit all the money now.
if only katherine contested and did not have custody of the kids, all the money would go to the kids. i think this is cleaver. and really how it should be. Katherine brought michael into this world and she and the kids, not greedy lawyers should get the control of the estate.

1886 days ago


Katherine does not have to support Michaels children from her portion. The children have there own portion for their support.

1886 days ago
Previous 15 Comments | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Around The Web