Parsad Posted May 11, 2011 Posted May 11, 2011 Article about how Wellington R. Burt decided to leave his children and grandchildren very little, but gave the rest to the generations after. Cheers! http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/article/112715/shutting-kids-out-family-fortune-wsj?mod=family-kids_parents
Myth465 Posted May 11, 2011 Posted May 11, 2011 Article about how Wellington R. Burt decided to leave his children and grandchildren very little, but gave the rest to the generations after. Cheers! http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/article/112715/shutting-kids-out-family-fortune-wsj?mod=family-kids_parents Thats interesting, and rough. Smart idea, but ........ No real way to game that one. "I'm pretty sure he didn't like his family back then," said Christina Cameron, an heir and a great-great-great grandchild of Burt's.
given2invest Posted May 11, 2011 Posted May 11, 2011 We can be sure his family didn't like him after reading the will!
Myth465 Posted May 11, 2011 Posted May 11, 2011 We can be sure his family didn't like him after reading the will! LOL, very true.
biaggio Posted May 11, 2011 Posted May 11, 2011 That's pretty sad. Obviously he loved his business or money (or both) too much, to the point that his own family didn t like him. I would be willing to bet that nobody like him. A lesson for all of us.
Parsad Posted May 11, 2011 Author Posted May 11, 2011 Could also be his kids were brats. We'll never know. Cheers!
given2invest Posted May 12, 2011 Posted May 12, 2011 That's pretty sad. Obviously he loved his business or money (or both) too much, to the point that his own family didn t like him. I would be willing to bet that nobody like him. A lesson for all of us. This paper did a 4 part series on him. Seems inconclusive (if I'm being nice). http://www.mlive.com/news/saginaw/index.ssf/2011/05/wellingtons_millions_92_years.html
gregtx81 Posted May 12, 2011 Posted May 12, 2011 A classic and commonly tested Property Law concept for first year law students is the Rule Against Perpetuities--"No interest is good unless it must vest, if at all, not later than twenty-one years after the death of some life in being at the creation of the interest.” The basis for the rule is that dead hand control of assets is uneconomic and not in society's best interest. In any event, looks like ol' Wellington maxed-out all that the law would allow him to!
Guest misterstockwell Posted May 12, 2011 Posted May 12, 2011 What kind of crappy trust managers turned his "$40-90 million" estate in 1919 into "$100-110 million" in 2011? Citizens Bank should be ashamed(and sued!)
given2invest Posted May 12, 2011 Posted May 12, 2011 What kind of crappy trust managers turned his "$40-90 million" estate in 1919 into "$100-110 million" in 2011? Citizens Bank should be ashamed(and sued!) Yah that just blows my mind.
rmitz Posted May 12, 2011 Posted May 12, 2011 Could also be his kids were brats. We'll never know. Cheers! Though this would also probably point out a parenting deficiency...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now