The Princess and the Pea-Brained Lawsuit

Fox News ^ | 12/05/02 | Mike Straka

[hoosierskypilot]

She is 18-year-old Liesel Pritzker, heir to the Hyatt hotel chain. She is young, beautiful, and ostensibly, wealthy. She co-stars in movies with Harrison Ford (Air Force One) and played -- prophetically, as it turns out -- the title role in the 1995 Warner Brothers film, A Little Princess, in which her character takes on the British government in a fight over -- what else? -- her father's money.

According to a civil lawsuit filed by the young heiress, life indeed imitates art. In the suit, Pritzker claims that her father, 76-year-old business exec Robert Pritzker, sold off assets belonging to his daughter's trust fund at below-market prices and used the proceeds to benefit other family members. She claims that her father and other relatives are ripping her off to the tune of over a billion dollars, and is seeking all of the alleged losses, as well as an additional $5 billion in punitive damages.

[hoosierskypilot]

I remember her! She was a good actress, too! The rest of the article points out she's worth billions more, anyway. After you're worth billions, how do you know if you've just made billions more? How many 50 room mansions can one live in, anyway? I guess it's true: the rich are different.

[NEWwoman]

As the old saying goes: You can never be too thin or too rich.

[wideawake]

Her father was 58 when she was born. I doubt he's ever been too involved in her life or had much time for her.

I presume this lawsuit is not about accumulating more money that she'll never be able to spend. It's probably a giant F*** YOU to her dad.

[thinktwice]

If that trust was written right, heirs disputing trust management automatically disinherit themselves.

[Mr. Lucky]

Wouldn't it be fair to assume that her father was the settlor, as well as the trustee, of the trust?

It was his money to begin with; if he really wanted to give the money to someone else, he could have done so from the beginning.

If the daughter doesn't like the circumstances, she could always disclaim her interest and make her own living.

[APBaer]

"Wouldn't it be fair to assume that her father was the settlor, as well as the trustee, of the trust?"

His father, her grandfather, was the founder of the fortune and would be most likely be the settlor.

[APBaer]

"If that trust was written right, heirs disputing trust management automatically disinherit themselves."

Courts usually disregard such "in terrorem" clauses as against public policy.

[Mr. Lucky]

Jimminy Cricket! If her father was 58 when she was born, how old would her Grandfather had to have been (assuming he didn't fund a trust for someone not yet in being)?

[APBaer]

She was born 1983.
Abe died in 1986

See:
Marmon Group (29)
Pritzker family
Mining equipment, railroad cars/Chicago
Founded: 1953
Revenues: $6.5 billion
Employees: 40,000
www.marmon.com
Lawyer A.N. Pritzker (1896- 1986) used his legal knowledge to assemble real estate and manufacturing empire that his sons Jay and Robert multiplied many times over through shrewd acquisitions and astute management (Hyatt Hotels, Marmon Group, American Medical International, etc.). Altogether about 550 facilities in 50 countries. Dealmaker Jay died in 1999; engineer Bob runs Marmon Group

http://www.familybusinessmagazine.com/top150.html

[F-117A]

That's Liesel on the right at age thirteen.

[F-117A]

[thinktwice]

Courts usually disregard such "in terrorem" clauses as against public policy.

In family matters, would a court consider a $1 bequest to a son or daughter an "in terrorem" clause?

[APBaer]

An "in terrorem" clause takes away a benefit if a beneficiary sues for e.g. fraud, maladministraton etc.

There is nothing wrong with making a bequest of $1, but it would be an "in terrorem" clause to write "I leave $5 million to X, but if she challenges, then I leave only $1."

[APBaer]

You can't cut off a spouse with nothing or leave her little.
In all states that I know of, in such a case a spouse can "elect against the will" and take the portion set forth in state law, usually a third.

But in most states a parent *can* cut of a child with nothing. In such a case the parent usually leaves one dollar so as to blunt any attack that the testator had "forgotten" to mention a child in his will.