Was sued by his father, deprived of the inheritance and went into battle with his sister Israel today

A ruling by the Family Court brought to an end a three-year legal battle over the execution of a diamond will.

The deceased changed the will on the grounds that his son had stolen millions of dollars from him and his daughter.

Therefore, he bequeathed to the daughter all his property, with the complete and express exclusion of his son.

The story begins in 1999, when the son who lives in the United States persuaded his widowed father and sister, according to them, to invest a lot of money in a real estate transaction in the state of Texas.

Many years later, during which the son allegedly evaded answers as to the fate of the deal, the father discovered through private investigators that the money he had transferred to him for the deal had disappeared.

The father and daughter then filed a lawsuit in the U.S. against the son for fraud, and at the same time the father dispossessed him of his will after the financial investment he made left his estate almost completely empty.

In his will, he bequeathed all his property to his daughter and explained why he did not want to bequeath anything to his son: "He caused me great disappointment and harmed me personally. He promises, but in a routine way does not keep."

When the father died four years ago at an extreme age, the son filed an objection to the execution of the will and argued, inter alia, that the father was unfit to sign it and that the daughter had forged or influenced his signature.

The legal battle lasted for three years, until the court rejected the son's claims and ordered the execution of the will.

Adv. Krauss, Photo: Moshe Tessler

In addition, it was determined that the son would pay the legal expenses.

The original lawsuit, filed by the father and daughter against the son, is still pending in the US.

Adv. Boaz Kraus and Adv. Noa Binder Steinberg, in the absence of the daughter in Israel, estimate that the ruling will affect the struggle between the brothers.

They said that "the deceased expelled his son from his estate after he fell victim, along with his daughter, to ugly acts of robbery and fraud on the part of his son, acts which resulted in an almost complete emptying of his property. The opponent presented a completely distorted description of things.

Were we wrong?

Fixed!

If you found an error in the article, we would love for you to share it with us