tmo1965 said:

nelcp777 said:

You are correct, in the draft will, Duane was listed as a son. And I will agree, there appeared to be some sort of fatherly-son relationship. The Heirs are claiming John L never supported Duane financially. In addition, they are claiming John L was not part of Duane's younger years. I do not know anybody. I have no clue why John L would put his name on the BC. Perhaps it was out of love for Vivian (the mother) or to make her not look bad (all her children on BCs have 1 father, not 2). I do not know. It is puzzling a little.

According to the Heirs arguement, Duane's father is not John L and they even listed a name. I am agreement with many orgers, just do a DNA test. If there is a match on the paternal side, then solved. If not, remove Simmons, Brianna and VN and proceed with the estate closing.

The Heirs claims that the obituary is heresay and nothing legal. I guess I can understand to a point, as the orbituary does not have to necessary contain factual information.

I agree that back in the day, the BC and death certificates would be evidentary enough (I am not a lawyer at all), but it is appearant the Heirs are trying to fight this, and in an expeditious mannner.

As far as the brother relationship, the Heirs are saying that does not matter. The law of decendents are based on paternal and maternal relationships. Since Vivian is not the mother of Prince, Duane, would be ruled out if John L is not the father. That is the headache.

If the courts rule in the favor of Brianna, VN and Simmons, then that will set a precedent that behavioral relationships are legal.

That would create massive claims. Not just for Prince's estate, but for the masses. Just think, your child has a friend, you treat that friend as though it is your child while the child is in your presence. When you pass, do you feel that child should have a cut of your estate?

I ask that only for conversation reasons, not trying to be facetious or a jerk.

My name would not be on my child's friend's birth certificate either. In court, it does not matter whether or not a parent acted as a parent to the child. Unfortunately, there are lots of parents who are not involved in their kids' lives, but those kids can, and do, inherit from these absent parents. What counts are official documents and the law. For example, if any of John L's other children were born while John L was married to their mother, but he is known not to be the biological father, according to the law, he is the father (I know this from personal experience). The fact that he is not the biological father does not matter in court, so that child would have to be counted as an heir in this case. I know this is not the situation with Duane.

Likewise, in a court of law, the fact that John L's name is on official documents as Duane's father may be enough to declare Duane's offspring as heirs of Prince, even without a dna test.

Thank you for sharing your experience. You have great points and I appreciate them. This all is very complicated.

In some states, it is extremely difficult to remove a man's name from a birth certificate if the child was born while the man was married to the mother. Even if DNA proves the child is not his, he may still be liable as a parent. There have been stories about this for the past several years: men who learned they were not the father trying to change birth certificates and terminating financial obligations. It is not easy to do. Minnesota seems to be sorting this out just like other states.

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

Just looked at the Exhibits:

The 1986 will was signed by John L.

The 1989 will was not signed by John.

From a legal standpoint, would the 1986 will have still been valid at the time of John L's passing, since it was the last signed will?

I can also add that this happened to a relative of mine. She was married to one man, yet had a child by another. Everyone, including the child, knew about it but nothing could be changed.

udo said:

An interesting opinon, see http://www.mncourts.gov/m...-14-16.pdf

Any comments?

.

And Tyka at al. respond: http://www.mncourts.gov/m...irship.pdf

1Sasha said:

I can also add that this happened to a relative of mine. She was married to one man, yet had a child by another. Everyone, including the child, knew about it but nothing could be changed.

It could have been changed if she filed for a divorce from her husband, and added the biological father as a party to the divorce to establish the parent-child relationship.

Thank you for the information.

udo said:

udo said:

An interesting opinon, see http://www.mncourts.gov/m...-14-16.pdf

Any comments?

.

And Tyka at al. respond: http://www.mncourts.gov/m...irship.pdf

Is this just legal talk?

"Despite the fact that Duane has no genetic connection to Prince, 5 the Intervenors’ claim to the Estate of Prince Rogers Nelson is based squarely on a purported parent-child relationship between John L. (Prince’s presumptive father) and Duane (the Intervenors’ father and grandfather).

MMJas said:

udo said:

.

And Tyka at al. respond: http://www.mncourts.gov/m...irship.pdf

Is this just legal talk?

"Despite the fact that Duane has no genetic connection to Prince, 5 the Intervenors’ claim to the Estate of Prince Rogers Nelson is based squarely on a purported parent-child relationship between John L. (Prince’s presumptive father) and Duane (the Intervenors’ father and grandfather).

John L is P's presumptive father because he was married to P's mother Mattie at the time of birth. If the parents are married at the time of birth, the husband is the presumed father of the child.

morningsong said:

MMJas said:

I have no idea how credible this Dixon guy, but does this not bother you guys??

"First of all, Mr. Dixon and Tyka Nelson both agree that Prince knew he was dying years ago. Prince filed this document three (3) months prior to his death in preparation for his death."

"TYKA NELSON INTERVIEW — OCTOBER 5, 2016

Tyka Nelson shocked the world with information that Mr. Dixon have been saying since the beginning of this Probate Matter. While everyone was mourning for Prince, Tyka Nelson, was preparing forPrince’s death for two years. More importantly, Tyka stated that she “mourned” for two years before Prince’s death even happened. When asked about it Tyka says the following: “I knew that it was coming,” she revealed. “He said it a couple of years ago. ‘I’ve done everything that I’ve come to do.’ I was crushed for about two years.”

"The question is, what did Prince do two years ago that can be construed as everything he came to do? Two years ago Prince gained back the master recordings from Warner Bros. Records, and executed an Exclusive Songwriter Agreement with NPG Music Publishing, LLC for all of his purported intellectual properties including collaborative works with others."

http://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/CIOMediaLibrary/Documents/MemoRodneyHDixon_10-17-16.pdf

Can somebody explain to me who this Dixon bloke is? Just a quick summary.

[Edited 10/18/16 17:20pm]

Dixon just filed those papers with that statement of him and Tyka a few days ago. He's just parroting what she said on those 2 shows a week and half ago. In fact from what I've gleaned because I'm not reading all 66 pages, he's just repeating back stuff that's already been said by others. He has not provided an ounce of evidence that he and Prince had any contact with each other. At least Prince's spiritual wife had a courier receipt with Prince signature of something she sent to him. This guy has not presented anything connecting him and Prince and it looks like he trying to say he doesn't have to, now give him $1 billion..

Yeah I saw that statement in the 66 pages. I wouldn't be suprised he also checked on the estate threads to add his info into the documents. That guy is batshit crazy and I hope he eventually goes away.

morningsong said:

PRN & Mani's divorce (Star Tribune case attached.)

http://pa.courts.state.mn...fault.aspx

the case number (27-FA-06-3597)


PRNs Probate Case

http://www.mncourts.gov/I...elson.aspx




That filing was fast. I just checked earlier this morning and it wasn't there. I'll have to look at that later myself.

.

I just can't believe they are doing this. Such an invasion of privacy.

And Now........We have Sharon Hughes filing a claim for wages from 1984 to 2016.

For her appearance on albums and album sales

For years I always thought Sharon Hughes was a pseudonym because you rarely heard about her. She was credited for female backup voice for If the Kid That Makes You Come off Ice Cream Castles the Time.

So she is actually a real person?

I totally didn't know who Sharon Hughes was. How does she rack up those years for wages?

zenarose said:

And Now........We have Sharon Hughes filing a claim for wages from 1984 to 2016.

For her appearance on albums and album sales

.

Yea, and that's only the tip of the iceberg! More to come!

ladygirl99 said:

For years I always thought Sharon Hughes was a pseudonym because you rarely heard about her. She was credited for female backup voice for If the Kid That Makes You Come off Ice Cream Castles the Time.

So she is actually a real person?

That's what she is saying in her filing.

I swear I thought Jill Jones was the who sang actually and Sharon Hughes was a pseudoym i If the Kid That Makes You Come. Jill sang a dozen of backup songs for Prince and the associaties and her voice is distinguished and others gotten the credit that explained Jill's Milli Vanilli commen she made awhile back of her sang songs for other women who weren't good singers and she never gotten credit.

Then I just look at the Prince Vault and it said Jill sang most of the song uncredited and Sharon Hughes did dialogue of the song. I am glad Prince Vault is properly giving the mention to my girl Jill.

But still how in the hell Sharon able to come up with money amount that P/estate owned her for all those years.? My goodness another one SMH.

[Edited 10/19/16 12:16pm]

cloveringold85 said:

morningsong said:

PRN & Mani's divorce (Star Tribune case attached.)

http://pa.courts.state.mn...fault.aspx

the case number (27-FA-06-3597)


PRNs Probate Case

http://www.mncourts.gov/I...elson.aspx




That filing was fast. I just checked earlier this morning and it wasn't there. I'll have to look at that later myself.

.

I just can't believe they are doing this. Such an invasion of privacy.

It's normal. Check your own hometown probate court website.

ladygirl99 said:

I swear I thought Jill Jones was the who sang actually and Sharon Hughes was a pseudoym i If the Kid That Makes You Come. Jill sang a dozen of backup songs for Prince and the associaties and her voice is distinguished and others gotten the credit that explained Jill's Milli Vanilli commen she made awhile back of her sang songs for other women who weren't good singers and she never gotten credit.

Then I just look at the Prince Vault and it said Jill sang most of the song uncredited and Sharon Hughes did dialogue of the song. I am glad Prince Vault is properly giving the mention to my girl Jill.

But still how in the hell Sharon able to come up with money amount that P/estate owned her for all those years.? My goodness another one SMH.

[Edited 10/19/16 12:16pm]

I just can't imagine waiting all these years to ask to get paid!!

zenarose said:

ladygirl99 said:

I swear I thought Jill Jones was the who sang actually and Sharon Hughes was a pseudoym i If the Kid That Makes You Come. Jill sang a dozen of backup songs for Prince and the associaties and her voice is distinguished and others gotten the credit that explained Jill's Milli Vanilli commen she made awhile back of her sang songs for other women who weren't good singers and she never gotten credit.

Then I just look at the Prince Vault and it said Jill sang most of the song uncredited and Sharon Hughes did dialogue of the song. I am glad Prince Vault is properly giving the mention to my girl Jill.

But still how in the hell Sharon able to come up with money amount that P/estate owned her for all those years.? My goodness another one SMH.

[Edited 10/19/16 12:16pm]

I just can't imagine waiting all these years to ask to get paid!!

I agree. She seems insignificant even during that Purple Rain time period. She might had been a side chick to P or even to Morris Day so its hard believed P kept her around beyond the Purple Rain era. Prince used his flavors at the moment to do the female dialogue in his songs and also the Time and then they are gone.

ladygirl99 said:

zenarose said:

I just can't imagine waiting all these years to ask to get paid!!

I agree. She seems insignificant even during that Purple Rain time period. She might had been a side chick to P or even to Morris Day so its hard believed P kept her around beyond the Purple Rain era. Prince used his flavors at the moment to do the female dialogue in his songs and also the Time and then they are gone.

Sharon is not saying she sang for P through 2016. She is claiming she was a backup singer in 83 and 84 and she wants 1/2 penny for each album sold through 2016.

Another person who does not have a copy of their contract.

zenarose said:

And Now........We have Sharon Hughes filing a claim for wages from 1984 to 2016.

For her appearance on albums and album sales

Sharon is smoking crack. She has no contract or agreement and she did not do anything but moan on the recording. What kills me is she wants a penny for each album sale. I bet Prince could not get a good accounting out of WB must less she expects one. I wish her luck.

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

ladygirl99 said:

I agree. She seems insignificant even during that Purple Rain time period. She might had been a side chick to P or even to Morris Day so its hard believed P kept her around beyond the Purple Rain era. Prince used his flavors at the moment to do the female dialogue in his songs and also the Time and then they are gone.

Sharon is not saying she sang for P through 2016. She is claiming she was a backup singer in 83 and 84 and she wants 1/2 penny for each album sold through 2016.

Another person who does not have a copy of their contract.

Oh okay I didnt see her complaint and I was replying based off the information from another poster. But good luck of her getting anything.

morningsong said:

cloveringold85 said:

.

I just can't believe they are doing this. Such an invasion of privacy.

It's normal. Check your own hometown probate court website.

.

Divorce records are usually "sealed" for several years in most states.

laurarichardson said:

zenarose said:

And Now........We have Sharon Hughes filing a claim for wages from 1984 to 2016.

For her appearance on albums and album sales

Sharon is smoking crack. She has no contract or agreement and she did not do anything but moan on the recording. What kills me is she wants a penny for each album sale. I bet Prince could not get a good accounting out of WB must less she expects one. I wish her luck.

I wonder if Kim Basinger is getting paid for her "performance". That lady was on loop

ladygirl99 said:

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

Sharon is not saying she sang for P through 2016. She is claiming she was a backup singer in 83 and 84 and she wants 1/2 penny for each album sold through 2016.

Another person who does not have a copy of their contract.

Oh okay I didnt see her complaint and I was replying based off the information from another poster. But good luck of her getting anything.

This is part of the filing:

"Immediately to date from 1984-2016

Monies (wages) unpaid are due as owed payment of wages each time an album is sold at one half penny per album sales at market price in the future for continued sales."

Maybe Sharon Hughes has misused the word "wages" here??

cloveringold85 said:

morningsong said:

It's normal. Check your own hometown probate court website.

.

Divorce records are usually "sealed" for several years in most states.

Most, if not ALL states do not seal divorce records, or any court records.

When you file a Complaint for Divorce with the Clerk of Courts (before any responsive pleadings are even filed) it is open to the public for inspection.

Divorce filings are rarely sealed.

zenarose said:

ladygirl99 said:

Oh okay I didnt see her complaint and I was replying based off the information from another poster. But good luck of her getting anything.

This is part of the filing:

"Immediately to date from 1984-2016

Monies (wages) unpaid are due as owed payment of wages each time an album is sold at one half penny per album sales at market price in the future for continued sales."

Maybe Sharon Hughes has misused the word "wages" here??

Okay thanks for the info.

I just saw her court document.

She need to sit down and go away as she didn't contribute to the song other than sang and singers generally don't get royalities unless they wrote the song or contract involved that entitle them royalities.

cloveringold85 said:

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said: