Johnson&Johnson, a fortune, a love child, the NJ Supremes and the definition of the word "spouse"

[Lobster Martini]

(LM: This story is so incredibly bizarre, I'm not even going to try to summarize it. Suffice it to say it involves Johnson & Johnson, a fortune, J. Seward Johnson's beneficiaries, New Jersey's Supreme Court and the definition of the word "spouse." The first few paragraphs only hint at the full weirdness of this story. The link is below.)


From the Star-Ledger:

A trust that's full of ill will for Johnson family

Long-running legal fight over word 'spouse' may influence probate law

The late John Seward Johnson Sr. -- son of a founder of the Johnson & Johnson pharmaceutical empire -- created a trust fund in 1961 to dole out money to charities for 35 years, then be divided among his beneficiaries.

From this trust has flowed, in addition to the charitable contributions, one of the legendary legal disputes in New Jersey history. Even before its charitable work was complete, the trust -- now worth about $360 million -- became the subject of a blizzard of motions, dozens of hearings and days of trial.

Blood tests have been requested to prove lineage. An illegitimate "love child" has been found eligible for a share of the money. Attorneys have come and gone -- a slew of lawyers from at least eight firms have taken in $2.1 million in fees generated by the wrangling. At least two judges have retired as the case wound its way through the court system.

Now comes the latest chapter.

"This case has been going for about 12 years now and, incredibly, it involves only one word: 'spouse,'" said Richard Collier, a lawyer in the case. "Twelve years over one word -- does that word include divorced ex-spouses and does it include widows and widowers? Talk about your Dickensian case ..."

Johnson's original trust said some of his children, as well as their "spouses," were to benefit. But that word was not defined, and just what Johnson meant is now at issue.
Tomorrow, the Supreme Court of New Jersey weighs in. The case is being closely watched, not just for its prurient elements. Some in the legal field say the outcome could have widespread ramifications for probate law because many wills mention a spouse.

<snip>

(Link to full story: http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/index.ssf?/base/news-12/119060891443210.xml&coll=1)

[no_hypocrisy]

1. Just when you thought that the Seward Johnson Estate couldn't get any wilder

because of his third wife, Basia, this comes along.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/w/wills_and_estates/index.html?offset=60&s=oldest&query=SUITS%20AND%20LITIGATION&field=des&match=exact