E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
W.A. Clark Memorial Library
Huguette Clark with one of her prized dolls. She reached age 98 without declaring who should receive her copper-mining fortune, and then signed two contradictory wills back to back. The latest will leaves much of her money, and her dolls, to her longtime nurse.
NEW YORK — The longtime private registered nurse for heiress Huguette Clark, named to receive more than $30 million in her last will and testament, will be fighting in court on Friday to keep Clark's relatives from poking into the way Clark's money was spent.
The nurse, Hadassah Peri, an immigrant from the Philippines, already owns a $200,000 Bentley Arnage luxury sedan and five houses. Money for four of those houses was given to her through the years by Clark, whom she joined almost 20 years ago when assigned by a home care agency.
The total amount of money already given to Peri was about $26 million, according to court documents, even before the amounts left in the will. That's a far higher figure than previously disclosed. The reclusive Clark, heir to a share of one of America's largest mining fortunes from the 19th century, lived out her last decades in modest hospital rooms in New York City before dying in May at age 104.
Nineteen of Clark's relatives have asked the court to make them a party to the first stage of the legal battle, the accounting for Clark's $400 million fortune. It's presumed that this step will lead to the family contesting Clark's last will, which leaves nothing to family. The family has filed in court a previous will, signed just six weeks before the last one. That earlier document left nearly everything to the family, and only $5 million to the nurse.
Her nurse's attorney this month asked the court to keep the family out of court, supporting an effort by Clark's attorney and accountant to block the family. The attorney and accountant portray the relatives as distant, having no contact with Clark. The 19 relatives are descended from the first marriage of Clark's father, the former U.S. Sen. William Andrews Clark (1839-1925).
Read the related story: Tax fraud alleged in estate of heiress; accountant resigns.
On Friday the parties will argue in front of the judge in Surrogate's Court in Manhattan, Surrogate Kristin Booth Glen.
Also on the judge's plate: whether or not Clark's longtime attorney should remain as an executor of her estate. That issue took the spotlight this week, as Clark's accountant resigned as an executor, just before a public official investigating Clark's finances accused the attorney and executive of fraud in handling Clark's taxes. The attorney and accountant, also the subject of an investigation by the Manhattan district attorney, have said they handled Clark's finances appropriately and according to her wishes.
See the related story: Tax fraud alleged in estate of heiress Huguette Clark; accountant resigns.
Speaking for nurse Peri, attorney Harvey E. Corn argued in court documents on Dec. 7 that Clark gave the money, and her doll collection, to her out of "gratitude for Ms. Peri's devoted service." Corn says that "Ms. Peri saw or communicated with the Decedent almost every day" during her nearly 20 years of service. And he says that hospital records from the six months around the signing of the wills show that Clark was in good health, "conversant, cheerful, well read and engaged in taking care of her personal affairs." Corn argues that the family has no legal standing, and that their intervention will cause delay and wasting of the estate in additional legal fees.
The family attorney, John R. Morken, replied in court papers on Wednesday. He said family members were not so distant as they have been portrayed, and had shown concern for Clark while she was alive. Family members have said their contacts with Clark were abruptly cut off by her attorney around the same time the wills were written, in 2005, when she was 98 years old. Then, in 2010 after msnbc.com disclosed questions about the financial dealings of Clark's attorney and accountant, three family members asked a court to appoint a guardian for her. That request was denied without even a hearing in court.
"The litigation in this Estate is not just about the probate of a will," Morken argued. "Rather, it is about what transpired during the last twenty years of Huguette Clark's life. This inquiry requires an open airing of the facts. The Family Members should not be denied the opportunity to participate in same. They were denied that opportunity when their Guardianship Petition was dismissed in 2010, while Huguette was alive. They should not be denied that opportunity again." Several times in the document, Morken suggests that Peri enabled or cooperated with the attorney and accountant in getting Clark to sign a second will that benefitted them all.
Hadassah Peri has not spoken publicly about Clark, but a press agent issued a statement on her behalf in June after she was named in the will: "I saw Madame Clark virtually every day for the 20 years. I was her private duty nurse but also her close friend. I knew her as a kind and generous person, with whom I shared many wonderful moments and whom I loved very much. I am profoundly sad at her passing, awed at the generosity she has shown me and my family, and eternally grateful. Just as Madame Clark demonstrated kindness toward others in her actions, so, too, will I and my family devote a substantial portion of this bequest toward making the world a better place for all people."
The public official investigating Clark's finances, the New York County public administrator's office, has already said in court papers that it might seek to "claw back" into the estate some of the gifts given from Clark's accounts while she lived. The administrator said the powers of attorney that Clark signed over to her attorney and accountant did not include the authority to give gifts, including a $5 million check written to Peri in 2009, after Clark herself stopped writing checks on her account.
If that clawback effort is successful, and if the second will is thrown out, Peri could not only lose the large bequest but could also have to pay back some of what she now has. Morken calls that Peri's "day of reckoning."
See below the full documents from the nurse, the family, and the attorney and accountant.
Though she inherited one of the great mining fortunes of the 19th century, Huguette (pronounced "hue-GET") Marcelle Clark lived quietly into the 21st century, secluded under fake names in a hospital room for more than two decades despite being in relatively good physical health. Intensely shy, she was almost entirely alone, aside from her private nurse, other helpers and occasional visits by her accountant. One of her former attorneys represented her for 20 years without meeting her face to face, instead talking to her through a closed door.
In the last year of her life, after her three empty mansions drew the attention of a reporter for msnbc.com in late 2009, she became a subject of public fascination, a trending topic of searches on Google and Yahoo, pictured on the cover of the New York tabloids, with fan pages on Facebook, a biography on Wikipedia, and her story read by tens of millions — though the last known photograph of her was made in 1930.
Huguette Clark was married only briefly and had no children. Her only full sister died at age 16 and had no children. Her mother had no other children. Under state law that leaves 21 "intestate distributees" — the relatives who would inherit her estate if she left no will or if the court chooses to uphold the earlier will instead of the later one. Nineteen of the 21 are in court now. Those 21 relatives are descended from three of the children from Sen. Clark's first marriage: 13 half-grandnieces and half-grandnephews (and their children), and eight half-great-grandnieces and half-great-grandnephews (and their children). Counting all the children of these relatives, there are about 50 living descendants of Clark's father.
---
Documents (PDF files)
Family reply to nurse Peri and Bock and Kamsler, Dec. 21, 2011
Public administrator's petition to remove Bock and Kamsler, Dec. 20, 2011
Bock and Kamsler reply to the family's motion to intervene, Dec. 16, 2011
Nurse Peri's motion opposing the family entering the case, Dec. 7, 2011
Family motion to intervene in the estate case, Nov. 28, 2011
Huguette Clark's last will and testament, signed April 19, 2005
Huguette Clark's previous will, signed March 7, 2005
Family's petition seeking a guardian for Huguette Clark, September 2010
Attorney Bock's sworn statement to the court, September 2010
Judge's ruling rejecting her family's guardianship petition, September 2010
Kamsler letter informing Clark of his guilty plea, February 2009
Kamsler's criminal court file and investigator's report
---
Previous stories in the Huguette Clark mystery on msnbc.com:
Archive of all stories, photos and videos
Photo narrative, "The Clarks: An American story of wealth, scandal and mystery," Feb. 26, 2010.
Printable version of the photo narrative, Feb. 26, 2010.
Clark family notes and sources, Feb. 26, 2010.
Investigative report, part one, "At 104, the mysterious heiress Huguette Clark is alone now: Relatives are kept away. Only her accountant and attorney visit. Who protects HuguetteClark, with 3 empty homes and no heirs?" Aug. 19, 2010.
Investigative report, part two, "Who is watching Huguette Clark's millions? Reclusive heiress's assets are sold by two advisers, one an accountant with a felony conviction. Another elderly client signed over his property to the same accountant and attorney," Aug. 20, 2010.
"Criminal probe begins into the finances of reclusive heiress Huguette Clark: Manhattan DA's Elder Abuse Unit is on the case. The same unit prosecuted the Brooke Astor case — though Clark has about four times the wealth," Aug. 24, 2010.
"Report sparks welfare check on heiress Huguette Clark," Aug. 25, 2010.
"Generosity of an heiress: four homes for a nurse, gifts for attorney's family," Sept. 1, 2010.
"Huguette Clark, the reclusive heiress, has signed a will, attorney says," Sept. 2, 2010.
"Family of copper heiress asks court to protect her from attorney, accountant," Sept. 3, 2010.
"Attorney for 104-year-old heiress defends his handling of her finances," Sept. 7, 2010.
"Judge leaves pair under investigation in control of heiress Huguette Clark's fortune," Sept. 9, 2010.
"Huguette Clark, the reclusive copper heiress, dies at 104," May 24, 2011.
"Family excluded from Huguette Clark burial," May 26, 2011.
"Heiress Huguette Clark's will leaves $1 million to advisers," June 22, 2011.
"The 1 percent of the 1 percent: How Huguette Clark's millions were spent," Nov. 19, 2011.
"A $400 miillion twist: Huguette Clark signed two wills, one to her family," Nov. 28, 2011.
"Tax fraud alleged in estate of heiress Huguette Clark; accountant resigns," Dec. 21, 2011.
the will is sound and legal. this greedy "family" is crawling out from beneath their rocks to get something that they were cut out of for whatever reason. this nurse was more family to her than she ever had. she was taking care of her for 20 YEARS, and she was placed there by an agency. she didn't seek her out. it is completely reasonable that the heiress would leave her a huge piece of her estate. who else would she leave it to... her never there sister's sister's sister's daughter's brothers wife's husband's brother? you take care of some for 20 years, it's the least she could have done, and exactly what she did.
I think they are all greedy. Does the nurse deserve the 26 mil and another 30 mil on top. There is plenty of money to go around and she appears to have been reclusive. The Lawyers want their share as well...
Gskx and she got paid for it she did not do this for free, I say let them go at it and spread the wealth around including the tax payer through court fees and a good accounting of any taxes owed by all. From what I've read there is a lot of money owed the government
Huguette Clark DID NOT earn this money herself. It was her FATHERS money. Why shouldnt HIS remaining family benefit from it? The old ladies employees were PAID for their services already. This is FAMILY money and not the old ladies to give to a nurse of no relation to her.
I think that the nurse worked in concert with the accountant and the attorney to bilk Clark of millions over the years. I find it very odd that the second will was written so soon after the previous one with such a drastic change. It just does not smell right. The reason the attorney has given for why Clark changed the will was that the family had abandoned her. However, this was not the case and it was in fact the lawyer who kept the family away and would not allow anyone to see Clark. We have only his word that this was the wish of Clark and I do not trust a thing that comes out of his mouth. He has behaved in a clearly unethical manner as demonstrated by the $1.5 million dollar gift he arranged from Clark to a kibbutz that his daughter was living at in Israel. Gifts like this to a family member of the attorney are considered to be completely unethical by the entire legal profession and the NY State bar association. I would not be at all surprised to learn that the nurse worked in concert with the lawyer and accountant and drugged Clark in order to get her to sign the new will. The three of them probably saw the first will and decided that they were not getting enough so they manipulated Clark into signing the second will. This nurse has already received over $26 million in gifts which were largely arranged by the attorney and accountant over the years. I would bet that there is some under the table deal for her to give the attorney and accountant both shares of the $30 million additional she stands to inherit. The attorney and accountant could not get the money directly in the will since large bequests to the two of them would raise immediate red flags with the probate court. They kept the direct bequests to themselves to $500,000 to try and minimize suspicion. My guess is that there is a plan that after things die down the nurse will quietly give the attorney and the accountant their cut of the $30 million. I hope that the family prevails and they get the money, not these three crooks that have been manipulating Clark for decades. This money was family money from Clark's father and really should be shared among the remaining family members, not given to a couple of shysters and a very suspect nurse. I would hope that the family would also give a substantial amount to charity. The only thing I would like to see the accountant and the lawyer get are long prison sentences for their unethical, and likely illegal handling of Clark's money over the years. If it can be proven that the nurse was in cahoots with these two, then she should also spend a long time in prison and be forced to give back all questionable gifts, including the $5 million gift check that apparently was illegally written to her. This nurse is such a greedy bitch that she is not happy with the $26 million she has already received and the additional $5 million she would have received under the first will, she wants the $30 million in the second will and is willing to fight to cut the family out to get it. If she were smart she would side with the family and take the $5 million and be happy. By causing a fight, every penny she has received over the years is going to be examined and she could very well have to give large chunks of that money back, including the recent $5 million dollar check.
Free Thinker - while it is true that Hugette didn't earn the money herself, it was hers to leave to whatever beneficiaries she wanted. Not saying that it is "right" but none of these people (the family or the nurse) deserve this money. If the old lady wanted to leave it all to the cat, she had every right to do that. It was absolutely the "old ladies to give to a nurse of no relation to her" because Hugette's father did not leave any legal instruction that she do otherwise.
Really? And what kind of "hospital" lets you have your own private nurse for 20 years?
GSX and others. Yes, the money was hers to do as she pleases, but why are you so sure she wasn't unduly influenced by these leeches to change the will 6 months after one leaving money to the family? Do you think it normal to give a nurse over 20 million BEFORE death? The Lawyer and Accountant appear to be less than upright people. I believe one served time in jail for something. The dates of checks written are also terribly damning... just a coincidence they were written the same day the story appeared in the paper? I think not.
The family should be getting the money not the nurse and lawyers who took over the life of a vulnerable elderly person to get it.
This heiress was intentionally kept away from her family so that the attorney, accountant and nurse could steal this woman's entire estate.
The family has been trying to contact the woman for years and was denied by her "handlers".
.
The attorney, accountant and the nurse need to be in prison.
.
@quacksnacker - I'm a nurse as well. If she was willing to pay for both a hospital bed and a private duty nurse, I'm sure the hospital had absolutely no problem getting paid for pretty much being a glorified hotel. As for who deserves the money - I honestly don't think anyone deserves it. The situation with the gold-digging trifecta is beyond suspicious, and if the family was distant they shouldn't get anything either.
If you've read all the "installments" of this story, it was stated that members of the family did indeed have contact with her over the years...frequent contact. Then all of a sudden they were denied contact. They tried various legal methods of re-establishing contact to no avail. If the second will is indeed a forgery, it shouldn't be too hard to prove that.
Hmmmmmmmm!!!! So that is why the money is in the medical field.!!!!!!!!!!!! Sounds illegal
and immoral to me. And at Christmas it is all about the family.
You do realize that if you are willing to pay for it, you could be perfectly healthy and hire a full time personal nurse. Anyone can.
She probably gave them a new wing or two. Some 2million dollar CAT or MRI machines. If you pay you get what you want.
To those who want to defend a pedophile and give her millions away to a shyster lawyer and a greedy nurse I say you must be just like them...a criminal and you make me physically ill.
For those of you who can see beyond greed and corruption I salute you. All of her relatives are financially well off and don't need her money. However, they are not about to sit back and watch the rest of her remaining millions go to three people who have already STOLEN from the deceased while she was alive.
The two most vile type of people on this earth are the types that would abuse and take advantage of the elderly and the types that would abuse and sexually exploit children.
Everyone can go home now. The verdict has been reached. Call the lynch mob.
I guess asking for any kind of evidence would be too much to ask when we can act on knee-jerk reactions and emotions alone. The families lawyers will be in touch with you when it's time for expert testimony.
Hey sport I gave you a vote up so now you can just STFU because you are making yourself appear stupid!
I'm stupid why? Because I believe in hearing evidence, any evidence before I make a judgement? Let's see what you do with the rope I just handed to you. You already tied the first one into a noose.
Take a moment and read the pdf files (ALL of them). The court file on Kamsler is most eye opening. The total of 15 counts filed against him by the Nassau County Grand Jury covering a 4 year period are also most telling about his moral attitude. One wonders if he was chatting online to your underage sister/daughter/female relative about having anal sex with them if you would feel different. There's some evidence for you along with the next knot.
Hey sport lack of evidence must be why Kamsler resigned as an executor of Ms. Clark's estate. How's that rope hanging for you now?
And how does any of that have anything to do with what's happening in this case now other than maybe he resigned because of the troubles he brought on himself in a totally unrelated situation?
How does that make people that were no more than acquaintances to her worthy of anything?
You're using up all my rope, but I'll find more. So far all you've given me is speculation.
Well sport apparently you can't see the forest for the trees so as such I'm done beating a dead horse and have resigned to using the "Ignore This Author" button. Have a nice evening. :)
Run away...good strategy.
I love this game.
Well this case truly proves the old saying: where there's a will, there's a lawyer.
From an unbiased point of view (I'm not getting anything) the second will seems mighty suspicious: $$$ goest to nurse, lawyer, accountant and then to a foundation the lawyer and accountant are going to run. The previous will gave a much smaller amount to the nurse and then the money went to her relatives. In between, the lawyer, nurse and accountant kept the relatives away from her.....
Something smells fishy, and it isn't clam chowder.
gskx, can you not read, or is understanding your problem? The family was excluded from visiting by the lawyer, accountant and nurse (LAN). Like vultures the LAN preyed over this woman and stole her family from her. In this day and age, where is the video taped will? The only will that I would accept would be a hand written will, or read onto an audio tape by the decedent. How does someone go from willing all their fortune to family, to cutting out her family entirely?... clearly LAN got her to sign a fraudulent will that she likely did not read. Time to put these (one is already a convicted felon) in jail.
gskx-
let's review, alleged fraud by Ms. Clark attorney and accountant, nurse Peri (whose connection was that of paid employee) alleged to have already "obtained" millions of dollars in 20 years from Messrs. Bock and Kamsler's nefarious plans, family members who were in court perviously and were denied access, again by Messrs. Bock and Kamsler and you posit that Ms. Peri has a "completely reasonable" claim? Interesting logic to be sure. Hope you enjoy the Holidays.
The only reasonable solution to all this money is to provide for orphans and abandoned pets.
the nurse swindled ms clark and swindled her good. If the judge sides with the nurse he should have his head examined. Go Newt Ginghrich!!!!
Really, what does Newt have to do with this case. Let's elect someone who isn't an insider to how politics are run in Washington. Opps, that leaves him out...
Dorrine 5.0
Go Newt? I think maybe you are the one that needs your head examined, not a judge siding with the nurse that was there for over 20 years. Clark's vulture extended family exchanged cards with her and made several phone calls a year in an attempt to inherit her money once she was in her late 90's. They don't sound like the injured party to me. The nurse deserves it far more than the family that was not there for her, paid employee or not she was there through the years as a friend and companion to a lonely old woman.
dorrine - needs head examined for Gingrich comment made on human interest story
2blunt4drivels - needs head examined for defending criminal behavior and for being gullible
This is a really simplistic, novice observation but if you look at the signatures on the 2 wills, they look dramatically different. The older one that is being labeled as revoked definitely looks like someone who was in their 90's signed it. The newer one seems to be much more polished looking. Anyone else see that?
Lori,
I noticed that, those sigs are dramatically different, and on the older version she put HMC on each page, on the newer verison H. Clarke. I'm no handwriting expert but I think the second one is a forgery.
If the nurse had nothing to hide then why does she care if the family looks into how Ms. Clark's money was spent. Any family would want to know
They are not even related to her except for being the offspring of her husband from a previous marriage. If her husband, the one who had all the money, wanted them to get it, wouldn't he have left it to their side of the family? You would all be screaming a different song if Ms. Clark left her money to some charity rather than her nurse. Then you would all be screaming that the family is evil for trying to contest the will. Deny it if you like, but I know better. Lot's of jumping to conclusions on this story without anything to go on other than feelings.
sport, you have it all wrong. If you've read any of the previous stories on this case, you would read that she inherited the money from her FATHER, not her ex-husband. She was only married for 2 years and divorced in 1930. Why would an ex-husband bequeath 400 million dollars to an ex-wife?
Send her to jail with the accountant and the lawyer. While we are at it let's stop issuing H1B visas since 82% of US citizen new grads cannot find work.
This woman was obviously a manipulative gold digger and is an embarassment to the nursing profession. i do believe gold digging and swindling is not in the scope of practice.
This will is a joke. Give what's left to her next of kin. That's as honorable as this fraudulent situation is going to get.
She doesn't have any "next of kin". The ones that want the money are the offspring of the offspring of her husbands first marriage which either he felt were unworthy, or went through what they were given already.
That the nurse does not want the family to be a party in determining the how and why behind the "gifts" would seem to indicate she has something to hide.
I would truly hope someone has the presence of mind to have all signatures "supposedly" made by Huguette Clark verified and do a complete investigation into how her monies were distributed over the years. As a matter of fact, anyone that has had contact with her during the 20 years she was sequestered in that hospital room ought to be suspect. With the amount of money at stake, no doubt there are many discrepancies if the whole thing is investigated hard enough. Seems there was an awfully large change in her position over a 3 week period as to how she wanted her estate handled. If it stinks like a fish, it must be a fish!
Or it could be that the Nurse that spent 20 years caring for this woman is respecting her last wishes and keeping a bunch of greedy distant relatives from getting their grubby hands on something Ms. Clark did not think they deserved.
I am a nurse in the home health field and find it dispicable and highly unethical for any nurse to receive such large "gifts" from someone they are caring for, no matter how long. Most agencies or hospitals, etc. have policies prohibiting any more of a gift than something like flowers or a cnady that can be shared or enjoyed by all staff. I wonder what agency sent her in and how they feel about the debacle it has become. What a bunch of greedy b*****ds!!!
do you mean greedy lawyer. Bock as well as her accountant should go to jail. change will at that age.the first will should be the one that should be used .how could anyone say this second will is sound and legal. this greedy "family. Her nurse's attorney Bock as well as her accountant should go to jail. also his nurse should not get anything at all.no lawyer should make any money off this .the nurse go get your own family, she was working her too. .this family should have all of the money. not a fight in court to take up all the money for the lawyers to get, this is bull.i know i have seen this happen before. take the old people out of there money it is easy to do.. go get your own family and leave the old people alone. and do not steal from them. take something that belongs to somebody else, illegally.she was to old to make this will change . something is not right here.this should not happen to this family . and that is it.. family is family.the lawyer can put anything in the will, what would she know at that age.. the first will or the last. it goes to the family . no fight in court and if so the lawyers. will have to do for free.that will stop the stealing from people. give all to the family..
this is just a shame that this can happen in the usa. when this much money is connected with a will .the lawyer rats come out of the wood work, a long with non family rats wanting .but it can happen when there is not much money at all . the rats just want,something what is not theirs it happens all the time..this is a shame.
The nurse has something to hide. The new will was changed drafted six weeks after the last? And the nurse was administering medication to this lady? Hello....
must be 1 hell of a nurse
People in the health care industry cannot take gifts like these. It can be concidered misappropriation of reisdent property. Its a very fine line and there are too many questions regarding the two wills. The family should be involved especially if they could prove that they had tried to contact Miss Clark but were denied. But I doubt their housekeeping records go back that far. Also another note: why did the family wait so long to try to have a court appointed guardian?
The family deserves nothing.... if you look at the whole story they were never part of Huguette's life... 2 different
mother's, 2 different families.... this ENTITLED family was the first bunch and had little or no involvement with the 2nd wife and 2 daughters, whom i might add were quite close to the Dad with the money... only seems right Huguette the only living member of this 2nd family got it all....She was of sound mind, almost until the end...this is what she wanted.. these people she chose,and gave to them what she wanted and lived the way she wanted...let her rest in peace... pay off the taxes owed, from sloppy burnouts,abide by the will!!! Where was this extended family with right of claim all those years...if she wanted them in her life she would have found them....
She didn't 'get it all'. Her father's estate was split between all his surviving children. And the question is, quite reasonably, whether the second will (dated 6 weeks after the first, and after she 'supposedly' told her lawyer to no longer allow her family to contact her) isn't, in fact, a forgery. Since the signature and method of initialing the individual pages varies significantly between the two, it very likely is. That second will stinks to high heaven. And her family did have regular contact with her up until the time they were excluded by the lawyer. Do a little more research, don't just believe what the lawyer, accountant, and nurse are saying happened.
Yeah, right, forgery. Because with all the money that is involved and all the publicity involved in this case, nobody involved has thought that maybe one of the signatures may be a forgery. It's takes the genius of arm-chair lawyers on the Newsvine to think of that. Puh-lease.
I think the family is looking for funds due to being related to her .
But they probably never went to see her except only when asking for a hand out .
I have seen it all before !
I am a nurse. First, if the family reviews nursing law in their state I believe that they will find this nurses behavior is inappropriate and possibly criminal. Second, what was the mental state of the decedent when she modofied her will. Third if her lawyer was appointed by the deceased to make financial decisions for her, the wording of that contract will state whether the lawyer could pay debts only or make gifts. Bottom line: the accountant took off, the nurse accepting gifts from a patient all smell fishy. The family would be smart to hire a forensic accountant to follow the money trail, Id say it leads to the lawyer, nurse and accountant.
I worked as a private duty nurses aide for years and many of my clients were wealthy. The children of my wealthiest clients were often spoiled and self-centered beyond belief. They had no natural care or concern for their parents outside of the money that would be left to them. Many of the adult children had lives that would have allowed them to care for their parents but they wanted no part of it. Some of these clients were starved for love and had no one to listen to them that cared about their troubles. I was sometimes the recipient of 'gifts' but none were extravagant. What I found was that these people wanted to give out of gratitude and an effort to be usefull - it gave them pleasure to be kind to me. I don't believe I was ever honored above any ones natural children but they became jealous none the less. I never understood this because they could have been close to their parents if they wanted to. Huguette chose her own 'family' as many of us do if our own is dysfunctional or dangerous. She was generous because she had a lot to give. That nurse more than likely was her only friend. She fed her, gave her baths and wiped her backside. Where was the 'family' then? After twenty years in a situation like that, you are thought of as more than an employee.
The lawyers would not allow her family or close friends to see her. They did try, and my understanding is that they did visit her for years until the lawyers no longer allowed it.
You're making an assumption that isn't presented in the facts, that Ms. Clark's family were somehow focused on her money and not her personally, your words used are 'dysfunctional and dangerous'. There is nothing in this family's actions (wanting to see their aunt) that connotes any ulterior motive other than her welfare. Plus, you have missed that the nurse had already stolen $23 million from her, this is not a 'friend' by any stretch of the imagination!
Where in the article did it say the money was "stolen"? I saw "gifted" myself. Are those two words interchangeable now?
The difference in this case is that the nurse lawyer and accountant kept her relatives away from her. When they wanted to see her they were told that she did not want to see them and wanted to be left alone. She had a relationship with a few of the relatives through letters and phone conversations over the years. It wasn't til she got older and her original lawyer got old that this stuff started. The old lawyer somehow met up with this new one and got his money stolen, he was old and had alzheimers. This lawyer took over his clients and started working with Ms. Clark. Then came the crooked accountant and the crooked nurse....these people are disgusting. I am not all for how some wealthy are but the state should take control over this entire estate and distribute to the relatives of Senator Clark.
"Crooked" is your assumption. Are you privy to some inside info that proves Ms. Clark did not instruct her lawyer, accountant or nurse to keep her "relatives" away?
No matter what I may think of how a family treats one of my patients it is never appropriate for me to think I am to be the recipient of their will, or any type of gift other than a box of candy or bouquet of flowers. There are ethics and laws concerning this situation, for both nurses or anyone in health care and lawyers. Thats it. period. Unethical behavior by all and should be charged, fined or in prison.
Something is very obvious with her money outlays.-fraud, thievery. Again may I dare say that Mr. Bernie Madeoff should make room for this coniving bunch of bandits 'cause they will soon join him.
I firmly believe now that all the facts are coming to light about the malfeasance of Kamsler and Bock that the nurse, Hadassah Peri, was in on the scam. By giving the nurse the bulk of the estate, Kamsler and Bock sought to mitigate the allegation that they were self-dealing (after all, who would suspect the 'loyal, devoted' nurse?). Then, when the will proceeds were awarded, the nurse was probably on the hook to "donate" money back to Kamsler, Bock and their family members via prior agreement. The whole thing stinks. People also forget that the very elderly (Ms. Clark was 104) lose their eyesight around 100 and RELY ON OTHERS to read documents and correspondence to them. Ms. Clark probably never even read the wills she was presented with and signed.
The signatures on the two different wills look different. Something fishy is going on here. I say investigate especially since the accountant has now quit.
What kind of "hospital" lets someone live there for 20 years?
Medicare and Medicaid payments should immediately cease, and this hospital should be shut down.
Who paid for this woman's "care"? Taxpayers?
It wasn't a hospital. It's a nursing agency. This kind of long-term care is actually fairly common.
As for who paid the nurse - Ms. Clark herself paid her. That's the definition of a private nurse.
Next time, try reading the article before replying. You might look less foolish.
Hilarious. So you think nursing agency= nursing facility?
Third paragraph:
(Clark) "lived out her last decades in modest hospital rooms in New York City before dying in May at age 104."
I guess attending USC is no guarantee of future sound reasoning or reading ability.
Greedy, disgusting nurse. it is amazing how people hover and circle the grave of rich people. Don't people realize they aren't entitled to anything when someone dies.
The root of all evil......
then i believe you are just as unethical as this nurse is. it is your job to look after these people. it is your profession to feed them, give them baths, to wipe their backsides. it isn't your job to evaluate and judge how well their children know them or to say that they are not cared for. you weren't there throughout the entire relationships with these people...how dare you judge these people's relationships when you have only seen a snippet of their lives. if you genuinely cared for these people that you were paid to take care of, then you never should have taken the generous gifts after their deaths. it wouldn't have mattered at all. you chose that profession...i think you are in it to see what you can get. how despicable.
Agreed!!!!