Hotel magnate and “Queen of Mean” Leona Helmsley has always been a figure of controversy, both in life and after her death in 2007. Reporters and bloggers went wild when she left $12 million dollars to her dog “Trouble” in a trust fund after her death. But that $12 million (later reduced to $2 million by the courts) wasn’t even the bulk of her estate. Most of the Helmsley estate (somewhere in the area of $4-$5 billion) was left to the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust. It is this charitable trust that is still carrying on the Helmsley controversy today.
Although the management of the Helmsley Charitable Trust was left up to trustees, with few specific legally binding instructions regarding beneficiaries, Helmsley did leave a “mission statement” (also called a “letter of intent” or a “memorandum of intent” in the Estate Planning world) stating that it was her intention that the bulk of the trust “provide for the care of dogs”. What trustees have actually done is given $1 million (less than 1% of the estate, according to the president of the Humane Society) to dog-related charities, with the bulk of the estate instead going to various medical centers—of the human kind.
The question from an estate planning perspective is not necessarily whether Ms. Helmley should have left her estate to the dogs, but whether or not her wishes are being followed. And the lesson to be taken from the controversy over her estate is this: If you have specific wishes as to the distribution of your estate, you must leave specific instructions in an updated and legally binding document created by a knowledgeable professional.
The best estate plan is the one that can be carried out without controversy.