When Michael Jackson died over 16 years ago, he died with a valid estate plan that appointed two co-executors (also referred to as a personal representative) to manage his assets and business interests: entertainment lawyer John Branca and music executive John McClain. Eventually, estate funds are to be deposited into a trust with Branca and McClain as co-trustees for the benefit of, among others, Jackson’s three children, who were minors when he died.
Recently, in her November 19, 2025, filing, Paris lodged formal objections to the personal representatives’ accountings for the year 2021. She argues here has been a lack of transparency with accounting delays that are contrary to the personal representatives’ duties, the personal representatives’ fees are allowing them to personally benefit from the slow administration and may rise to the level of self-dealing, and the estate is taking on greater risks to garner income yet failing to invest large amounts of cash, in violation of the prudent investor rule.
Normally, an estate administration lasting 16 years would be all but absurd. Despite the King of Pop’s estate having a life of its own, there are useful takeaways we can share with clients.
1. No Matter Your Age—Have an Estate Plan
It should not be lost on readers that Jackson’s having an estate plan at his death was (1) not a guarantee and (2) likely drastically helped the administration of his estate. Jackson died young and unexpectedly at the age of 50.
In contrast, artist such as Prince, who passed away without a will, and Aretha Franklin, who died with only a handwritten will devising her $80 million estate, had their estates caught up in years of litigation because of the lack of a sophisticated estate plan.
For the general public, just over half of adults over the age of 50 have a valid estate plan, with only 38% of adults 50–64 having an estate plan. S. Kathi Brown, Disparities in Wealth Transfer: Experiences and Expectations of Adults Ages 50-Plus, AARP (June 6, 2024), https://tinyurl.com/5cewc2uk. There is also a racial gap present with estate plans, with Black households “far less likely to have a valid will than their White counterparts.” Jean-Pierre Aubry et al., How Much Could Will-Writing Reduce the Racial Wealth Gap?, Ctr. for Ret. Rsch. (Nov. 5, 2024), https://tinyurl.com/2u376xnd. All in all, it would not have been surprising if Jackson died intestate like Prince, but Jackson’s careful planning may have helped avoid even more litigation.
Estate plans are important for anyone from Joe Shmoe to ultra-high-net-worth individuals. For people with children, naming guardians prevents family disputes and can help the children’s transition. Estate plans also can minimize conflict and can put people in control who may not be family but may be best positioned to manage assets. Estate planning also can help minimize estate tax obligations.
2. The Duty of Loyalty and Self-Dealing
Turning to the administration of trusts and estates, the duty of loyalty is the most fundamental duty a fiduciary owes to the beneficiaries of a trust or estate. Under the Uniform Trust Code, a “trustee shall administer the trust solely in the interest of the beneficiaries.” Unif. Tr. Code § 802(a). A trustee and personal representative’s failure to abide by the duty of loyalty may be grounds for removal. Id. § 706(b)(1).
Self-dealing is in direct violation of the duty of loyalty. Id. § 802. It is not necessarily self-dealing for a trustee or personal representative to receive compensation. Trustees and personal representatives are entitled to be compensated for their work, so long as the amount of compensation is reasonable. Id. § 708; Unif. Prob. Code § 3-719.
In her objection, Paris alleges that the executors are paying themselves unreasonable compensation and making “risky bets that are not necessarily aligned with the best interest of the Estate,” and may be driven by self-interests, raising questions about self-dealing and the duty of loyalty.
Although it’s possible all of the executors’ actions were reasonable, when there is a significant amount of money at play, questions about reasonableness and, relatedly, self-dealing are sure to arise. Assuming Jackson’s estate is worth $2 billion, $148,252,657 in payments to the executors is equivalent to $148,252 in a $2 million estate. Another factor to consider is the length of the administration, which spans over a decade. The issue is ultimately for a judge to decide, but the complexity of an estate such as Jackson’s may make such compensation reasonable.
Fiduciaries should take care to avoid actual or apparent conflicts of interest. Although potentially innocuous, perceived conflicts of interest can create a perception of a conflict in the eyes of beneficiaries, and concerns should be discussed with a goal of being as transparent as possible. Transparency is key. A failure to do so may damage a beneficiary’s view of the fiduciary even if no actual wrongdoing has occurred. If there are concerns, fiduciaries can seek court approval for actions to minimize legal risk.
3. The Prudent Investor Rule
Paris alleges that keeping $464 million uninvested violates the classic “prudent investor” rule. The investor rule generally comes up not in the management of an estate but, more typically, in the trust context, though, given the unusual length of the Jackson estate administration, it is not surprising that concerns may be raised about the management of the estate’s cash funds.
Under the Uniform Trust Code and Uniform Probate Code, a trustee and a personal representative have a duty to administer the trust or estate respectively as a “prudent” person would. Unif. Tr. Code § 804; Unif. Prob. Code § 3-715(5).
If Paris’s allegations are true and there are large sums of cash being held in a low-interest account during a period of high inflation, the court must consider whether it was prudent to keep a large cash reserve instead of investing the assets. Cash reserves are particularly useful when a trust largely holds illiquid assets that may be hard to liquidate quickly or without a discount, like real estate and business interests. It may be smarter to have some cash reserves that can be accessed quickly and some invested cash that can be accessed more quickly than real estate but that have a higher level of return.
A failure to prudently invest assets in a trust or estate can subject the fiduciary to damages. Here, Paris alleges that had the $464 million in uninvested cash been invested in a 60/40 split of common bonds and index funds, “the Estate’s cash would have earned approximately $41,009,654 in 2021 alone.” If the alleged breach is proven true, Paris’s claims highlight the severe consequences a fiduciary may face if cash reserves are not intentionally managed.
4. The Duty to Inform and Report
Paris’s claims also implicate the duty to inform and to respond to reasonable requests for information. According to Paris, there has been a “persistent lack of transparency with respect to certain large expenses and lack of diligence in timely reporting their activities to the beneficiaries and the Court.”
Fiduciaries have duties to respond to reasonable requests for information under the Uniform Codes. Under the Uniform Trust Code, “[a] trustee shall keep the qualified beneficiaries of the trust reasonably informed about the administration of the trust . . . [and] promptly respond to a beneficiary’s request for information related to the administration of the trust.” Unif. Tr. Code § 813. The practice of responding to requests in a reasonable and prompt manner also reduces tension between parties and is a best practice.
For more information see Carly Johnson & Evan Nelson “Wanna Be Startin’ Somethin’: Litigation and the Jackson Estate” Probate & Property, July 15, 2026.