Quote:
Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers
This case is unique because if the parents sold the farm and downsized, and gave the profits to their sons, the daughters would likely be able to successfully sue for their share. Since they had a hand (literally) in building the fortune. This is basically what they did.
It’s not “fairness” due to blood. It’s an equal share in a fortune they helped create, with a spoken understanding that they would be compensated.
|
Really,
What grounds would they have sued on if there parents just transferred the title to the brothers before they died.
Unless there was some sort of verbal contract I don’t think there is some enforceable fairness clause that if you put in a lot of work for something you don’t own that you get a fair chunk if a person decides to sell the asset.
I may have missed something in the articles but where was the spoken understanding that they would be compensated equally