COURTHOUSE >> A claim by the son of the late R&B singer and songwriter Teddy Pendergrass that he was entitled to his father’s estate under a May 2009 will “was a fabrication,” a Montgomery County judge has ruled, adding he found the will “to be a forged document.”

“We believe the proponent’s tall tale was hatched when he learned he was being disinherited by his father,” Orphans’ Court Judge Stanley R. Ott wrote in an Oct. 14 order striking the decree of probate filed by Theodore D. Pendergrass II.

You are viewing: Who Lives In Teddy Pendergrass House Now

The judge’s ruling essentially gives control of the musician’s estate to his widow, second wife Joan Pendergrass, who contended that a will dated March 25, 2009, and a codicil dated Oct. 17, 2009, earmarked her as heir to the estate and left the singer’s son out. Joan Pendergrass, an executive manager of an athletic shoe company, met the musician in 2006, and they were married two years later, according to court papers.

The estimated value of the estate has not been revealed. The battle was unique because it didn’t deal with traditional items such as bank accounts and property but with royalties and the music legend’s legacy and the use of his name.

“My client respectfully disagrees with the court’s ruling and is considering his appellate option,” said Timothy Holman, the lawyer who represented the younger Pendergrass.

Any appeal would be filed with state Superior Court.

Read more : Who Created Zyn

Testimony during an eight-day trial earlier this year revealed the elder Pendergrass, who lived in Lower Merion and who was left a quadriplegic after a 1982 car crash in Philadelphia, had a colonoscopy in May 2009 and was diagnosed with colon cancer for which he underwent surgery to remove a tumor in June 2009. Pendergrass died on Jan. 13, 2010, after spending many months in a hospital.

The younger Pendergrass claimed a will executed by his father during a secretly arranged meeting on the side of a road in Delaware on May 24, 2009, named him executor and beneficiary of his late father’s estate. One issue explored during the court battle was whether the musician, who had a driver and traveled in a specially equipped van, could have left his Flat Rock Road home that day, without nurses being aware, to finalize a will that named his son as beneficiary.

The judge said many parts of the younger Pendergrass’ case “did not ring true,” including his claim that his musician father spirited relatives away for several hours on May 24, 2009, without telling them the purpose of the trip; his contention that the musician orchestrated “this clandestine signing of a homemade will,” despite his having used the services of attorneys to procure and execute at least two prior wills; and his insistence that the musician downloaded the will onto a flash drive.

That alleged flash drive, nor a computer hard drive that could back it up, was ever presented as evidence. Pendergrass claimed he returned the flash drive to his father and that the hard drive of the computer on which he printed a copy of the will had crashed, according to testimony.

Ott pointed out that Gordon Nicholson, a private duty nurse who cared for the elder Pendergrass at his Lower Merion home in 2009 “and a most credible witness,” testified he helped the musician with computer issues and “was certain the decedent never touched a flash drive.”

Other nurses who cared for Pendergrass on May 24, referring to their shift notes, “stated definitively that the decedent did not leave the residence at any time on the afternoon in question,” the judge wrote, adding the witnesses, who also testified a nurse always went with the musician when he left his house, were credible.

Read more : Who Makes The Best Nutcrackers

The judge, according to his ruling, found that the younger Pendergrass’ testimony “was wholly lacking in credibility” and that there was overwhelming evidence that the May 24 will “was fraudulent.”

“We find, by clear and convincing evidence, that the (younger Pendergrass’) entire case was a fabrication,” Ott wrote, adding the younger Pendergrass’ motive was “to wrest control of the decedent’s estate” for his benefit.

Joan Pendergrass, who claimed to have a conflicting document that gave her control of the estate, had the burden of proving that the will naming the younger Pendergrass as beneficiary was not valid. The judge noted he found the testimony of Joan Pendergrass was “straightforward and highly creditable.”

During the trial, witnesses, including nurses, the musician’s former lawyers, cousins, friends and even women who once dated the elder Pendergrass, testified on behalf of Joan Pendergrass that the musician, known for hits such as “If You Don’t Know Me By Now,” was not physically capable of signing anything and confided in them about his wishes, including that he didn’t want to leave his children an inheritance and “wanted them to work for it … make their own way in life.”

Witnesses testified the musician wanted his wife to take over his estate and communicated that he wanted to remove his son from his will “because he was disappointed in him,” according to court papers.

The younger Pendergrass, a financial advisor, testified he observed his father write his initials “numerous times” and that he often drove his father in his van with and without a nurse. He also denied any estrangement with his father and relied on several other witnesses to support his claims.

During his testimony earlier this year, the younger Pendergrass claimed his father summoned him to his home in May 2009 and told him he wanted help in executing a will and wanted Pendergrass II to take care of the family.

Source: https://t-tees.com
Category: WHO