,type=downsize)
In a legal saga that continues to unfold with the late Michael Jackson’s estate, his son Bigi Jackson, also known as Blanket, has taken an unexpected step by filing against his grandmother, Katherine Jackson. The 22-year-old son of the pop icon contested the use of estate funds to support Katherine’s legal battle against the executors.
In documents obtained by PEOPLE, Bigi asserts that Katherine Jackson should not be allowed to draw from Michael Jackson’s estate to finance her legal challenges against the estate’s executors, John Branca and John McClain. The dispute stems from an undisclosed recent transaction; the details remain a mystery but are speculated to involve the estate’s substantial catalog sale to Sony, estimated at $600 million.
Both Bigi and Katherine were initially united in their opposition to the estate’s proposed transaction. However, following a court ruling that favored the executors‘ decision to proceed with the sale, Bigi and his siblings accepted the verdict. In contrast, Katherine opted to appeal the decision, a move that Bigi perceives as not in their best interests.
Bigi’s legal representatives presented a compelling argument highlighting that Katherine’s appeal has slim chances of success. Therefore, they believe it would be imprudent to allocate resources to it, especially when the beneficiaries have chosen to refrain from participating in the appeal process. As a result, Bigi is taking a stand against bearing the financial burden of his grandmother’s legal pursuits. “It is readily apparent that a reversal on appeal would be an extreme longshot,” wrote lawyers on behalf of Bigi, as informed by the publication. “Given those odds, Bigi decided not to waste his resources to participate in an appeal. Nonetheless, Katherine has decided to appeal this court’s ruling. That decision is not for the benefit of the heirs.”
Bigi agrees that covering Katherine’s legal fees for her initial objection is reasonable. Still, he questions the overall amount being sought, especially considering the high hourly rates of the legal team involved. He believes that the court should intervene and determine a fair and reasonable sum, considering that beneficiaries who have opted out of the appeal should not be expected to finance it. Bigi emphasizes that avoiding any potential unfairness in the process is important.
“Katherine’s petition has the practical effect of requiring Bigi and his siblings pay for her appeal,” the filing read. “It would be unfair to make those beneficiaries shoulder this burden when they expressly decided an appeal would not be in their best interests.”