Alan Thicke’s sons should drop their petition to have a judge confirm a prenuptial agreement between their father and stepmother because there is nothing to litigate, an attorney for the late entertainer’s widow states in new court papers.

On May 16, “Blurred Lines” singer Robin Thicke and his brother, Brennan Thicke, filed a Los Angeles Superior Court petition asking the court to uphold the accord their father and his third wife, Tanya Callau Thicke, had agreed to prior to their 2005 wedding. The siblings are co-trustees of the Thicke Living Trust created in March 1998.

Adam Streisand, the attorney for Tanya Thicke, filed court papers Thursday taking the brothers and their petition to task, saying they are wasting the trust’s resources with needless litigation.

“While for Brennan and Robin attempting to tarnish Tanya’s name in the press may be worth the cost of depleting their inheritances, such conduct is abhorrent to their … duties as co-trustees and should end now,” Streisand states in his court papers.

The siblings’ petition alleges 41-year-old Tanya Thicke said she would take her claims to the news media unless her community property claims are recognized by the co-trustees. They claim she is seeking more than what their father left her, which consists of $500,000 from a life insurance policy, 25 percent of her husband’s personal effects, all the furniture at the actor’s ranch property, all death benefits from his pensions and multiple union memberships and 40 percent of the estate that remained.

The sons recently filed court papers of their own stating that Tanya Thicke previously challenged the estate’s plan, including the prenuptial agreement and various items of the trust.  Attached to the son’s attorneys’ court papers is a copy of a letter written by Streisand in January to one of the petitioners’ lawyers, David Cartano, in which Streisand addresses the prenuptial agreement.

“I have to say I’ve never seen anything quite like this pre,” Streisand wrote. “Let me just begin by saying that there is no chance the pre could withstand a legal challenge.”

Streisand calls the prenuptial agreement “about the worst document I think I have ever seen a lawyer generate. It is impossible to make any sense of the document and whatever it is supposed to mean, it certainly would not constitute a waiver of any community property rights.”

But Streisand states in his court papers that the letter was made public in violation of the sons’ attorneys ethical duties as lawyers. He said the document was “intended as a settlement communication and marked as privileged and confidential” and was sent about four months before the sons filed their petition.

There is currently nothing for a court to provide instruction to the parties, according to Streisand’s court papers.

“It is a fabricated request as cover for an ulterior purpose,” Streisand states in his court papers.

Tanya Thicke believes the trust is “not yet in a position to be distributed” and the brothers “have not so much as even provided a proposed distribution plan, much less an accounting of the trust’s assets, to the beneficiaries or the court,” according to Streisand’s court papers.

But the siblings’ attorneys state in their court papers that in light of the Streisand letter, the petitioner’s did not ignore the widow’s claims, but instead acted responsibly by filing the petition to resolve the issues that she raised.

The petition asks for such additional instructions, including the extent to which the ranch and other trust assets are to be distributed to Tanya Thicke and the other beneficiaries, according to the sons’ lawyers’ court papers.

“Try as she may to ignore now ignore these issues for purposes of these motions, Tanya cannot run, nor can she hide, from them,” the sons’ lawyers’ state in their court papers.

A hearing on Tanya Thicke’s dismissal motion is scheduled Sept. 14.

Thicke died Dec. 13 at age 69 of a ruptured aorta. He had collapsed while playing ice hockey in Burbank.

–City News Service

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.