Carroll Shelby - Wife vs. Kids in WAR Over Auto Legend's Body

[brianspony]

[07SGT]

Some have obviously missed the point here. It is not a question of whether your spouse or your children have a right to determine your final plans. The individual has those rights and has the right to set those forth, in writing, so as to ensure his or her last requests are honored. That person has the right to override the spouse or the children, or anyone else, if their request is reasonable, lawful, and documented with a court of competent jurisdiction. If CS wanted to be cremated and his ashes divided equally between his children and his parents that was his business and his last requests. It would certainly seem reasonable and certainly not illegal. The documents were signed and filed with the proper court. And as far as his wife it is no secret he had filed for divorce quite some time before his death.

 

So with all the pontificating present here ask yourself. Should a person that is in the process of a divorce have the right to direct that his children receive his ashes and that a portion be buried with his parents. The courts will usually abide by the last request if it is reasonable, properly filed, and has no reason to believe there is anything unlawful or improper going

on.

 

Some seem to think that a spouse, even when in the process of being divorced, has 100% control and that is just not correct. A last will and testament and many estates allow for the deceased to divide his assets and personal effects to not only his or her spouse but also to children and even friends, or charities or foundations. After all the self aggrandizing statements here I would think we should all agree that CS's last wishes should be followed, whatever they were. And we have a document, on record, stating what his last wishes were. Who are we, or a spouse, friend, enemy, or whomever, to argue. Instead of accepting his last wishes someone chose to allow him to be kept on ice in a morgue while they argued. That took away from his dignity and his being allowed to be buried promptly and with dignity. I doubt if anyone can argue with this. But I am sure some will.

[07SGT4578]

Great post!!!

 

(null)

[2010KonaBlueGT]

Some have obviously missed the point here. It is not a question of whether your spouse or your children have a right to determine your final plans. The individual has those rights and has the right to set those forth, in writing, so as to ensure his or her last requests are honored. That person has the right to override the spouse or the children, or anyone else, if their request is reasonable, lawful, and documented with a court of competent jurisdiction. If CS wanted to be cremated and his ashes divided equally between his children and his parents that was his business and his last requests. It would certainly seem reasonable and certainly not illegal. The documents were signed and filed with the proper court. And as far as his wife it is no secret he had filed for divorce quite some time before his death.

 

So with all the pontificating present here ask yourself. Should a person that is in the process of a divorce have the right to direct that his children receive his ashes and that a portion be buried with his parents. The courts will usually abide by the last request if it is reasonable, properly filed, and has no reason to believe there is anything unlawful or improper going

on.

 

Some seem to think that a spouse, even when in the process of being divorced, has 100% control and that is just not correct. A last will and testament and many estates allow for the deceased to divide his assets and personal effects to not only his or her spouse but also to children and even friends, or charities or foundations. After all the self aggrandizing statements here I would think we should all agree that CS's last wishes should be followed, whatever they were. And we have a document, on record, stating what his last wishes were. Who are we, or a spouse, friend, enemy, or whomever, to argue. Instead of accepting his last wishes someone chose to allow him to be kept on ice in a morgue while they argued. That took away from his dignity and his being allowed to be buried promptly and with dignity. I doubt if anyone can argue with this. But I am sure some will.

 

 

You logic is flawed.

 

The problem is, THERE WAS NO DIVORCE. His *children* contend that he filled out divorce papers....but NEVER FILED THEM. Then they say he wanted a annulment. I don't know of *any* annulment granted after 1 year of marriage. Carroll and Cleo were married, for how long? And how many people *here* (on TS) have personally seen Carroll and Cleo together, harmoniously, multiple times (within the alleged time frame of the so claimed "divorce period")?

 

The next problem is, Cleo is allegedly saying (via court papers) that the "documents" the Children say exist, were signed under false pretenses.

 

Everything you cite is from the children's perspective/statements (i.e. one sided). There are two sides to every story and Cleo has not made a statement in regards to these issues.

 

 

 

Phill

[07SGT]

Au contraire. All we can go by is the reports since neither you or me have personal knowledge. And the reports are that CS filed for divorce in 2010 and filed for an annulment in April 2012. Those are the court records and the courts take judicial notice of such filings. They were also estranged for those periods. http://www.tmz.com/2...th-body-family/

 

 

Yes one can be seen with an ex spouse or an estranged spouse and be polite in public. I am sure they were not trying to make their differences public. That is their business and none of yours or mine. If they were happy so be it. If they wanted to give the appearance of being happy so be it. Again, it is their business and not yours, mine, or others on this site.

 

You attack my logic as flawed. I stated that a person has the right to leave their assets or make final arrangements when they leave this earth. I stated a person's spouse is not necessarily in control of the body or the estate when the person dies and this is correct. And the spouse does not necessarily inherit everything, including control of the body. And that is fact. That is the purpose of a Last Will and Testament, so the deceased has the final say on the disposition of his body, funeral planning, burial, and division of assets. A person is not required to leave everything to his spouse. In most states a person is required to leave a minimum percentage to their spouse but not 100%. You can decide to leave your assets and personal property to relatives (plural), friends (plural), charities (plural) foundations (plural), businesses, etc. That is fact. Not flawed logic. It is not only fact, it is law. And yes marriages can be annulled after more than one year. Hell you can leave part of your estate to your wife, part to your kids and part to your mistress and or girl friend/boyfriend if you so decide. What matters is having an attorney that is familiar with the laws and requirements of your particular state and if there is precedent. CS was well versed in legal controversies over the years and had attorneys. This is not conjecture. Just fact. BTW- I am personally familiar with those that have obtained an annulment after being married for more than a year. Usually, if there are grounds such as deception, etc, then the other party has, in some states, up to four years to file for an annulment. Again, just fact. The law is not necessarily based on logic. Law is based on statute or common law and oft defies logic. The law is what it is .........until changed.

BTW- a spouse is usually the recipient of the entire estate and has control over the burial, etc, if the deceased dies in what is known as in testate. But if there is a will or documents filed with the court then those documents usually take precedent. Again, fact, not logic.

[2010KonaBlueGT]

Au contraire. All we can go by is the reports since neither you or me have personal knowledge. And the reports are that CS filed for divorce in 2010 and filed for an annulment in April 2012. Those are the court records and the courts take judicial notice of such filings. They were also estranged for those periods. http://www.tmz.com/2...th-body-family/

<SNIP>

BTW- a spouse is usually the recipient of the entire estate and has control over the burial, etc, if the deceased dies in what is known as in testate. But if there is a will or documents filed with the court then those documents usually take precedent. Again, fact, not logic.

 

 

You are correct in that the only "sources" we both have are the articles posted here and elsewhere on the Internet. And those sources are what I am citing in *my* opinions regarding this issue.

 

Check those sources one more time. It was reported that the divorce you cite (in one of the articles posted HERE) was never FILED with the courts. That means there was *never* a divorce, let alone the start of divorce proceedings. Just the filling out of divorce papers does not make a divorce, nor does the filing for divorce. It has to be litigated in a Court of Law, before a Judge makes a judgement and grants the divorce (i.e dissolution of marriage).

 

As per the annulment you cite; Again, check your sources. That was allegedly filed in a period when Cleo asserts that Carroll was not of the mindset to file it, AND (correct me if I'm wrong) I don't believe a annulment can be granted after 1 year of marriage.

 

Regarding a Last Will And Testament: I don't recall seeing ANYWHERE that there is a Will in place. At least not one prior to Carrroll's health deteriorating to the point it was in the last few months of his life.

 

For the assertion that his Children somehow have authority over remains (vs. his wife) because "he knew them longer"; My mother has known me longer than my wife so does my mother have the say so over what happens to my remains after I die, versus my wife? Of course not, my WIFE does. As I said, she (Cleo) is his NEXT OF KIN and his HEIR. She is not his *sole* heir but she is the next in line. His children are Heirs, but not *next* of kin. Next of kin is (in this order); WIFE, Children, Grandchildren, Parent, Grand Parent, Uncle/Aunt. If no wife is present, his Children would be "next of kin". No children? Then Grandkids. None of them? Parent....etc. etc. etc.

 

The FACT is, Cleo Shelby is Carroll Shelby's Next Of Kin. Period. No divorce was ever granted. No annulment was ever granted. They were still *legally* married which makes Cleo Shelby the heir to his Estate.

 

IF there is a Will stating said Children get XYZ, then obviously that over rules her *exclusive* rights to his estate AND his remains. So far, I have seen no evidence of a legal Will.

 

 

Phill

[2010KonaBlueGT]

http://www.tmz.com/2...th-body-family/

 

 

To add: That is the FIRST report we saw here of this mess. Read all subsequent articles & reports posted and you will find more on the so called "divorce" and its status.

 

And as I said when this first one came out..."Consider the source". TMZ isn't what I consider an overly credible "News" site.

 

Fox "News" isn't much better in my opinion but at leas they are a recognized mainstream media. I try to take everything as a whole and weigh it all out to come to the conclusion I have come to. Not just one article that fits my opinion.

 

 

Phill

[David Hawkins]

Some have obviously missed the point here. It is not a question of whether your spouse or your children have a right to determine your final plans. The individual has those rights and has the right to set those forth, in writing, so as to ensure his or her last requests are honored. That person has the right to override the spouse or the children, or anyone else, if their request is reasonable, lawful, and documented with a court of competent jurisdiction. If CS wanted to be cremated and his ashes divided equally between his children and his parents that was his business and his last requests. It would certainly seem reasonable and certainly not illegal. The documents were signed and filed with the proper court. And as far as his wife it is no secret he had filed for divorce quite some time before his death.

 

So with all the pontificating present here ask yourself. Should a person that is in the process of a divorce have the right to direct that his children receive his ashes and that a portion be buried with his parents. The courts will usually abide by the last request if it is reasonable, properly filed, and has no reason to believe there is anything unlawful or improper going

on.

 

Some seem to think that a spouse, even when in the process of being divorced, has 100% control and that is just not correct. A last will and testament and many estates allow for the deceased to divide his assets and personal effects to not only his or her spouse but also to children and even friends, or charities or foundations. After all the self aggrandizing statements here I would think we should all agree that CS's last wishes should be followed, whatever they were. And we have a document, on record, stating what his last wishes were. Who are we, or a spouse, friend, enemy, or whomever, to argue. Instead of accepting his last wishes someone chose to allow him to be kept on ice in a morgue while they argued. That took away from his dignity and his being allowed to be buried promptly and with dignity. I doubt if anyone can argue with this. But I am sure some will.

 

 

 

IF, and this is a BIG if, you are right, then WHY did his Kids make a Deal instead of taking it all the way to Court? The fact that they made a Deal tells me that something was not adding up.

[07SGT4578]

David, have you stopped to think that maybe, just maybe they are tired of fighting this and just want their dad burried? Don't you think you would be if in their shoes?

[twicebitten]

i do not know ,but the anullment issue just doesnt seem right.

[07SGT]

You are correct in that the only "sources" we both have are the articles posted here and elsewhere on the Internet. And those sources are what I am citing in *my* opinions regarding this issue.

 

Check those sources one more time. It was reported that the divorce you cite (in one of the articles posted HERE) was never FILED with the courts. That means there was *never* a divorce, let alone the start of divorce proceedings. Just the filling out of divorce papers does not make a divorce, nor does the filing for divorce. It has to be litigated in a Court of Law, before a Judge makes a judgement and grants the divorce (i.e dissolution of marriage). I never said there was a divorce. Rather I stated he had filed for a divorce. And that is supported by this news article"

Shelby, famous for making Cobra and Mustang sports cars, was legally married to Cleo Shelby when he

 

died May 10

in Dallas at the age of 89, but they became estranged after he filed for divorce in 2010." Source- FOX news, as listed below.

 

Read more:

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2012/06/07/children-and-estranged-wife-sports-car-legend-carroll-shelby-in-legal-battle/#ixzz21xPGzpbM And yes I am well aware the divorce was not final. But it certainly does show the intent of CS. And again, I never said the divorce was final. Read my statements again. For the first time.

 

 

As per the annulment you cite; Again, check your sources. That was allegedly filed in a period when Cleo asserts that Carroll was not of the mindset to file it, AND (correct me if I'm wrong) I don't believe a annulment can be granted after 1 year of marriage OK, Cleo states CS was not of the mindset to file. But CS did file and there were seven witnesses. We must assume the standard boiler plate legal language "...of sound mind and body... " were incorporated in to the statement. The statement was drawn up by an attorney. And why should we take Cleo's word over the word of seven witnesses and CS himself? And as I stated before I have personal knowledge of a person whose marriage was annulled after almost four years of marriage. Usually you have up to four years after discovery of the basis of the annulment. This comes down to the classic "What did you know and when did you know it." You can obtain an annulment 20 years later if you find the marriage was based on deception and that is what the court records for CS stated. He state, in the filings, that Cleo misled him. AGAIN, CS SUED MANY PEOPLE OVER THE YEARS AND HAD MANY ATTORNEYS. THEY ADVISED HIM WHAT HE COULD OR COULD NOT DO. THEY, AS OPPOSED TO OTHERS WHO ONLY OPINE, ACTUALLY KNOW THE LAW.

 

Regarding a Last Will And Testament: I don't recall seeing ANYWHERE that there is a Will in place. At least not one prior to Carrroll's health deteriorating to the point it was in the last few months of his life. t I also am not aware of a will. However, the affidavit signed by CS, presumably drafted by an attorney, and witnessed by seven people and notarized, serves the purpose here. The purpose was to declare CS intentions for the disposition of his body upon his death. That is the point of discussion here. So, wrong again.

 

For the assertion that his Children somehow have authority over remains (vs. his wife) because "he knew them longer"; My mother has known me longer than my wife so does my mother have the say so over what happens to my remains after I die, versus my wife? Of course not, my WIFE does. As I said, she (Cleo) is his NEXT OF KIN and his HEIR. She is not his *sole* heir but she is the next in line. His children are Heirs, but not *next* of kin. Next of kin is (in this order); WIFE, Children, Grandchildren, Parent, Grand Parent, Uncle/Aunt. If no wife is present, his Children would be "next of kin". No children? Then Grandkids. None of them? Parent....etc. etc. etc. You are correct that Cleo is his next of kin until such time as a divorce or annulment is final. And the divorce was not final nor was the annulment. However, one can still stipulate the disposition of their body and assets and everything does not necessarily go to the next of kin. Have you not read where a person has died and divides his estate between spouse, children, possibly girlfriends, charities, etc? It happens every day. Again, just because one is the next of kin does not guarantee you receive all the assets. Sorry, but it is not the law. I am sure everyone here has read news stories where there is a bitter contestment of a last will and testament. That is because they do not agree. So, wrong again.

 

The FACT is, Cleo Shelby is Carroll Shelby's Next Of Kin. Period. No divorce was ever granted. No annulment was ever granted. They were still *legally* married which makes Cleo Shelby the heir to his Estate.

 

IF there is a Will stating said Children get XYZ, then obviously that over rules her *exclusive* rights to his estate AND his remains. So far, I have seen no evidence of a legal Will.

Please re to above. Just because one is the next of kin does not guarantee sole inheritance. Please re to below.

 

However, the below is the general spousal rule. It gets more complicated if it's a second marriage. Here's a link you can follow to find the rules applicable to your specific situation:

http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title29/ar1/ch2.html

 

IC 29-1-2-1

Estate distribution

Sec. 1. (a) The estate of a person dying intestate shall descend and be distributed as provided in this section.

(B) Except as otherwise provided in subsection ©, the surviving spouse shall receive the following share:

(1) One-half (1/2) of the net estate if the intestate is survived by at least one (1) child or by the issue of at least one (1) deceased child.

(2) Three-fourths (3/4) of the net estate, if there is no surviving issue, but the intestate is survived by one (1) or both of the intestate's parents.

(3) All of the net estate, if there is no surviving issue or parent.

 

 

 

Phill

 

Phil, no offense but the problem here is you are arguing based on logic and opinion as opposed to fact. Carroll did have a will as we have been told he left everything to his Foundation. Are you saying that simply because he was still married to Cleo that she should inherit everything rather than the Foundation? I must assume you do not believe that. Again, a person can direct their final disposition of their body and distribution of their assets. This is done through a will or an affidavit. If the person dies in testate then the courts usually follow a pre-determined equity distribution as listed above. These issues are determined through Probate Court. I think you are well intentioned here but are not well versed in this subject. What I have cited are facts and is the law.

 

Since this thread is taking on the appearance of a personal disagreement I will not comment further. I have stated that CS had the right to determine the final disposition of his remains and the distribution of his remains and his assets. That is fact. I am sure neither you or anyone else will argue that CS did not have those rights. Good Luck!

[07SGT4578]

[Frank S]

Didn't say it wasn't legal. Just sayin it isn't nice. As you grow older and wiser you're going to realize that things that rattle around in your brain are sometimes best left unsaid...

 

 

Your donations are admirable and, I'm certain, appreciated.

 

Your statement as quoted is QED.

[twobjshelbys]

http://www.tmz.com/2...th-body-family/

 

 

 

 

 

OOOOOHHHH! TMZ. Now there's a reliable source!

[twobjshelbys]

Hey Grasshopper,

 

Old wise hiker in the Grand Canyon once told me that along the trail you will run into a rattle snake. He told me I would have two choices:

 

1. go up and kick it and get it really P****d off. Then it'll hiss at you and you'll kick it back again. Neither of you will win.

2. Make a wide swath, avoid the disagreeable contact, and make progress on the trail.

 

I detect a rattle snake. Best thing to do is follow advice #2.

 

P.S. That was wisely applied in real practice on a GC hike last summer. Snake really tried to get us riled up, didn't work.

 

PPS. Hey rattler, it's done. Let the trail alone.