Paris Jackson's bitter battle over Michael Jackson's estate

News.com.au

2 days ago

Michael Jackson's estate revealed they dealt with 'issues' related to one of the King of Pop's ex-wives and his former home as part of a plea for legal fees.
Earlier this month, the pop star's daughter Paris raised 'serious' concerns over payments made from her father's estate.
The payouts in question were to law firms for 'unrecorded attorney time' in 2018, which was unclear what the lawyers were being paid for.
In court documents from February 2025 obtained by Us Magazine, the estate's executers, John Branca and John McClain, detailed what one of the law firms worked on during that period.
According to the lawyers, some work was done 'addressing issues relating to Michael Jackson's former spouse'.
However, the filing did not identify which of the singer's former wives was involved.
Jackson was married to Lisa Marie Presley from 1994 to 1996 and Debbie Rowe, who is the mother of Paris and her brother Prince, from 1996 to 2000.
Other matters included legal issues related to the musician's former home, Neverland Ranch, and meetings with a potential buyer.
The property was put on the market in 2015 for $US100 million ($A128 million).
After five years and numerous price cuts, the sprawling property finally found a buyer.
Billionaire and friend of the late pop star Ron Burkle purchased the 2700-acre (1092Ha) estate for $US22 million ($A28 million).
It was considered a 'bargain' far below its initial asking price of $US100 million ($A128 million).
Paris, who is one of the beneficiaries of her father's estate along with her brothers Prince and Bigi, objected to 'premium payouts' made for unrecorded attorney time.
In her court filing, the 27-year-old's argued, 'During this [six-month period] alone in 2018, Executors request that the Court approve $625,000 ($A957,000) in payments to three law firms for what they say is uncaptured time, without explanation as to why counsel was incapable of recording unbilled time, or why such a failure should not preclude payment.'
Her lawyer added, 'Even worse, these payments appear, at least in part, to consist of lavish gratuities bestowed upon already well-compensated counsel.'
Jackson's legal team argued the payouts reflect poorly on the executers of the estate, writing: 'These irregular payments raise serious and substantial questions about Executors' ability to effectively supervise counsel … and refraining from wasteful, six-figure gift-giving to themselves and their colleagues.'
The filing added: 'Despite repeated inquiries from the Court, Executors are unable to provide even remotely satisfactory explanation for their delay, nor have they provided the beneficiaries any sort of plan to fix this ongoing and worsening issue.'
A hearing has been set for later this month.