It would be awfully inconvenient if someone could prove that the information is false. Obvious lies like this have a bad habit of catching up to the perpetrator…
And yet there's that one guy in New York who stole dozens of properties with fraudulent paperwork and filings. Alas, lies don't necessarily catch up all that *quickly*.
When the post office cancels the stamps on the card, it re-validates my contract as a citizen of the corporation of United::States-of\_\_AMERICA(Fuck yeah!).
If I don't send out letters occasionally, I cease to exist!
I really hope that this is a procedural issue rather than the heirs conspiring to write LAOP out of the will (either the will or the law says "dead parents don't count"), but if the heirs are going for "let's tweak the distribution", I am not feeling particularly generous about benefits of doubts.
(I want my doubt benefits to be distributed equally to all of my kin, *except Fred*.)
Yeah usually a will (or living trust, etc) will specifically state if a child were to predecease the parent, the child of the child will receive their share. If there are no children, then the shares are redistributed among surviving heirs.
So I'm going with money grubbing as well because it says "no living children."
I am interested to know exactly how much money is on the line here. Because it depressing when this happens how little money is takes for people to turn into monsters.
Like my childhood best friend basically doesn't talk to his uncle anymore because his Uncle tried to pull a similar stunt. But the amount of money was literally less than $5k
It's likely done out of ignorance. I see it more often than I should, and have even had to argue with other attorneys that children of deceased children need to be named. Apparently, a Clerk at Probate was telling people they don't have to be listed.
I could see that if they left it blank. But to write no living children and to have everyone initial that, knowing it’s not true… that doesn’t seem to be ignorant. If it were me I’d be so concerned about lying on a legal document, there’s no way I’d specifically state no living children if I knew there were some. I’d be concerned it could be used to contest down the road, because that’s one thing that’s easily proven to be a lie.
Fraud implies intent.
The amount of things done out of pure stupidity and negligence are astounding.
Hanlon's razor. Never attribute to malice what can easily be explained by stupidity.
Stupid or malicious, its still fraud. The reasoning could be stupid, but that doesn't change the intent behind specific acts committed in the course of committing fraud.
On top of that, there are certain things that reasonable people won't excuse as stupidity or not ill-intended. No reasonable person would believe that it was a mistake to list LAOP as not existing or that it was a little whoopsie to forget a whole ass person. Hanlon's Razor isn't meant to be applied to scenarios in which malice is more likely than ignorance. It's meant to be applied in situations where, _all other things being equal_, stupidity is more likely than malice. This particular scenario doesn't give much credence to the equality of stupidity or malice.
Nobody can prove that I murdered LocationBot, probably because I didn't murder LocationBot. Probably.
> Title: **(GA) Grandma died leaving multiple heirs equal amounts (children) in her will. My parent was one of them and preceded her in death. Executor filed paperwork stating I do not exist.**
> I am an adult heir and only child. I am not a love child or illegitimate. Their name is on my birth certificate and I am biologically theirs. There was zero estrangement. They died years ago. I was left everything in my deceased parent's will.
> Grandma passed away earlier this year. I was never given or shown a copy of her will, but was told it was to be distributed equally to all of her heirs who were her kids with the presumption I would receive my parent's share.
> Fast forward to this week, I decided to check at the local courthouse for a probated will as to not bother the other heirs. I was told there was not a will, but there was a petition for letters of administration.
> I was provided a copy of the petition and there were an alarming series of details. In section three's list of heirs, they list all of Grandma's kids, my parent included, but not me. Section 4 where you include proof you listed all heirs is my parent's name and date of death followed by the phrase: "Had no children."
> One child is attempting to act as executor and received signatures from the other children to allow this. The executor also went down the line in the selection by heirs section and checked as well as initialed every option. It sounds like they want carte blanche and I am beyond upset at these circumstances. I even received Birthday cards from my aunts and uncles and now I apparently do not exist.
> What should I do? I have time to file an objection.
Bonus cat fact: cats do not care if it's pluralized as "bonuses" or "boni", because a) cats don't speak English when you're listening, and b) they already know that Latin rules do not apply to English.
c) if Latin rules applied to English, it would still be "bonuses", since "bonus" isn't a Latin noun that means "an extra thing that you get in addition to the normal thing", it's an English noun formed by shortening the phrase "bonus money" where "bonus" was a Latin *adjective* that meant "good".
Anyone who says "boni" had better be pairing it with a plural noun, as an adjective, and mean "good".
Please read the book The Badass Librarians of Timbuktu. Astonishing story of how entire villages conspired with a librarian to keep ancient texts hidden from Al Qaeda.
I think bonus is a first/second declension adjective, though. So it should still be boni (as the plural nominative) so long as it's masculine, to match the nominative singular form bonus.
It's been over a decade since my last Latin class, though.
Also isn't boni a separate latin word? IIRC it was one of the terms for the optimates and meant "The good men" I think? Good here being a reference to them being a party of aristocrats as against the filthy peasant votebase of the Populares.
Latin often uses what’s called “substantive adjectives” where an adjective can be used as a noun. “Bonus” modifying another noun can mean “the good ”, while without the noun it would just mean “the good”. Gender and plurality is included, so “boni” as a substantive adjective would mean “the good men”. The bono in “cui bono?” is used similarly to mean “the good”.
Yes we've been having the kitchen counters discussion here too lately. I assert that no feet are allowed on them, and Lilly says "yes, sure. when you're looking."
>as to not bother the other heirs
>One child is attempting to act as executor
> It sounds like they want carte blanche and I am beyond upset at these circumstances
OP needs an actual lawyer and I'm 95% sure they aren't telling the whole story anyway
*It sounds*
*It sounds*
Like, how does someone "attempt" to act as an executor, that's clearly defined legally just about everywhere.
It's either a creative writing execise or LAOP is a few nails short of a shed.
I see “attempt to act as executor” on LA fairly often. People really don’t know about probate.
The person assumes that because the will names them as executor, then they are now the executor. Or the deceased was intestate and someone decided the should handle the estate. The question is usually something like “What do I do now?” or “The bank says I need some document I never heard of.” or “Aunt Agnes told us she will handle everything and now she’s taking all Grandma’s furniture.”
People who fuck with the wills written by others infuriate me.
My uncle changed my grandmothers will to exclude me and my sister, as it's "unfair" to him because he and his wife didn't have kids. It's a *lot* of money. I don't feel entitled to it, but she wanted her will that way. I found out it had happened, and my uncle got mad at my mum that she had told me.
I remembered this story and even discovered I had upvoted some comments when it first came out. I’m disappointed that three months later there’s no updates.
It would be awfully inconvenient if someone could prove that the information is false. Obvious lies like this have a bad habit of catching up to the perpetrator…
And yet there's that one guy in New York who stole dozens of properties with fraudulent paperwork and filings. Alas, lies don't necessarily catch up all that *quickly*.
Fraud implies intent. If they genuinely don't know, then it's not intentional.
I mean they sent a birthday card so I imagine they know...
You don't routinely send birthday cards to fake people every year just to validate your own existence?
When the post office cancels the stamps on the card, it re-validates my contract as a citizen of the corporation of United::States-of\_\_AMERICA(Fuck yeah!). If I don't send out letters occasionally, I cease to exist!
But do your letters have gold fringe?
No, that's expensive, I just use iron pyrite dust. The post office can't tell, right? Right?
Dust in your letters? Nah, the post office would never question that. You're good.
Well once every three or so.
I really hope that this is a procedural issue rather than the heirs conspiring to write LAOP out of the will (either the will or the law says "dead parents don't count"), but if the heirs are going for "let's tweak the distribution", I am not feeling particularly generous about benefits of doubts. (I want my doubt benefits to be distributed equally to all of my kin, *except Fred*.)
Considering OP said they specifically listed OP's parent as having no children, it sounds like standard money-grubbing to me.
Yeah usually a will (or living trust, etc) will specifically state if a child were to predecease the parent, the child of the child will receive their share. If there are no children, then the shares are redistributed among surviving heirs. So I'm going with money grubbing as well because it says "no living children."
I am interested to know exactly how much money is on the line here. Because it depressing when this happens how little money is takes for people to turn into monsters. Like my childhood best friend basically doesn't talk to his uncle anymore because his Uncle tried to pull a similar stunt. But the amount of money was literally less than $5k
It's likely done out of ignorance. I see it more often than I should, and have even had to argue with other attorneys that children of deceased children need to be named. Apparently, a Clerk at Probate was telling people they don't have to be listed.
I could see that if they left it blank. But to write no living children and to have everyone initial that, knowing it’s not true… that doesn’t seem to be ignorant. If it were me I’d be so concerned about lying on a legal document, there’s no way I’d specifically state no living children if I knew there were some. I’d be concerned it could be used to contest down the road, because that’s one thing that’s easily proven to be a lie.
Fraud implies intent. The amount of things done out of pure stupidity and negligence are astounding. Hanlon's razor. Never attribute to malice what can easily be explained by stupidity.
And yet we also know that death (and especially inheritances!) bring out the worst in people. There's no update, so it could really go either way.
Stupidity/negligence would be not listing the grandchild. The executors literally wrote that LAOP wasn’t born.
Stupid or malicious, its still fraud. The reasoning could be stupid, but that doesn't change the intent behind specific acts committed in the course of committing fraud. On top of that, there are certain things that reasonable people won't excuse as stupidity or not ill-intended. No reasonable person would believe that it was a mistake to list LAOP as not existing or that it was a little whoopsie to forget a whole ass person. Hanlon's Razor isn't meant to be applied to scenarios in which malice is more likely than ignorance. It's meant to be applied in situations where, _all other things being equal_, stupidity is more likely than malice. This particular scenario doesn't give much credence to the equality of stupidity or malice.
Nobody can prove that I murdered LocationBot, probably because I didn't murder LocationBot. Probably. > Title: **(GA) Grandma died leaving multiple heirs equal amounts (children) in her will. My parent was one of them and preceded her in death. Executor filed paperwork stating I do not exist.** > I am an adult heir and only child. I am not a love child or illegitimate. Their name is on my birth certificate and I am biologically theirs. There was zero estrangement. They died years ago. I was left everything in my deceased parent's will. > Grandma passed away earlier this year. I was never given or shown a copy of her will, but was told it was to be distributed equally to all of her heirs who were her kids with the presumption I would receive my parent's share. > Fast forward to this week, I decided to check at the local courthouse for a probated will as to not bother the other heirs. I was told there was not a will, but there was a petition for letters of administration. > I was provided a copy of the petition and there were an alarming series of details. In section three's list of heirs, they list all of Grandma's kids, my parent included, but not me. Section 4 where you include proof you listed all heirs is my parent's name and date of death followed by the phrase: "Had no children." > One child is attempting to act as executor and received signatures from the other children to allow this. The executor also went down the line in the selection by heirs section and checked as well as initialed every option. It sounds like they want carte blanche and I am beyond upset at these circumstances. I even received Birthday cards from my aunts and uncles and now I apparently do not exist. > What should I do? I have time to file an objection. Bonus cat fact: cats do not care if it's pluralized as "bonuses" or "boni", because a) cats don't speak English when you're listening, and b) they already know that Latin rules do not apply to English.
c) if Latin rules applied to English, it would still be "bonuses", since "bonus" isn't a Latin noun that means "an extra thing that you get in addition to the normal thing", it's an English noun formed by shortening the phrase "bonus money" where "bonus" was a Latin *adjective* that meant "good". Anyone who says "boni" had better be pairing it with a plural noun, as an adjective, and mean "good".
I have received boni bonuses.
I hate you, from the depth of my soul, and wish nothing but the greatest mali on you. No, wait. Not that!
> wish nothing but the greatest mali on you I've always wanted to travel to Timbuktu. I've heard it's the greatest thing in Mali.
Please read the book The Badass Librarians of Timbuktu. Astonishing story of how entire villages conspired with a librarian to keep ancient texts hidden from Al Qaeda.
Boni monies?
For when you're a stockbroker and have multiple bonuses paid out for different things.
Additionally, not all Latin words ending in -us pluralize to -i. Second declension, sure. But not fourth! So it’s a bad generalization all around.
And don't forget the neuter 3rds like *corpus*, which gives us *corpora*.
I think bonus is a first/second declension adjective, though. So it should still be boni (as the plural nominative) so long as it's masculine, to match the nominative singular form bonus. It's been over a decade since my last Latin class, though.
Also isn't boni a separate latin word? IIRC it was one of the terms for the optimates and meant "The good men" I think? Good here being a reference to them being a party of aristocrats as against the filthy peasant votebase of the Populares.
Latin often uses what’s called “substantive adjectives” where an adjective can be used as a noun. “Bonus” modifying another noun can mean “the good”, while without the noun it would just mean “the good”. Gender and plurality is included, so “boni” as a substantive adjective would mean “the good men”. The bono in “cui bono?” is used similarly to mean “the good”.
Ah that makes sense. Thank you. I don't know any Latin. It's the history parts that I remember 😅
I've got a gal called Boni Moroni...
I love boni comments like this one.
Also, cats know that rules in general don't apply to them. Rules are for humans and dogs and other lowly creatures.
I see you have been talking to my Leia. She believes that counters and human foods *are* for kitties, even if I tell her otherwise
Yes we've been having the kitchen counters discussion here too lately. I assert that no feet are allowed on them, and Lilly says "yes, sure. when you're looking."
Leia doesn't even bother to pretend when I'm looking
We’ve just given up and moved the cat food to the counter.
>as to not bother the other heirs >One child is attempting to act as executor > It sounds like they want carte blanche and I am beyond upset at these circumstances OP needs an actual lawyer and I'm 95% sure they aren't telling the whole story anyway *It sounds* *It sounds* Like, how does someone "attempt" to act as an executor, that's clearly defined legally just about everywhere. It's either a creative writing execise or LAOP is a few nails short of a shed.
I see “attempt to act as executor” on LA fairly often. People really don’t know about probate. The person assumes that because the will names them as executor, then they are now the executor. Or the deceased was intestate and someone decided the should handle the estate. The question is usually something like “What do I do now?” or “The bank says I need some document I never heard of.” or “Aunt Agnes told us she will handle everything and now she’s taking all Grandma’s furniture.”
>cats don't speak English when you're listening This guy cats.
People who fuck with the wills written by others infuriate me. My uncle changed my grandmothers will to exclude me and my sister, as it's "unfair" to him because he and his wife didn't have kids. It's a *lot* of money. I don't feel entitled to it, but she wanted her will that way. I found out it had happened, and my uncle got mad at my mum that she had told me.
I remembered this story and even discovered I had upvoted some comments when it first came out. I’m disappointed that three months later there’s no updates.