IBJNews

Judge: Bren Simon can take some distributions from estate

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A Hamilton County judge will allow Bren Simon to withdraw about $3.3 million per year of the estimated $43 million in annual dividend and interest income from her late husband's estate.

The widow of the late mall billionaire Melvin Simon will be entitled to a distribution of $125,000 every two weeks to offset the payroll expenses of her personal staff and the team that manages her homes, including Asherwood in Carmel, Judge William J. Hughes wrote in an order issued Oct. 27.

The withdrawals will later be charged against the amount of the trust she ultimately is due. The estate holds assets, primarily stock in Simon Property Group Inc., worth at least $2 billion.

"Distributions to Bren during the administration of the trust can be appropriate, but only if they occur in a manner that protects the trust and the interests of all beneficiaries," Hughes wrote. "A further consideration is that the amount of distributions this court can legitimately order must be based on record evidence."

Bren Simon's attorneys have said the biweekly payroll expense for MBS Associates is about $116,000.

The order, which specifies distributions must come from the estate's interest income and not principal, clarifies a July ruling in which Hughes banned withdrawals from the trust after Bren, in her capacity as trustee, distributed to herself $13 million from the trust's principal balance.

Deborah Simon—Melvin's daughter from a previous marriage—is challenging his will, saying Melvin was coerced into approving a new estate plan that dramatically increased the amount of his fortune going to Bren. She also wants her stepmother removed as trustee of the estate while the broader case is pending. (Click here for a July story on the dispute that includes video excerpts of Bren's deposition; the first of the four videos appears below.)



There is no provision in the trust allowing Bren to receive distributions before the trust assets are dispersed, but attorneys for Bren argued she should be allowed to collect all of the income from the estate during the court battle since she was Melvin's "object of greatest concern and solicitude."

Attorneys for Deborah did not dispute that point, but they argued Bren should get nothing until the judge sorts out the will contest.

Deborah contends that her father was suffering from dementia near the end of his life and didn’t understand what he was doing when he revised his estate plan, boosting the share of his fortune going directly to Bren from one-third to one-half. The changes also wiped out a portion that was to go to Deborah and siblings Cynthia Simon-Skjodt and David Simon, and left charitable gifts stipulated in prior versions to Bren’s discretion.

Bren, who married Mel in 1972, contends the changes fully reflected his wishes.

ADVERTISEMENT

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. Those of you yelling to deport them all should at least understand that the law allows minors (if not from a bordering country) to argue for asylum. If you don't like the law, you can petition Congress to change it. But you can't blindly scream that they all need to be deported now, unless you want your government to just decide which laws to follow and which to ignore.

  2. 52,000 children in a country with a population of nearly 300 million is decimal dust or a nano-amount of people that can be easily absorbed. In addition, the flow of children from central American countries is decreasing. BL - the country can easily absorb these children while at the same time trying to discourage more children from coming. There is tension between economic concerns and the values of Judeo-Christian believers. But, I cannot see how the economic argument can stand up against the values of the believers, which most people in this country espouse (but perhaps don't practice). The Governor, who is an alleged religious man and a family man, seems to favor the economic argument; I do not see how his position is tenable under the circumstances. Yes, this is a complicated situation made worse by politics but....these are helpless children without parents and many want to simply "ship" them back to who knows where. Where are our Hoosier hearts? I thought the term Hoosier was synonymous with hospitable.

  3. Illegal aliens. Not undocumented workers (too young anyway). I note that this article never uses the word illegal and calls them immigrants. Being married to a naturalized citizen, these people are criminals and need to be deported as soon as humanly possible. The border needs to be closed NOW.

  4. Send them back NOW.

  5. deport now

ADVERTISEMENT