Grasshopper70399 03:23:13 AM Mar 22 2008

This is going to be interesting, because Ledger is Australian, but his child, and presumably most of his assets, are in America. In many states, you must expressly disown a child in your will in order to avoid leaving any portion of your estate to that child, and it may not even be possible to disown the child if she is a minor. Since Ledger had an outdated will that doesn't mention his daughter, obviously he never disowned her. She may be entitled to a statutory share, which must be put in trust for her until she is 18, no matter what the will says or who the executor is -- at least under American law, depending on the state. It might take a law professor specializing in wills and trusts to unravel this one. You can be sure this isn't over. What a mess.

JudeDiane 06:53:07 PM Mar 21 2008

NO, He had a will. Maybe it was outdated, but it was his responsibility to change that. Not ours. His child's mom can go to court and ask for something for her child, if she wants to do that. The family can alot some part of it for her if they choose. But Daddy is the executor of the estate, and there is no reason he should be if the job was not left to him.And if he isn't responsible enough for the job. He maybe did a poor job in the past and the uncles remember that. So why wouldn't it be thier responsibilty to remind everyone of this before it is too late to do anything about it. That's not greed. it's common sense. All the issues that surround this family, are just not our business. It would be sad if the child were left out of the money,But can the money make up for the loss of her dad? It would be sad if The family mishandled the money, but would Heath care? He's gone after all. But My thang is that it's no one's intitlement. It was Heath's and he left it to his family to do with

Purtnergon 02:45:09 PM Mar 20 2008

kodiak1115 10:29:40 AM Mar 20 2008

Purt,
whatever!
It doesnt matter what type of relationship he had with his child mother, the bottom line is simply he had a child, HIS CHILD, she is heir to everything no matter if he wanted her to be the mother or not. Its all irrelvant what the relatioship was like...who cares really, he has an heir, her daughter should get everything.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kodi~ When our lives and all that they end up meaning are the end result of what we coulda, woulda, shoulda wanted to do, come up against the cold hard facts of reality in a court of law, what you or I consider fair and equitible, doesn't matter,.....it's called the state statutes and the letter of the law that is governing the state, city, county and/or municiple code. And Yeah, it does matter,........it's called the law.

angelangeleyes38 02:00:24 PM Mar 20 2008

maybe heath never updated his will because it was the way he wanted it maybe he belived his father would be the best one to make sure his little girl would be took care of and not only that i haven't read or heard anywere were poor michell williams has ask for anything she proble is still in morn when she talks about heath you can tell she still loved him she may not care about his money at all and she may know his family well enough to know his father well do the right thing

elderclark1 01:15:31 PM Mar 20 2008

his child should be taken care of, but the mother should get nothing!! many times the mother lives off the money and the child has nothing when they grow up. the reason his parents should be a part, is because the will says so. secondly,parents make huge sacrifices for there children, his did the same. he would want his mother and father to be taken care of also. we all give back to are parents when we get older and take care of them. I SAY, GIVE THE CHILD MONEY IN A TRUST FUND WHERE THE MOTHER CANT ABUSE IT, RELEASE IT WHEN THE CHILD IS 21, GIVE THE PARENTS THERE SHARE ALSO, BECAUSE THEY RAISED HIM, AND WERE THERE ALL HIS LIFE WHEN HE WAS NOT FAMOUS. THAT IS THE FAIR THING TO DO. HIS UNCLE'S SHOULD GET NOTHING!!! THEY NEVER PAID ANY BILLS FOR HEATH WHEN HE WAS GROWING UP. AND HOLIDAYS, BIRTHDAYS DONT COUNT!!!

joiseyshore 11:49:12 AM Mar 20 2008

skip82235 09:00:35 AM Mar 20 2008

Report This! I read the article did i miss where the uncles wanted money they did not want his father to manage his estate as he screwed up his mothers estate
------
He screwed up his father's estate. Usually the executor of the will is paid for services rendered.

jiminboxers 11:19:40 AM Mar 20 2008

NICE TO BE SUCH A GREEDY FAMILY ( FATHER )

GIVE IT TO A LAWYER TO BE IN CHARGE OF TILL THE CHILD IS OLD ENOUGH TO MANAGE IT. WHATEVER HER MOTHER WILL MAKE A LOT OF MONEY SO IS IT WORTH THE FIGHTING? JUST TELL HIM " IF HE DOESN;'T DO RIGHT HE WON'T SEE HIS GRANDCHILD".

kodiak1115 10:29:40 AM Mar 20 2008

Purt,
whatever!
It doesnt matter what type of relationship he had with his child mother, the bottom line is simply he had a child, HIS CHILD, she is heir to everything no matter if he wanted her to be the mother or not. Its all irrelvant what the relatioship was like...who cares really, he has an heir, her daughter should get everything.

Purtnergon 10:17:44 AM Mar 20 2008

AS WITH EVERY PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP, EVERY COUPLE MAKE AND BREAK PROMISES AND AGREEMENTS.THIS HAPPENS IN YOUR LIFE AS WELL AS MINE, OUR FAMILIES, AND PEOPLE WE ADMIRE, RESPECT AND HOLD CLOSE TO OUR HEART, ARE THE HEARTBREAKERS AT TIMES!! WHY DO YOU ALL BELIEVE HEATH WANTED MICHELLE WILLIAMS TO HAVE HIS CHILD? MAYBE HE DIDN'T! MAYBE BOTH MICHELLE AND HEATH AGREED, THAT HE'D GO HIS WAY, SHE GO HER'S (BOTH THINKING "BROKEBACK" WOULD SUPPORT THEM INDIVIDUALLY) AND EVERYTHING WOULD BE O.K.? MAYBE MICHELLE DIDN'T WANT HEATH TO DO ANYTHING MORE, SHE WOULD "KEEP THE HOME FIRES BURNING",......JUST SO HE COULD SEE THE BABY, IN THE BEGINNING, JUST TO BE ABLE TO SEE HIM. WHY ALL HEATH'S GIRLFRIENDS
SINCE, IF HEATH "STILL LOVED MICHELLE WILLIAMS"??

mlhofer 10:14:48 AM Mar 20 2008

It should be put away til Maltilda turns 25 yrs of age unless for colledge tuition ONLY I am sure that is what Heath would of wanted to begin with.

ross87001 10:01:26 AM Mar 20 2008

Figures they have to argue over this bullsh@t, it should all go to the kid

kodiak1115 09:56:28 AM Mar 20 2008

It was important for him to have a will especially when he started to earn huge amounts of money, of course he needs to "will" it to someone when he does not have an immediate family of his own. So its understandable his estate would go to who he designates and that would be the parents and siblings. But! When he had a child it all changes, when he had that baby girl she just became heir to everything.
The parents should be getting nothing not one cent, all his estate should be put away until the child is an adult. It all HERS.

kodiak1115 09:50:49 AM Mar 20 2008

His child should inherit the entire estate, all of it. It should be placed in trust until she is a legal adult.

babydollz110twz2 09:35:31 AM Mar 20 2008

If anyone want to take care of his daughter they would put a lawyer incharge of all of his assets and have it made up that she inherits all of "her share" when she reaches a certain age and that the lawyer will manage it until she reaches that age.

claudijean51 09:33:31 AM Mar 20 2008

they should all shut up and leave the money locked in an account that the little girl cant get to nor anyone else...and when she is 18-21 years of age she can have it for school or w/e she wants or needs at that time. adults act inhuman with these situations, it should just be the daughters. to me that will is void...cause since then he had a daughter and an exwife...but still the daughter was his lite as they have said...
it should all go to the little girl....or donation to cancer or better drug od studies... HA