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. Of what value is selling alcoholic beverages to State Fair patrons when there are many families with children attending. Is this the message we want to give children attending and participating in the Fair, another venue with alooholic consumption onsite. Is this to promote beer and wine production in the state which are great for the breweries and wineries, but where does this end up 10-15 years from now, lots more drinkers for the alcoholic contents. If these drinks are so important, why not remove the alcohol content and the flavor and drink itself similar to soft drinks would be the novelty, not the alcoholic content and its affects on the drinker. There is no social or material benefit from drinking alcoholic beverages, mostly people want to get slightly or highly drunk.

  2. I did;nt know anyone in Indiana could count- WHY did they NOT SAY just HOW this would be enforced? Because it WON;T! NOW- with that said- BIG BROTHER is ALIVE in this Article-why take any comment if it won't appease YOU PEOPLE- that's NOT American- with EVERYTHING you indicated is NOT said-I can see WHY it say's o Comments- YOU are COMMIES- BIG BROTHER and most likely- voted for Obama!

  3. In Europe there are schools for hairdressing but you don't get a license afterwards but you are required to assist in turkey and Italy its 7 years in japan it's 10 years England 2 so these people who assist know how to do hair their not just anybody and if your an owner and you hire someone with no experience then ur an idiot I've known stylist from different countries with no license but they are professional clean and safe they have no license but they have experience a license doesn't mean anything look at all the bad hairdressers in the world that have fried peoples hair okay but they have a license doesn't make them a professional at their job I think they should get rid of it because stateboard robs stylist and owners and they fine you for the dumbest f***ing things oh ur license isn't displayed 100$ oh ur wearing open toe shoes fine, oh there's ONE HAIR IN UR BRUSH that's a fine it's like really? So I think they need to go or ease up on their regulations because their too strict

  4. Exciting times in Carmel.

  5. Twenty years ago when we moved to Indy I was a stay at home mom and knew not very many people.WIBC was my family and friends for the most part. It was informative, civil, and humerous with Dave the KING. Terri, Jeff, Stever, Big Joe, Matt, Pat and Crumie. I loved them all, and they seemed to love each other. I didn't mind Greg Garrison, but I was not a Rush fan. NOW I can't stand Chicks and all their giggly opinions. Tony Katz is to abrasive that early in the morning(or really any time). I will tune in on Saturday morning for the usual fun and priceless information from Pat and Crumie, mornings it will be 90.1

ADVERTISEMENT