- 21 -
above-quoted paragraph in the 1994 plan for settlement because
the children were concerned about whether their parents would
treat them, as a group, fairly when they decided how to divide
their respective assets among their children. As reflected in
the above-quoted paragraph, the children intended and agreed that
they would not settle and resolve any of the issues involved in
the litigation among the children and the children’s concerns
regarding Mr. Stone’s and Ms. Stone’s assets unless their parents
agreed to make changes to their respective estate plans that were
consistent with the provisions of the 1994 plan for settlement
relating to such concerns.
In the summer of 1994, Mr. Stone retained David A. Merline
(Mr. Merline) to prepare a will for him. Ms. Stone did not
retain Mr. Merline; at all relevant times she had her own coun-
sel.
After execution of the 1994 plan for settlement, issues
arose with respect to the scope of the authority of the three
independent, qualified trustees whom, according to the 1994 plan
for settlement, the Probate Court was to select from the four
candidates nominated by the children. Issues also arose with
respect to whether such three independent, qualified trustees
would be fully indemnified in the event of any further litigation
against such trustees by any of the children. Because of the
unresolved issues relating to the scope of authority and indemni-
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011