IBJNews

State court rejects Bren Simon's appeal in estate battle

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The Indiana Court of Appeals has dismissed Bren Simon’s petition seeking to reverse a lower court’s ruling that removed her as interim trustee of her late husband’s $2 billion estate.

Simon, the widow of mall magnate Melvin Simon, in January asked the higher court to overturn Hamilton Superior Court Judge William J. Hughes’ decision late last year.

The three-member appeals court dismissed the appeal April 15, according to an order signed by Chief Judge Margret G. Robb.

In removing Bren as trustee, Hughes cited her decision to distribute $13 million from the estate to herself without notifying other trust beneficiaries, a move she later tried to recast as a loan. Among Bren's other questionable decisions: paying her attorneys more than $3 million from the estate without the court's approval, and moving to convert more than $500 million worth of ownership units in Simon Property Group Inc. without appropriate professional advice, the judge wrote.

Attorneys for Bren argued that she served capably as executor and trustee of the estate of her late husband, pointing to a series of moves she has signed off on, including the transfer of her husband's stake in the Indiana Pacers and moves to appraise the value of a vast array of holdings.

Retired Indiana Supreme Court Judge Theodore R. Boehm was appointed trustee in her place.

The plaintiff in the case is Melvin's daughter Deborah Simon, who claims her stepmother coerced Melvin to make changes to his estate plan in February 2009, seven months before he died at age 82.

Bren has claimed in court filings that the changes to the will reflected Melvin’s desire to compensate her for a drop in the company’s stock price and a reduction in the cash dividend.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Walk way
    she need to take the money that in her account and walk away!
  • Why can't Bren be satisfied with what she has?
    Doesn't she have better things to do?
  • DOA
    Either Bren is spending a lot of money for poor legal advice or she is spending a lot of money and refusing to listen to good legal advice. In either event, this appeal was DOA in in the Court of Appeals. A Trustee can't put her own interests ahead of those of the beneficiaries even if only sometimes. One strike and you are out.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. First, let me say that I love the idea of communities being self-sufficient and people in the community not needing cars, living, working and shopping all in their neighborhood. To sum it up; I love good urban planning and hate urban sprawl. However, there are two reasons that I am against this development. First, this building doesn't fit. Density can occur in Ripple by building up top the street and better use of land. The scale of this project should be downtown. Secondly, I would be willing to bet that if a whole foods in Ripple is built, the Nora store would be closed. Here's my reasoning. The Nora Whole Foods expansion plans have been put on hold. I'm guessing they are waiting to see what happens with the Ripple proposal. Communities next to each other should work together to end sprawl and not work against each other and take other neighbors assets. Develop something both communities can be proud of and will attract more development and density. There's my soap box for the day.

  2. My apologies, Lou - it was the Indy Star that printed cost for entertaining "celebrities" during Indy 500. Sorry for confusing the always timely IBJ with Indy's Gannett reprint news source.

  3. That's fine if you want a grocery store that has festivals and live music. I guess with the prices they charge, they can afford to host such activities. As for me, I choose to spend my money more wisely and if I want to go to a festival or a concert, I will pay for that separately - not through my grocery bill.

  4. TIF is not just to attract development but to attract a higher use for that development. Carmel wisely is using TIF for numerous public parking garages. Asphalt seas of parking pay little taxes and bring even less value to a commercial area. Also density is what is going to save Indy and Broad Ripple. The days of trying to compete with burbs are long gone.

  5. The Prestige was an awesome movie.

ADVERTISEMENT