When a beneficiary says they cannot get a clear picture of an estate’s finances, the issue is rarely only about money. It is about trust, transparency, and whether the person managing a loved one’s legacy is following the rules. A high-profile dispute over Michael Jackson’s estate, now playing out in a Los Angeles courtroom, shows how these conflicts arise and what California beneficiaries can do when they face something similar.
What Happened
According to reports, Paris Jackson has asked a Los Angeles probate court to reduce the compensation tied to running her late father’s estate. In a motion reportedly filed on October 23, 2026, she alleges that executor John Branca did not fully comply with an April 24, 2026 court order requiring updated financial accountings. Her attorneys reportedly claim that a September 15 deadline was missed, that the court pushed it to September 30, and that the documents eventually filed still lacked required information.
The compensation at issue is reportedly about $109.2 million. That is a combined figure covering Branca, the late co-executor John McClain, and a law firm. It is not a sum sought by one person. The motion reportedly asks the court to drop the rate from 15 percent to 10 percent of the estate’s gross entertainment-related income for 2023 and 2024. It also asks the court to keep the lower rate until complete and accurate records are produced.
The filing reportedly makes several other claims:
- About $90.9 million was paid out before the court approved it.
- The 2024 accounting contains a discrepancy of roughly $972,000.
- Jackson should be reimbursed for her legal fees and costs under California Probate Code section 12205.
The estate strongly disputes these claims. A spokesperson reportedly said that the executors waived traditional executor compensation from the outset. According to the spokesperson, they are instead paid a separate, court-approved management fee for operating the estate’s business.
Reports also note an earlier ruling. In May 2026, a judge ordered three lawyers connected to the estate to return $625,000 in bonuses because the payments had not been shown to be justified. A hearing on the new motion is reportedly set for December 4, 2026. No ruling has been made, and the new allegations remain unproven.
Who May Be Liable
We are not commenting on the merits of the Jackson matter. Speaking generally, when a California beneficiary believes an estate or trust has been mishandled, several parties could face responsibility:
- The executor, administrator, or trustee. As a fiduciary, this person owes beneficiaries duties of loyalty, care, and disclosure. A fiduciary who allegedly fails to account, overpays themselves, or ignores court orders could be liable for resulting losses.
- A co-fiduciary or that person’s estate. When two people serve together, each may be responsible for the other’s conduct in some situations. If a co-fiduciary has died, claims may in some cases be pursued against their own estate.
- Attorneys and other paid professionals. Fees paid from estate funds must generally be reasonable and properly authorized. The reported May 2026 order requiring the return of bonuses shows that courts may claw back payments that are not justified.
- A bonding company. If the executor posted a probate bond, the surety may be responsible for losses up to the bond amount.
- Third parties holding estate assets. People who wrongfully took or kept estate property may be required to return it.
Legal Theories That May Apply
- Breach of fiduciary duty: A fiduciary who allegedly puts personal interests first or mismanages assets may be held responsible for the harm.
- Petition to compel an accounting: Beneficiaries may ask the court to order a full, detailed account when records are missing or incomplete.
- Objection to an accounting or fee request: Beneficiaries can challenge an account or a compensation request before the court approves it.
- Reduction of compensation for delay (Probate Code §12205): A court may reduce fees when administration takes longer than it should because of the fiduciary or the attorney.
- Surcharge: The court may order a fiduciary to personally repay losses caused by a breach.
- Recovery of estate property (Probate Code §§850, 859): Beneficiaries may petition to recover wrongfully taken property. Enhanced damages may apply when the taking is found to be in bad faith.
- Removal of the fiduciary (Probate Code §8502): A court may replace a personal representative for reasons such as mismanagement or long neglect of duties.
Damages Victims May Recover
Estate disputes look different from injury cases. The “damages” usually involve restoring what the estate or trust lost. Depending on the facts, beneficiaries may be able to recover:
- Surcharged losses: Money the estate lost because of alleged mismanagement or self-dealing.
- Disgorgement of fees: Return of compensation paid without approval or found to be unreasonable.
- Reduced future compensation: A lower fee rate or a fee cut tied to delay.
- Interest and lost earnings: Amounts the money could have earned if properly handled.
- Double damages: Twice the value of property wrongfully taken in bad faith, under Probate Code section 859.
- Attorney’s fees and costs: Available in certain circumstances, though California generally requires each side to pay its own lawyers.
- Punitive damages: In narrow cases involving fraud, oppression, or malice under Civil Code section 3294.
It also helps to know how executor pay normally works. For ordinary services, Probate Code section 10800 sets a statutory fee on a sliding percentage of the estate’s value. Under section 10801, courts may approve extra pay for extraordinary services. Large, business-heavy estates sometimes use different, court-approved arrangements, which appears to be part of the disagreement here.
Evidence That Strengthens a Case
In accounting and compensation disputes, the paper trail often decides the outcome. Helpful evidence includes:
- Court orders and deadlines: Records showing what the fiduciary was ordered to produce and when.
- Filed accountings and inventories: Account documents to compare against bank and brokerage statements.
- Fee records: Fee agreements, invoices, and any court orders approving compensation.
- Payment proof: Records showing when fees or bonuses were actually paid compared with when they were approved.
- Income records: Royalty, licensing, and other income statements for estates with business or creative assets.
- Your requests for information: Written requests you sent and the responses you received, or did not receive.
- Forensic accountant reports: An expert can identify gaps, unexplained transfers, or discrepancies.
- Prior court findings: Earlier rulings about improper payments or incomplete disclosures.
What to Do Next
If you suspect an estate or trust is being mishandled, take careful, measured steps:
- Request information in writing. Ask the executor or trustee for an accounting and keep copies of every request.
- Preserve documents. Save statements, emails, notices, and court filings you receive.
- Do not sign releases or waivers without advice. Approving an account or signing a receipt may limit your ability to object later.
- Watch the court calendar. Objections to an account generally must be raised before the court approves it.
- Mind the time limits. Trust-related claims can be subject to limits of just a few years, sometimes shorter.
- Get independent legal advice. The estate’s attorney represents the fiduciary, not you.
If you or a loved one is a beneficiary who has been kept in the dark about an estate or trust, LA | Estate Plans can help you understand your rights and options. Visit https://laestateplans.com to schedule a confidential consultation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I make an executor show me where the estate’s money went?
Generally, yes. In California, a personal representative must account to the probate court, and beneficiaries may petition the court to compel an accounting if the executor fails to provide one. If the records produced are allegedly incomplete, the court may order more detail.
How much is an executor allowed to be paid in California?
For ordinary services, Probate Code section 10800 sets a statutory fee based on a sliding percentage of the estate’s value, and the court may approve extra pay for extraordinary services. A will or a court order may set up a different arrangement. Beneficiaries can generally object to a compensation request before the court approves it.
Can a judge reduce an executor’s fees if the estate is dragging on?
It may be possible. Probate Code section 12205 allows a court to reduce compensation for a personal representative or attorney when administration takes longer than it should because of their delay. Whether a reduction is appropriate depends on the facts and is up to the court’s discretion.
What if the executor already paid themselves without court approval?
Beneficiaries may be able to ask the court to order the money returned, possibly with interest, and to surcharge the executor for any losses. If the court finds property was taken in bad faith, Probate Code section 859 may allow recovery of twice its value. These remedies depend on proof, and the executor may have defenses such as prior authorization.
How long do I have to challenge an executor or trustee in California?
Deadlines vary by situation. Objections to a probate accounting usually must be raised before the court approves that account, and approved accounts can be hard to reopen. Trust beneficiaries may face a three-year limit that can begin once they receive a report adequately disclosing the problem, so acting early matters.
Can I get my attorney’s fees paid if I win a dispute over an estate?
Sometimes. California generally requires each side to pay its own lawyers, but some statutes and doctrines allow fee recovery, such as certain bad-faith cases under Probate Code section 859. Paris Jackson is reportedly seeking reimbursement of her fees, but no ruling has been made on that request.
Could an executor be removed for not providing financial records?
Possibly. Under Probate Code section 8502, a court may remove a personal representative for reasons that include mismanaging the estate or long neglecting their duties. Repeated failures to follow court orders could be relevant, but removal is a serious step and courts weigh all the circumstances.
Original reporting: marca.com.