Estate Controversy
In his will, made in Los Angeles County on February 12, 1969, Morrison left his entire estate to Courson, also naming her co-executor with his attorney, Max Fink.
When Courson died, a battle ensued between Morrison's and Courson's parents over who had legal claim to Morrison's estate. On his death, his property became Courson's; on her death, her property passed to her next heirs at law, her parents. Morrison's parents contested the will under which Courson and subsequently her parents had inherited their son’s property.
To bolster their positions, Courson’s parents presented an unsigned document that they claimed Pam Courson had acquired in Colorado, apparently an application for a declaration that she and Morrison had contracted a common-law marriage under the laws of that state. The ability to contract a common-law marriage was abolished in California in 1896, but the state's conflict of laws rules provided for recognition of common-law marriages lawfully contracted in foreign jurisdictions. Colorado was one of the 11 U.S. jurisdictions that still recognized common-law marriage. As long as a common-law marriage was lawfully contracted under Colorado law, it was recognized as a marriage under California law. However, neither Morrison nor Courson had signed the document, nor was there any proof that either of the deceased had even been aware of the document's existence. Neither Morrison nor Courson was ever a resident of Colorado.
Whatever the circumstances of the unsigned document, the court case, and the controversy surrounding it, the California probate court decided that Courson and Morrison had a common-law marriage under the laws of Colorado. The effect of the court ruling was to close probate of Morrison's and Courson's estates and to reinforce the Courson family's hold on the inheritance.
Read more about this topic: Pamela Courson
Famous quotes containing the words estate and/or controversy:
“The difference between de jure and de facto segregation is the difference open, forthright bigotry and the shamefaced kind that works through unwritten agreements between real estate dealers, school officials, and local politicians.”
—Shirley Chisholm (b. 1924)
“And therefore, as when there is a controversy in an account, the parties must by their own accord, set up for right Reason, the Reason of some Arbitrator, or Judge, to whose sentence, they will both stand, or their controversy must either come to blows, or be undecided, for want of a right Reason constituted by Nature; so is it also in all debates of what kind soever.”
—Thomas Hobbes (1579–1688)