The rights of adopted children are one of the topics covered in the basic Wills, Trusts & Estates course. Over-simply stated, in most jurisdictions, adopted children are treated as descendants of their adopting parents for purposes of inheritance.
Tobacco heiress Doris Duke had hoped to preclude Chandi Heffner, adopted as an adult (at age 35) by Miss Duke, from sharing in her estate and certain family trusts. After Miss Duke's death in 1996, Ms. Heffner asserted that she was entitled to several trusts and property interests. She alleged, for example, that as Miss Duke's adopted daughter, she was a successor income beneficiary of a trust created by Miss Duke's father.
Doris Duke's will (full copy here) famously included some pointed words about Chandi Heffner:
[I]t is my intention that Chandi Heffner not be deemed to be my child for purposes of disposing of property under this my Will (or any Codicil thereto). Furthermore, it is not my intention, nor do I believe that it was ever my father's intention, that Chandi Heffner be deemed to be a child or lineal descendant of mine for purposes of disposing of the trust estate of the May 2, 1917 trust which my father established for my benefit or the Doris Duke Trust, dated December 11, 1924, which my father established for the benefit of me, certain other members of the Duke family and ultimately for charity.
I am extremely troubled by the realization that Chandi Heffner may use my 1988 adoption of her (when she was 35 years old) to attempt to benefit financially under the terms of either of the trusts created by my father. After giving the matter prolonged and serious consideration, I am convinced that I should not have adopted Chandi Heffner. I have come to the realization that her primary motive was financial gain. I firmly believe that, like me, my father would not have wanted her to have benefited under the trusts which he created, and similarly, I do not wish her to benefit from my estate. Accordingly, I specifically authorize and direct my Executors to steadfastly take any and all actions and to expend such funds as my Executors in their sole discretion deem appropriate in order to prove the validity of this my Will for the purpose of having it admitted to probate. I also specifically authorize and direct my Executors to steadfastly take any and all actions and to expend such funds as my Executors in their sole discretion shall deem advisable in order to prove the effective exercise of the power of appointment described in Article SEVEN of this my Will over the principal and income of the trust created by my father, J.B. Duke, as Grantor and Trustee, dated May 2, 1917.
"Steadfastly oppose" is exactly what the executors did. Eventually Chandi Heffner settled for a multi-million dollar payout. It seemed as if every major T&E firm (including lawyers at my own firm) had some involvement with the case at some point. Many firms earned handsome fees for their work. See here, e.g.
My very bright and funny research assistant Troy Lipp (Pace Law JD expected 2012) imagined a scenario in which Doris Duke and Chandi Heffner exchange some words. I remixed, added a few embellishments and voilà! another Trusts & Estates video!
(Miss Duke met Ms. Heffner in a dance class in Hawaii. That's a major part of the story line.) Here are some lines to listen for:
"Is there a button I can press to un-adopt you?"
"You look like Elaine from Seinfeld."
"Did you really just refer to yourself in the third person?"
"I predict that this little adoption is going to cost you at least 40 million."
"...I belted out a rather enthusiastic version of Gloria Gaynor's song 'I Will Survive.'"
"I would rather live alone with 100 cats than have you in my life."
Comments