Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Good morning, Welcome to Life Happens Radio. Are you prepared?
This is our weekly radio program for baby boomers and
their families. We address the challenges we all face as
we age. We talk about aging as a lifestyle, the
issues that must be confronted, and the careful planning that's
required to avoid crises in the future. Life Happens will
provide you with tools to educate and prepare yourself for
events like retirement, protecting your income and assets, planning to
(00:22):
pay for nursing, home and home care, special needs, wills
and trusts, and planning for an untimely death. Also, it
will plan you maybe stay out of court, as we
will get into today. Aaron Connor from Pierre O'Connor and Strauss,
joined by my litigation compadre. We could say Brent Stack,
(00:43):
Good morning, Brent, Good morning Aaron. So if you haven't
listened to Life Happens before, well come on, where have
you been? But this is a show about legal issues,
but legal issues related to estate planning and medicaid and
trust in a state litigation, you know. And some days
(01:03):
we're dealing with the best of people and the best situations,
and other days we're dealing with people who are not
in great.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
Situations like those bad actors.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
Yes, and that's not just you know that they're in
a lifetime movie right right, so it can it can
really run the gamut. I do want to just briefly
mention that, you know, we do see people living longer
and longer. And my great aunt actually turned one hundred
(01:35):
on Christmas, so she's still doing uh pretty well. It
looks like she she lives in Cohosts, so she was
given a proclamation by both the mayor of Cohos and
John McDonald, who's been on our radio Quandle. So you
never know, right. My grandmother always used to say that
(01:59):
my green aunt used oil of ola every day, and
she probably should do an ad for that because I
would say, for one hundred, skin looks pretty good. So
I mean, I don't know if you can get much
more of a testimonial than that. No idea what's in it,
but hey, it's working. But I do think that what
one of the things to think about there is that
(02:22):
you may live a very long time.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
Right.
Speaker 1 (02:25):
I meet with a lot of people who say, well,
my dad died at fifty two, or my dad died
at fifty and my mom died at you know, a
young age, so I don't expect that I'm going to
be around forever. Well guess what, that's not really like
a one to one, right, I mean, just in my
own experience, I could tell you that, for instance, my
(02:47):
grandmother's father died when he was fifty three. Okay, But
and my grandmother's mother lived to be eighty eight and
actually her oldest the children my great grandmother had, right,
So she had seven kids, the oldest of those only
lived to be about eighty six. So which is you?
(03:09):
But many of them live to be in their eighties, right,
So I mean there's no rhyme or reason perfect science.
And certainly we'd like to think that we are not
exposed to the chemicals or things that some of those
people were, right. Maybe not. They weren't exposed to plastics,
let's say, right, but my grandfather, for instance, smoked camel
(03:30):
nonfilter or lucky strikes from the time he was twelve
until his seventies. Okay, no lung cancer. I wouldn't roll
those dice. But you know, I often joke that maybe
it's the filters that give you cancer. But I wouldn't,
you know, and live to be eighty four. And but
you have to plan like you may live close to forever.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
Yeah, spend the time, spend the money, Yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
Get it done. And I mean that's also this is
not a show for financial planning in any way, shape
or form. But you do have to think about that.
Most people we see now still have many at least
have a defined benefit program. Right, they're a state retiree,
they're a teacher retiree. There may be a hospital retiree,
(04:16):
or even you know, someplace like ge or something like
that may have still a pension.
Speaker 2 (04:23):
Right.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
More and more though people don't have pensions, they're making
their own pension in the form of a four to
one K or IRA or SEP or whatever four h
three V deferred comp if you're working. But again, if
you're working for the state, you're going to have a pension.
So if you live to be one hundred, your costs
one are going to be more than they were when
(04:46):
you were seventy, right, because I mean inflation, right, things
cost different than they did thirty years ago, which is
something you need to factor in. And two, will your
money last that long? And if you end up paying
for care, let's say, for instance, right, you're ninety two
and you're doing great, but you fall, which is typically
(05:10):
one of the most common ways that people end up
with a problem, and you need care. Maybe you don't
need nursing home level care, right, but you need assistance. Well,
if it's assistance here or there, generally it's not worth
going on Medicaid.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Right.
Speaker 1 (05:28):
If it's if it's let's say, under a few thousand
dollars a month, you're not going to want to go
through everything that's necessary to get on Medicaid.
Speaker 2 (05:38):
Yeah, that's bent down, right.
Speaker 1 (05:40):
And you know, have income restrictions. And I mean, don't
get me wrong. The Medicaid home care program great program,
we use it all the time, but you have to
have like a sizable care need. I mean, is that
ten hours a week, Fine, that'll do it. But if
you're below that, generally people are going to pay. But
(06:00):
if you live a long time paying those amounts, at
the end.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
Of the day, it adds up pretty quickly, absolutely, right.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
The same thing, someone may say, well, you should retire
at sixty Well, the difference between working to sixty eight
may be a lot of money. It may not be right,
but you need to look at those things because you
never really know, and you may be that next person
that lives to be one hundred. Yep, right, hopefully I'm
not really intending to live to one hundred yeh see.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
And also do that planning around your social security correct,
you can? You can. There's a website I think, yes,
you discuss this. You can sign in.
Speaker 1 (06:39):
And see what your benefit is going to be.
Speaker 2 (06:40):
Yeah, you can sign in at our age. We can
sign in, that's right, create an account, and you know,
plan the best time to start receiving that right.
Speaker 1 (06:48):
And you know that depends on a lot of things.
A lot of people take it them instant. You can, right,
and you have to live a fair fair amount of
time before that makes a difference. But if you take
it at sixty two and then you live to one hundred,
your number that you took at sixty two thirty eight
years later, right, think about it. Thirty eight years so
(07:10):
long time is not probably going to be you know,
maybe it's going to have half the buying power it
did when you originally took it. So a lot of
people jump in and take it as soon as possible.
You know, maybe that's the right decision for you.
Speaker 2 (07:24):
I have no idea.
Speaker 1 (07:25):
I don't know your financial situation, but it is something
you need to think about and then think about in
terms of when I'm aging, is this going to be
sufficient with my other things? Because a lot of people say, well,
my social Security is exempt if I go on Medicaid.
Speaker 2 (07:43):
Well that's not true, right.
Speaker 1 (07:45):
It may be if you have an amount underneath the
income limit, right, but it's not, Oh, your social securities exempt? Nope.
Speaker 2 (07:53):
Yeah. People pass around information like that, yes, somewhat irresponsibly. Yes,
also all the time. Correct, So yeah, make sure you're
looking for yourself or having someone professional look for you.
Don't just take take it for what it's worth.
Speaker 1 (08:10):
Right.
Speaker 2 (08:10):
When people say something like that, it might be true,
but it might not be true in your circumstances. Right.
Speaker 1 (08:15):
And I you know, I know I'm getting older because
I just had a discussion with one of my cousins
who's god, I guess, eleven or twelve years older than me,
And I said, hey, I heard you're retiring, and goes, no,
I'm going to go one more year. We talked to
the benefits person and it's going to make a difference.
So I'm going to go one more year. Yeah, right,
And you know that's important to do. So I don't
(08:38):
know what the difference is or but I'm sure if
he's going to work another year to him as a teacher,
it's going to be you know. I say that because
I think teaching is a tough job. Not being the
most patient person in the world, it would not be a.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Good job for me.
Speaker 1 (08:52):
So, so part of a plan is making sure you
look at what can happen. Right. Nobody knows what's going
to happen. Well, we do know one thing that's going
to happen, right, We're all going to die.
Speaker 2 (09:11):
It actually.
Speaker 1 (09:14):
Today's today's sunny information. So it's important.
Speaker 2 (09:20):
So and we're all going to age until we get there,
that's right.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
We have so many people come into the office and
say if I die, and I'm like, well, if you
die at a certain time, But it's not really enough, right.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
I think Ricky Bobby said talladacone percent of us are
all going to die at some point in our life.
So that's still a pretty high number, it is, so
sure you can count on.
Speaker 1 (09:49):
It, that's right, And so you really need to think
about what may happen.
Speaker 2 (09:58):
Right.
Speaker 1 (09:58):
You may live a very very long time, you may not.
You may become incapacitated sooner than other people.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Right, maybe that's sooner.
Speaker 1 (10:12):
Than your spouse, or your spouse becomes incapacitated at a
young age. You know, I have a guy who's really
close friends with my cousins, but i've known since I
don't know, we were eighteen or twenty, and his wife
had a health event and she is basically very disabled
and at a young age. And you know, it's awful
(10:35):
and it just changed life dramatically at But if you
can at least have some documents in place, it can
simplify at least some of the concerns.
Speaker 2 (10:45):
Right.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
You can have people act on their behalf, you can
have someone make medical decisions on their behalf. It's I
would never say it's going to make things easier easy, right,
It's not going to do that, but it may take
at least a few of the obstacles you're going to
face out of the way and in that situation, going
to have.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
Enough and the stress and the uncertainty, right, because most
of these times, these life events, health events happen out
of nowhere.
Speaker 1 (11:12):
Correct, So I think that's a good time to take
a break. I think when we come back, we're going
to talk baseball of a sort, right, So there are
some things going on with the San Diego Padres, which
are a baseball team, very interesting and involving some trust
in the States litigation, which is what Brett and I do.
(11:34):
So when we come back, we're going to take a
look at that. This is Life Happens Radio, and we'll
be back after this. Welcome back to Life Happens Radio.
Aaron Connor, pure O'Connor, and Strauss joined by Brent Stack
associated in our office specializing in guardianship and Trust in
(11:55):
the States litigation like myself. So it seems like we
keep having things pop up in sports context, which is
kind of interesting. I mean, we haven't had a lot
of celebrity ones lately. In the past. We've had stan
Lee was subject to a guardianship cher tried to get
(12:18):
guardianship over her son that was denied.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
The whole Britney Spears saga. Of course that was conservatorship.
But yeah, same situation.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
And we've had the Presley's had a little bit of
a trust contest, but they were able to resolve their
differences somehow. So but in the world of sports, we've
had the well, the first one I can think of
is a guardianship filed over the owner of the Clippers,
right right, and Balm Balmer owns them now I can't
(12:48):
remember who what his name was, but it was kind
of a nuts scenario there, and the league actually stepped
in and sold.
Speaker 2 (12:53):
The team absolutely right.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
And we had one filed against Tom Benson, who owned
the Saints at the time, and the kids were alleging
that his new wife was kind of running everything. Well,
they weren't ultimately successful in their guardianship either. More recently,
the owner of the Houston Texans had a guardianship filed
(13:19):
against him by one of his children. I haven't seen
a lot about that, so I'm guessing that result out
of court somehow, which is not atypical.
Speaker 2 (13:28):
Right.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
So and so we often see this question can it
happen under seal?
Speaker 2 (13:39):
Right?
Speaker 1 (13:39):
Well, we usually get them sealed at the end if
there's a good reason, right, you have to have an
affirmative basis, although we're usually pretty successful, but getting it
sealed out of the gate much more difficult.
Speaker 2 (13:52):
Yeap. I don't think I've seen that yet. I don't know.
I think if we were to make that motion.
Speaker 1 (13:57):
I mean, you'd have to file it as a Jane
Doe I don't even know, or John Doe, Right, I
don't even I've never even attempted that. No, I don't
even know what completing rules are for that.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
You know. The only time the court has offered for
us to make that motion would be at the end
of a proceeding.
Speaker 1 (14:12):
Right, so, more recently, not a guardianship, but a trust contest.
So the gentleman that owned the Padres, not Ray Kroc.
All right, we're not going back that far. But of
McDonald's fame, for those of you who don't don't know,
(14:32):
was a manned.
Speaker 2 (14:33):
Peter Peter Peter Sidler.
Speaker 1 (14:35):
Yeah, and he knew that he was not well. And frankly,
that's one of the reasons that was given that the
Padres kind of went nuts spending wise.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Right, Yes, a little successful.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
Steinbrenner like Spree like Steinbrenner won the original og exactly
who some days I would I would take you know back,
because those.
Speaker 2 (15:03):
Current they didn't always work out. But before were they exciting.
Speaker 1 (15:05):
That's right, Well, current Steinbrenner has been a little more
reluctant to spend. I think this year it's been better.
But for a guy and a family who inherited the
Yankees with no estate tax do because their father happened
to die in the one year that there was no
estate tax. Now think about that, of all, how much
that saved them. The Yankees were bought in nineteen seventy
(15:26):
three for three million dollars. Okay, yes, that was a
lot of money in nineteen seventy three, but when George
Steinbrenner died, they were worth at least a billion dollars,
probably multiple billion dollars. So it's to get that asset
with no tax to crazy.
Speaker 2 (15:47):
It's almost like it was scripted fortuitous.
Speaker 1 (15:49):
Yeah so, But generally speaking, people who own a sports
franchise have to do planning and have to do.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
Elaborate, extensive elaborate. Ye.
Speaker 1 (16:03):
Yeah, so, I mean I have no idea, like, for instance,
what the Marra family does. I mean, I know they
sold half of their interest to the Tish family at
one point, but the Maris paid something like a five
hundred dollars entrance fee for their team in nineteen twenty five.
So the Giants are bad, but they're worth more than
(16:25):
five hundred dollars.
Speaker 2 (16:26):
Okay, So good to keep in mind. Yeah, especially on Sundays.
Speaker 1 (16:32):
Return for your investments pretty good. So there may be
when there are children. A lot of times there's some
gifting going into trust for shares for children. You're using
your annual gift exclusion to the best of your ability.
Maybe you're using that for cash. And when I say
(16:52):
annual gift exclusion, i'm talking about you can roughly give
twenty thousand a year per person out of your estate.
That does not count and Stewart ultimate gift tax or
a state tax liability. So you have a you have
an exemption amount right now. It's pretty high, about thirteen
million dollars for an individual or twenty six million for
(17:12):
a couple. But if you own a sports team, that's
not going to cover very much a bit. Brent, did
you see anywhere what he paid for the padres. I
didn't see that, but I'm sure we're talking hundreds of
millions of dollars.
Speaker 2 (17:24):
And he got in a little bit later. He got
in it looks like as a minority owner in twenty twelve,
and finally in twenty twenty is when he took over
a majority stake. So I'm sure he paid a little
bit more than the mirrors and the Steinbrunner.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
Yes, absolutely, so, and just because I think it's interesting
and it does a little bit apply to what we do.
To do something like that, there would be a valuation
of the business, all right, and that in this case
it's a franchise, right, just in some ways much like
a dunkin Donuts franchise. Right. There's rules that Major League
(17:57):
Baseball sets forth. You have to have a controlling owner
first of all, right, you can't have multiple people speaking
for the team, which frankly makes a lot of sense
because it's just like you can't have two people in
your healthcare proxy because you have two people who disagree,
you don't have an agreement.
Speaker 2 (18:14):
So so to.
Speaker 1 (18:19):
Go from a minority owner to a majority owner, you
have to come up with evaluation of the team, evaluation
of your share of the team, and then evaluation of
the share of the team that you're buying. And sometimes
there will be discounts two minority shareholders, because the theory
(18:41):
is that someone is not going to pay the same
amount for a share of a team, that they can't
dictate what happens, right, it makes sense. Sometimes there's what
we call a marketability discount, which means that I just
can't go out on the open market and somebody by
my share. That really probably doesn't apply to a to
(19:05):
a major league team. I think there's going to be
a lot of people chomping at the bit. But if
I wanted to sell my share of the firm, well, one,
I would only be able to sell it to someone
who is a lawyer, So that would be a marketability issue, right.
And oh, by the way, my partner might want you know.
Speaker 2 (19:24):
I had to have a say, and who becomes the.
Speaker 1 (19:27):
New part There are things to think about, right, And
certainly I'm sure that there's a very elaborate partnership agreement
for the owners of the padres, and I'm sure that
they had to agree on the admittance of a new partner.
A lot of times it's unanimity required, right, meaning everybody
has to agree because having a partner is it's a
(19:48):
pretty big step. So Peter dies in twenty twenty two
or twenty three, twenty three, twenty three, so it's pretty fresh, right, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (20:02):
I think it was either April or June of twenty
twenty three.
Speaker 1 (20:06):
Right, So, and that's really when these triggering events are
going to happen in a lot of these trusts. Okay,
And so I think to get into the actual, the
real deep part of it, I'm going to save till
after the break. But all of these cases involve what
we call fiduciary duties, right, And this is something that
(20:29):
people get tripped up on a lot, normal people, non lawyers.
What's a fiduciary, right? And a fiduciary is someone who
has to act in your best interests.
Speaker 2 (20:41):
Not their own, often the beneficiary, that's right.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
So if I'm the trustee of a trust for my children,
I have to act in my children's best instrants, not mine,
or you know, they're often corporate trustees. They have to
act according to not only internal dynamics right because they're
going to have practices and procedures, but they have to
(21:05):
make sure they're doing right by the beneficiaries. For a
corporate trustee, that means generally paying out when they're supposed
to pay out, not paying out when they're not supposed
to pay out, Managing investments that grow over time hopefully
or provide income depends on the trust. If it's a
special needs trust, we generally aren't going to pay income
(21:25):
out of it, right, So.
Speaker 2 (21:28):
It almost always involves not paying themselves and explos.
Speaker 1 (21:32):
Right, they're due a commission, right, but no self dealing correct.
Self dealing is a big no no as far as
fiduciary duties go. And you know, so that's what we're
talking about. We're going to have a trustee acting for
the benefit of Peter's children, which who are surprisingly young
in my mind, and we'll kind of go over those
(21:55):
details again before we get into the nitty gritty of it.
But we are coming up on the break, so when
we come back, we will dig into this Padre situation
and how the padre left everything for his children and
his wife. So this is Life Happens Radio, w G Watt.
(22:18):
We'll be back right after the news. Welcome back to
Life Happens Radio. Aaron Connor, Piroconnoran Trouse joined by Brent Stack,
also of piro Connor and Trauss. We are discussing a
new case, a pretty pretty interesting case of what's going
(22:42):
on with control of the San Diego Padres. Obviously they're
not local, but the same thing happens in families with
businesses about who's going to control what after. It also
happens in family trusts and often people come in and
they are like I don't have enough money for a trust.
(23:04):
Well that's wrong. Okay, if you own a house, you
have something to protect, and you have enough of an
asset to have a trust.
Speaker 2 (23:12):
Could I put my cell phone in trust? Aaron?
Speaker 1 (23:15):
Technically, I mean you could or you could, right, you know,
I don't know how much of that you want to
save into perpetuity or not. But hey, it's there you
I mean, we we It's not just cash, is the point.
That's right. You can do money life insurance with a
cash value lots of times goes into a trust. Collectibles, right,
(23:36):
I've had several people with large sports memorabilia collections that
we need to put into a trust because if you
do it right, you buy stuff and it appreciates in value,
and if you sell those things during your lifetime, you're
subject to capital gains tax.
Speaker 2 (23:54):
Right.
Speaker 1 (23:55):
If you own those items at death, your errors get
them at date of day value, so you can generally
say between twenty and twenty five percent and tax. By
doing that. That doesn't mean that you know you shouldn't
sell anything. It just means that if you don't need
the money, maybe oftentimes it's better to hang on to it.
Speaker 2 (24:14):
Right, So.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
This case is not about memorabilia at least yet, so
it's about the actual team now Here. Here's a factor
that is out of control of all of these people
that I see as a problem. It says that Peter
had nine siblings. Okay, the more people in the room,
(24:38):
the worse it gets.
Speaker 2 (24:39):
Oh. Absolutely, it's hard.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
To get three people to agree. And I'm not saying
that all ten of them had to agree, but picking
three of them to be involved certainly says there's reasons
not to pick the others, right, whether it's business acumen,
personal dynamics, whatever, Right, But there's probably already some hurt feelings.
(25:05):
And it seems, Brent, that Peter did not pick his
wife for any of these roles.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
That seems clear, at least in what's been shared publicly. Again,
we're talking about this case without actually having seen the
trust documents, right, So at this point we're taking and
we may never write, we're taking each party's word for it,
at whatever that's worth. But yet it seems like Sheiel,
(25:32):
which is the Peter's, the late owner's wife, was not
considered one of the trustees to manage the trust which
owns the baseball team.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
Right, which is an indication, right, so Peter could have
picked anybody could have picked Sheel for sure, right, She's
not in the chain of control anywhere, I guess, at
least from what we can see, it seems right that way.
And the brother who is in control is actually a
(26:06):
minority owner.
Speaker 2 (26:08):
Yes, it seems from my understanding, She'll would have inherited
Peter's majority ownership She'll and the children, right.
Speaker 1 (26:19):
So, and that's the other kind of.
Speaker 2 (26:20):
What we're talking about here, is team control, right.
Speaker 1 (26:23):
Startling thing is that Peter's children are pretty young. Yes,
I mean, Peter wasn't an old person when he passed away. Unfortunately,
his kids are all minors.
Speaker 2 (26:32):
I believe, right, right, not someone who you leave in
charge of the baseball team.
Speaker 1 (26:36):
Right, And maybe the document provides that when they get
to be a certain age they do I don't know, right.
Generally with us, that is a discussion point with our clients.
I've had people who say they don't want their child
to have control until they're fifty or sixty, and I say,
that's not okay. We're not going to do that, okay
unless there's a real reason for that, right, right, And
(26:59):
if they have a special or supplemental need or something
then we're going to put it into that type of
trust anyway. Right, But typically, and especially in a wealthier family,
we might say it maybe thirty or thirty five, the
child would become a co trustee with somebody else to
(27:20):
kind of get their feet wet, right, learn how the
trust is operating, see what's what. We certainly don't do
it at twenty one or generally at twenty five. I
can't speak for anybody else, but I'm certain that I
made financial decisions that I would not make now then, Okay,
And oftentimes after five or so years of being a
(27:43):
co trustee, we give the child the ability to trigger
the other person off. Right Now, It doesn't mean they
have to, I mean most times they do. But let's
say they thought, like I don't know, uncle Bobby was
a great with finances and they wanted to keep them
they could, right, or their aunt was giving them really
good advice about how they should handle things for their
(28:04):
whatever it may be. So I'm going to imagine that
this trust document is very long, absolutely and complicated, because
I'm sure it also had provisions for estate tax purposes. Right,
(28:25):
Because at least on the first death in a married couple,
there's an unlimited exemption. The problem with that is in
a situation like this is if you don't use some
of the exemption, you may lose it. Now right now,
we have what's called portability, meaning that the wife can
(28:45):
use the husband's unused exemption. So let's just try to
speak like a person for a minute.
Speaker 2 (28:50):
Ere So what does that mean?
Speaker 1 (28:53):
So about twenty six or twenty seven million of the
assets can pass the state tax free, okay, combining husband
and wife. But in terms of the controlling interest of
a baseball team, that's really like a drop in the
buckup right. So oftentimes in a situation like this, there
(29:13):
might be life insurance which would be huge, right to
make any kind of state tax payment? Or do you
have any idea where their wealth came from. I haven't
seen anything like that, so, you know, I say this
is different in the NFL for a team like let's
(29:34):
say the Broncos, right they're owned by a Walmart air
as opposed to the Giants or the Pittsburgh Steelers, who
have been in a family, you know, for one hundred years. Basically,
their wealth mostly comes from the team itself. Where if
you have outside money, well to buy in your you're
(29:56):
significantly wealthy.
Speaker 2 (30:00):
Jerry Jones loyal.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
Right, Whereas my fraternity brother from Louisiana would say, Oh,
I don't know what you're saying, but so so those
are factors. So there may be money in this trust
as well, not just control, or there may be a
separate trust for that. Maybe there's a trust that shield,
(30:24):
which is the wife does control right for the children.
We don't know that. We only know really about the Padre.
Speaker 2 (30:32):
Portion private equity. Arin his wealth came from private equity. Yep.
Speaker 1 (30:39):
Well, if you're good at that, that's the way to
do it, right. Stock markets, as I said to you
the other day, if you have real money, like a
stock I bought the other day went up forty dollars
in a day. Right, if you had ten million dollars,
you could have made one point six million dollars in
that day. It's a lot, right, But I did not
(31:03):
because I do not have that anywhere near anything like that.
I think I bought three shares and I made one
hundred and twenty dollars. But so private equity means he
probably has sources of other funds, right, pretty large. Yeah,
And so I'm sure that the wife and the children
(31:24):
are well taken care of from a financial standpoint, But
this isn't about that.
Speaker 2 (31:29):
No, this is this is strictly about team control, and
she doesn't have it and she wants it, so she
filed suit for that purpose to become named the I
think it's just called very basically the team control person.
Speaker 1 (31:46):
Clearly didn't get the thesaurus out for that one.
Speaker 2 (31:49):
Right, pretty basic designation.
Speaker 1 (31:53):
They put it out to fifth graders. What would we
call this person? Team control person TCP?
Speaker 2 (32:00):
Right?
Speaker 1 (32:00):
All right, Well, now that person has a lot of responsibilities.
They are the one going to the Major League Baseball
meetings and voting on behalf of the padres yep, right,
they would be maybe dealing with the least.
Speaker 2 (32:16):
For all of that, you interfacing with petcow yes, pet
Co Park okay, yep, interfacing with free agents right, and
working directly with the general manager on trades, right, and
other personnel issues.
Speaker 1 (32:31):
And in this case, that person doesn't own the majority share, correct,
They own a minority share, correct, So they have somewhat
aligned interest I would say, right, because if the majority
is making money, the minority owners share owners should be
also making money. But so do you think this is
(32:54):
about anything other than ego.
Speaker 2 (32:57):
It's hard to tell. I mean, one of the allegations
was that the current trustee who is the one who
according to these articles, the trust gave the trustee the
authority to name the team control person. Yes, And one
of the allegations that Shiel made was that she believes
(33:22):
that he would possibly relocate the team. Now, that may
have just been something to get to get the fans
really riled up right and get the public opinion on
her side, But it could be it could come down
to those issues which direction is the team going. Notably,
(33:42):
after Peter's death, the team immediately stopped it's it's extravagant
spending spree. Luckily the team still had success. But I
would say it probably comes down to a little bit
of ego, but also some different opinions on how the team,
what team, what direction the team is going to go on.
Speaker 1 (34:03):
Yeah, I think that, you know, just from a baseball standpoint,
I'm not sure that that's spending was sustainable for them.
A lot of major league teams now face this problem
where they don't have.
Speaker 2 (34:16):
Like local TV rights.
Speaker 1 (34:19):
The Diamond Sports I don't know if you're familiar with it,
but they went to bankruptcy. So there's a lot of
teams that don't know where their cable money is coming from. Right, Thankfully,
not the Yankees, because they own their own network and
people really want to watch the Yankees.
Speaker 2 (34:32):
So but.
Speaker 1 (34:35):
I think that's true of the Red Sox and you know,
whatever with the Mets. But no bitterness, no business. But
you know other teams, that's harder for Texas or San Diego.
I mean, I'm sure the Dodgers are okay too, you know,
but so that is a big part of it. I mean,
relocating a major league team is not easy. No, I
(34:58):
mean Oakland, the former Oakland A's got a little bit
of a pass since they had really been going at
it with the city of Oakland for a long time
and they were having like sewage leech into their locker room,
which is probably not a sign of a good stadium.
But moving a team, and I think that would be
(35:20):
unlikely out of San Diego.
Speaker 2 (35:22):
Yeah, in any event, he Matt Seidler is the trustee.
He denied that allegation and said that's preposterous and laffable.
Speaker 1 (35:30):
I think that that that's a bad allegation, frankly.
Speaker 2 (35:33):
But it sounds like just like in any family going
through these issues trust and estate litigation, there's also a
lot of personal bitterness. Yes that has come out correct,
So that's where EGO would come into play.
Speaker 1 (35:49):
Yeah, so I think now it's a good time to
take our last break. When we come back, we'll kind
of talk about what would happen next and how that
would go. This is Life Happens Radio. I'm Aaron Connor
from Piro, Connor and Strauss Still joined by Brent Stack,
and we'll be back right after this. Welcome back Still
(36:12):
Life Happens Radio. Still Aaron Connor, pier O'Connor and Strauss
joined by Brent Stack, also of pierro' connor and Strauss.
We have been getting into the nitty gritty of a
trust case which involves the widow of the well the
late owner of the San Diego Padres at least the
majority share against his brother, who owns a minority share
(36:37):
of the team, but is in control of the trust
that has shares of the team and gets to designate
the quote team control person who is the face of
the team, essentially the face of the French.
Speaker 2 (36:52):
And really kind of an end run around not being
a majority owner. That's right, as a trustee of the
trust that owns the baseball team, he gets to act
like a majority owner.
Speaker 1 (37:03):
Right, And so one I can tell you a trust
like this isn't just pulled off the internet. Okay, this
is a very involved process, and I'm sure at this
level a very very involved process about if, what and
when and how? Probably right, not where. I'm pretty sure
(37:24):
we got where.
Speaker 2 (37:25):
But you know, I think, like we discussed earlier, this
sort of thing doesn't just come out of the blue.
Speaker 1 (37:30):
That they may have been well, and they knew Peter
was ill to write.
Speaker 2 (37:34):
So this has been going on informally for probably since
the day he died, right, and it has without successful resolution.
Now it's in the courts, and now it's in the public, right.
Speaker 1 (37:47):
So from there, so Sheiel has filed essentially what would
be a complaint in New York in a surrogate quarter
would be called a petition, right yep, But that's really
just nomenclature. It's the same thing as like a complaint.
Speaker 2 (38:03):
So I'm sure take the safe thing to call it
as a lawsuit.
Speaker 1 (38:06):
Right sure, And the trustee is then going to answer that. Now,
great thing for the trustee is and guess where the
money comes to defend this lawsuit out of the trust, okay,
and that will stay that way unless they're able to
show essentially that there was bad faith and bad acts,
(38:28):
which a disagreement isn't that right? Right? I would guess
that they are going to file emotion to dismiss out
of the gate on this one.
Speaker 2 (38:39):
That sounds about right.
Speaker 1 (38:40):
Right now, we don't know exactly what the trust says,
So at this stage in a litigation, you have two chances,
two opportunities, right, two things you can do. You can
file an answer, and then you essentially go to discovery
and you'll be in this marass for a year or
(39:00):
two or three. Right, You'll be a slow processes, be
document discovery, depositions, all sorts of disagreements, a lot of
back and forth, what.
Speaker 2 (39:14):
Are called interlocatory motions, which are are not just positive motions,
but they decide and determine other issues that impact the
lawsuit as a whole.
Speaker 1 (39:26):
They're just as exciting as the word interlocatory. So most aggressively,
generally in a case like this, would be a motion dismiss. Now,
it's hard to win on a motion to dismiss because it's
basically all facts have to be taken as true for
(39:48):
the other side. So essentially, what you're saying is the
law under no circumstances supports this case. Now, jurisdiction doesn't
appear to be an issue, although this happening in Texas,
but that must be where these people reside, Okay, because
that's an easy one. You can't. I can't go sue
(40:08):
Brent in Indiana if Brent doesn't have, like live in
Indiana or some real connection to Indiana, like.
Speaker 2 (40:14):
The asset we're fighting over being located in exactly.
Speaker 1 (40:18):
Okay, I'm sure that personal jurisdiction is not an issue,
meaning that they've been served, they know, they've responded to it,
all right. This isn't the type of case where a
statue of limitations would apply, Okay. So generally speaking, you'd
be saying, even if every allegation Shield has made is true,
(40:39):
we still didn't violate our fiduciary duties. It's a tough standard.
We don't know what they have documentary evidence wise. Right,
they may have emails from Shield saying hey, you're great,
I love you. Keep being the TPC, right.
Speaker 2 (40:55):
Right, Yeah, and that's that's one of the allegations that
Sheiel herself said that she thought Matt would would make
a great TPC. And on the other side, she also
said that Peter, the former owner, told her that she
would make a great TPC. So with neither statement which
(41:17):
would be admissible in court, but using it to sway
the public opinion here, Well, do you.
Speaker 1 (41:22):
Think maybe that Peter, knowing he's dying, might say to
his wife something that was not true to make his
life easier While he was dying.
Speaker 2 (41:32):
He probably told all his friends and family that they
would be great tps.
Speaker 1 (41:35):
That's right, you can run the padres. You can run
the padre.
Speaker 2 (41:39):
Including the minor children. That's right.
Speaker 1 (41:42):
So it's not uncommon for a person in that situation
to say things that aren't true to make their life easier, right,
I mean, can you imagine breaking the news if she
thought if you, she were the type of person who's said, oh,
you're leaving this to me. And she may have business acumen,
(42:03):
I have nothing. I don't know anything about it.
Speaker 2 (42:04):
We don't know much about her background.
Speaker 1 (42:06):
Right, but she may be perfectly qualified to run the team,
and he may still have decided not to allow her
to do that.
Speaker 2 (42:14):
Right, Right, they were his shares, right, so so, really,
in this case, it's going to come down to the
ins and outs of that trust agreement, and in my opinion,
I think the brothers have more of an advantage in
this case because, regardless of any discussions that he may
have had with anyone involved, if the trust truly states
(42:36):
that Matt be the trustee right and subsequently that the
trustee have the sole authority to name the what are
we calling it TPC. We like acronyms in our line
of TPC sawgrass now not TPC. We immediately resort to acronyms. Yes,
Aaron's really good at making them up. But I think
(42:59):
the trust in this case is going to be controlling
at the end of the day, like you said, unless
there's some proof of some some breach of fiduciary duties
real mouth's I think that's real malfeasance, and I think.
Speaker 1 (43:12):
Not a disagreement, and over course, right, it would have.
Speaker 2 (43:15):
To be objectively bad, right, and I think that there
have been some allegations of that. I believe that she's
alleging that, under Matt's direction, they have not been allowed
into the team's ownership lounge. That would be gross and
that right unnecessary and certainly not.
Speaker 1 (43:34):
Unless they're disruptive, right right.
Speaker 2 (43:36):
I mean that's where you don't know exactly right, So
those are the types of things that could overcome whatever
clear language is in the trust, right.
Speaker 1 (43:44):
And I think Peter Signsander Bogart's that big deal. So
you can't you can't throw dirt at this guy, right, right,
So those were certainly when they were going for it.
You know, signing guys that are about thirty to twelve
year deals are not really ideal.
Speaker 2 (43:59):
That's become a popular contract in MLB. Yeah, and I
frankly don't understand it because you know that towards the
tail end of those deals, those guys are not going
to be getting up off the bench much no, let
alone hitting home runs.
Speaker 1 (44:11):
When you hit forty, your body doesn't really bounce back
the way it did. Now when exactly that stops and starts,
I don't know, but I can tell you through my
mid thirties, fine, yeah, right, And I'm certainly no athlete.
Speaker 2 (44:24):
Not everybody's Lebron James or Tom Brady, that's right.
Speaker 1 (44:27):
And have you ever seen what Lebron James does or eat?
Speaker 2 (44:30):
Yeah? I mean he like a lot of sacrifices.
Speaker 1 (44:32):
That's right, yes, And I mean Tom Brady had his
face pulled weird like, you know, to continue to look young.
So I'm not going to necessarily do what he does.
So we're just about at the end here. But so
I think moral of the story is a plan is
always better than no plan, but you have to actually
think about what may happen in the plan that you
have to make sure it's the best plan.
Speaker 2 (44:54):
And we don't know. This could be a case of
bad bad planning, bad drafting.
Speaker 1 (44:58):
It could be. It could be just a case of
just someone wants to litigate.
Speaker 2 (45:02):
Yep, it's just a sign. It's a sign that not
every plan works, that's right, even the better, best laid plans.
That's right. But what would you think for a trial
on this, Aaron, two three years if it goes that far.
Speaker 1 (45:13):
Yeah, absolutely, and probably a few million.
Speaker 2 (45:15):
Dollars in this case. So well, we'll keep our eye
on it.
Speaker 1 (45:18):
Absolutely, and if we have further developments, we will let
you know. Thank you for tuning in today. In the
very near future, we're going to be at the nine
am slot, so keep your eye out for that. Thank you.
I'm Aaron Connor Puire O'Connor. And Strauss have a great weekend.
Speaker 2 (45:31):
Everybody
Good morning, Welcome to Life Happens Radio. Are you prepared?
This is our weekly radio program for baby boomers and
their families. We address the challenges we all face as
we age. We talk about aging as a lifestyle, the
issues that must be confronted, and the careful planning that's
required to avoid crises in the future. Life Happens will
provide you with tools to educate and prepare yourself for
events like retirement, protecting your income and assets, planning to
(00:22):
pay for nursing, home and home care, special needs, wills
and trusts, and planning for an untimely death. Also, it
will plan you maybe stay out of court, as we
will get into today. Aaron Connor from Pierre O'Connor and Strauss,
joined by my litigation compadre. We could say Brent Stack,
(00:43):
Good morning, Brent, Good morning Aaron. So if you haven't
listened to Life Happens before, well come on, where have
you been? But this is a show about legal issues,
but legal issues related to estate planning and medicaid and
trust in a state litigation, you know. And some days
(01:03):
we're dealing with the best of people and the best situations,
and other days we're dealing with people who are not
in great.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
Situations like those bad actors.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
Yes, and that's not just you know that they're in
a lifetime movie right right, so it can it can
really run the gamut. I do want to just briefly
mention that, you know, we do see people living longer
and longer. And my great aunt actually turned one hundred
(01:35):
on Christmas, so she's still doing uh pretty well. It
looks like she she lives in Cohosts, so she was
given a proclamation by both the mayor of Cohos and
John McDonald, who's been on our radio Quandle. So you
never know, right. My grandmother always used to say that
(01:59):
my green aunt used oil of ola every day, and
she probably should do an ad for that because I
would say, for one hundred, skin looks pretty good. So
I mean, I don't know if you can get much
more of a testimonial than that. No idea what's in it,
but hey, it's working. But I do think that what
one of the things to think about there is that
(02:22):
you may live a very long time.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
Right.
Speaker 1 (02:25):
I meet with a lot of people who say, well,
my dad died at fifty two, or my dad died
at fifty and my mom died at you know, a
young age, so I don't expect that I'm going to
be around forever. Well guess what, that's not really like
a one to one, right, I mean, just in my
own experience, I could tell you that, for instance, my
(02:47):
grandmother's father died when he was fifty three. Okay, But
and my grandmother's mother lived to be eighty eight and
actually her oldest the children my great grandmother had, right,
So she had seven kids, the oldest of those only
lived to be about eighty six. So which is you?
(03:09):
But many of them live to be in their eighties, right,
So I mean there's no rhyme or reason perfect science.
And certainly we'd like to think that we are not
exposed to the chemicals or things that some of those
people were, right. Maybe not. They weren't exposed to plastics,
let's say, right, but my grandfather, for instance, smoked camel
(03:30):
nonfilter or lucky strikes from the time he was twelve
until his seventies. Okay, no lung cancer. I wouldn't roll
those dice. But you know, I often joke that maybe
it's the filters that give you cancer. But I wouldn't,
you know, and live to be eighty four. And but
you have to plan like you may live close to forever.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
Yeah, spend the time, spend the money, Yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
Get it done. And I mean that's also this is
not a show for financial planning in any way, shape
or form. But you do have to think about that.
Most people we see now still have many at least
have a defined benefit program. Right, they're a state retiree,
they're a teacher retiree. There may be a hospital retiree,
(04:16):
or even you know, someplace like ge or something like
that may have still a pension.
Speaker 2 (04:23):
Right.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
More and more though people don't have pensions, they're making
their own pension in the form of a four to
one K or IRA or SEP or whatever four h
three V deferred comp if you're working. But again, if
you're working for the state, you're going to have a pension.
So if you live to be one hundred, your costs
one are going to be more than they were when
(04:46):
you were seventy, right, because I mean inflation, right, things
cost different than they did thirty years ago, which is
something you need to factor in. And two, will your
money last that long? And if you end up paying
for care, let's say, for instance, right, you're ninety two
and you're doing great, but you fall, which is typically
(05:10):
one of the most common ways that people end up
with a problem, and you need care. Maybe you don't
need nursing home level care, right, but you need assistance. Well,
if it's assistance here or there, generally it's not worth
going on Medicaid.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Right.
Speaker 1 (05:28):
If it's if it's let's say, under a few thousand
dollars a month, you're not going to want to go
through everything that's necessary to get on Medicaid.
Speaker 2 (05:38):
Yeah, that's bent down, right.
Speaker 1 (05:40):
And you know, have income restrictions. And I mean, don't
get me wrong. The Medicaid home care program great program,
we use it all the time, but you have to
have like a sizable care need. I mean, is that
ten hours a week, Fine, that'll do it. But if
you're below that, generally people are going to pay. But
(06:00):
if you live a long time paying those amounts, at
the end.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
Of the day, it adds up pretty quickly, absolutely, right.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
The same thing, someone may say, well, you should retire
at sixty Well, the difference between working to sixty eight
may be a lot of money. It may not be right,
but you need to look at those things because you
never really know, and you may be that next person
that lives to be one hundred. Yep, right, hopefully I'm
not really intending to live to one hundred yeh see.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
And also do that planning around your social security correct,
you can? You can. There's a website I think, yes,
you discuss this. You can sign in.
Speaker 1 (06:39):
And see what your benefit is going to be.
Speaker 2 (06:40):
Yeah, you can sign in at our age. We can
sign in, that's right, create an account, and you know,
plan the best time to start receiving that right.
Speaker 1 (06:48):
And you know that depends on a lot of things.
A lot of people take it them instant. You can, right,
and you have to live a fair fair amount of
time before that makes a difference. But if you take
it at sixty two and then you live to one hundred,
your number that you took at sixty two thirty eight
years later, right, think about it. Thirty eight years so
(07:10):
long time is not probably going to be you know,
maybe it's going to have half the buying power it
did when you originally took it. So a lot of
people jump in and take it as soon as possible.
You know, maybe that's the right decision for you.
Speaker 2 (07:24):
I have no idea.
Speaker 1 (07:25):
I don't know your financial situation, but it is something
you need to think about and then think about in
terms of when I'm aging, is this going to be
sufficient with my other things? Because a lot of people say, well,
my social Security is exempt if I go on Medicaid.
Speaker 2 (07:43):
Well that's not true, right.
Speaker 1 (07:45):
It may be if you have an amount underneath the
income limit, right, but it's not, Oh, your social securities exempt? Nope.
Speaker 2 (07:53):
Yeah. People pass around information like that, yes, somewhat irresponsibly. Yes,
also all the time. Correct, So yeah, make sure you're
looking for yourself or having someone professional look for you.
Don't just take take it for what it's worth.
Speaker 1 (08:10):
Right.
Speaker 2 (08:10):
When people say something like that, it might be true,
but it might not be true in your circumstances. Right.
Speaker 1 (08:15):
And I you know, I know I'm getting older because
I just had a discussion with one of my cousins
who's god, I guess, eleven or twelve years older than me,
And I said, hey, I heard you're retiring, and goes, no,
I'm going to go one more year. We talked to
the benefits person and it's going to make a difference.
So I'm going to go one more year. Yeah, right,
And you know that's important to do. So I don't
(08:38):
know what the difference is or but I'm sure if
he's going to work another year to him as a teacher,
it's going to be you know. I say that because
I think teaching is a tough job. Not being the
most patient person in the world, it would not be a.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Good job for me.
Speaker 1 (08:52):
So, so part of a plan is making sure you
look at what can happen. Right. Nobody knows what's going
to happen. Well, we do know one thing that's going
to happen, right, We're all going to die.
Speaker 2 (09:11):
It actually.
Speaker 1 (09:14):
Today's today's sunny information. So it's important.
Speaker 2 (09:20):
So and we're all going to age until we get there,
that's right.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
We have so many people come into the office and
say if I die, and I'm like, well, if you
die at a certain time, But it's not really enough, right.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
I think Ricky Bobby said talladacone percent of us are
all going to die at some point in our life.
So that's still a pretty high number, it is, so
sure you can count on.
Speaker 1 (09:49):
It, that's right, And so you really need to think
about what may happen.
Speaker 2 (09:58):
Right.
Speaker 1 (09:58):
You may live a very very long time, you may not.
You may become incapacitated sooner than other people.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Right, maybe that's sooner.
Speaker 1 (10:12):
Than your spouse, or your spouse becomes incapacitated at a
young age. You know, I have a guy who's really
close friends with my cousins, but i've known since I
don't know, we were eighteen or twenty, and his wife
had a health event and she is basically very disabled
and at a young age. And you know, it's awful
(10:35):
and it just changed life dramatically at But if you
can at least have some documents in place, it can
simplify at least some of the concerns.
Speaker 2 (10:45):
Right.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
You can have people act on their behalf, you can
have someone make medical decisions on their behalf. It's I
would never say it's going to make things easier easy, right,
It's not going to do that, but it may take
at least a few of the obstacles you're going to
face out of the way and in that situation, going
to have.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
Enough and the stress and the uncertainty, right, because most
of these times, these life events, health events happen out
of nowhere.
Speaker 1 (11:12):
Correct, So I think that's a good time to take
a break. I think when we come back, we're going
to talk baseball of a sort, right, So there are
some things going on with the San Diego Padres, which
are a baseball team, very interesting and involving some trust
in the States litigation, which is what Brett and I do.
(11:34):
So when we come back, we're going to take a
look at that. This is Life Happens Radio, and we'll
be back after this. Welcome back to Life Happens Radio.
Aaron Connor, pure O'Connor, and Strauss joined by Brent Stack
associated in our office specializing in guardianship and Trust in
(11:55):
the States litigation like myself. So it seems like we
keep having things pop up in sports context, which is
kind of interesting. I mean, we haven't had a lot
of celebrity ones lately. In the past. We've had stan
Lee was subject to a guardianship cher tried to get
(12:18):
guardianship over her son that was denied.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
The whole Britney Spears saga. Of course that was conservatorship.
But yeah, same situation.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
And we've had the Presley's had a little bit of
a trust contest, but they were able to resolve their
differences somehow. So but in the world of sports, we've
had the well, the first one I can think of
is a guardianship filed over the owner of the Clippers,
right right, and Balm Balmer owns them now I can't
(12:48):
remember who what his name was, but it was kind
of a nuts scenario there, and the league actually stepped
in and sold.
Speaker 2 (12:53):
The team absolutely right.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
And we had one filed against Tom Benson, who owned
the Saints at the time, and the kids were alleging
that his new wife was kind of running everything. Well,
they weren't ultimately successful in their guardianship either. More recently,
the owner of the Houston Texans had a guardianship filed
(13:19):
against him by one of his children. I haven't seen
a lot about that, so I'm guessing that result out
of court somehow, which is not atypical.
Speaker 2 (13:28):
Right.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
So and so we often see this question can it
happen under seal?
Speaker 2 (13:39):
Right?
Speaker 1 (13:39):
Well, we usually get them sealed at the end if
there's a good reason, right, you have to have an
affirmative basis, although we're usually pretty successful, but getting it
sealed out of the gate much more difficult.
Speaker 2 (13:52):
Yeap. I don't think I've seen that yet. I don't know.
I think if we were to make that motion.
Speaker 1 (13:57):
I mean, you'd have to file it as a Jane
Doe I don't even know, or John Doe, Right, I
don't even I've never even attempted that. No, I don't
even know what completing rules are for that.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
You know. The only time the court has offered for
us to make that motion would be at the end
of a proceeding.
Speaker 1 (14:12):
Right, so, more recently, not a guardianship, but a trust contest.
So the gentleman that owned the Padres, not Ray Kroc.
All right, we're not going back that far. But of
McDonald's fame, for those of you who don't don't know,
(14:32):
was a manned.
Speaker 2 (14:33):
Peter Peter Peter Sidler.
Speaker 1 (14:35):
Yeah, and he knew that he was not well. And frankly,
that's one of the reasons that was given that the
Padres kind of went nuts spending wise.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Right, Yes, a little successful.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
Steinbrenner like Spree like Steinbrenner won the original og exactly
who some days I would I would take you know back,
because those.
Speaker 2 (15:03):
Current they didn't always work out. But before were they exciting.
Speaker 1 (15:05):
That's right, Well, current Steinbrenner has been a little more
reluctant to spend. I think this year it's been better.
But for a guy and a family who inherited the
Yankees with no estate tax do because their father happened
to die in the one year that there was no
estate tax. Now think about that, of all, how much
that saved them. The Yankees were bought in nineteen seventy
(15:26):
three for three million dollars. Okay, yes, that was a
lot of money in nineteen seventy three, but when George
Steinbrenner died, they were worth at least a billion dollars,
probably multiple billion dollars. So it's to get that asset
with no tax to crazy.
Speaker 2 (15:47):
It's almost like it was scripted fortuitous.
Speaker 1 (15:49):
Yeah so, But generally speaking, people who own a sports
franchise have to do planning and have to do.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
Elaborate, extensive elaborate. Ye.
Speaker 1 (16:03):
Yeah, so, I mean I have no idea, like, for instance,
what the Marra family does. I mean, I know they
sold half of their interest to the Tish family at
one point, but the Maris paid something like a five
hundred dollars entrance fee for their team in nineteen twenty five.
So the Giants are bad, but they're worth more than
(16:25):
five hundred dollars.
Speaker 2 (16:26):
Okay, So good to keep in mind. Yeah, especially on Sundays.
Speaker 1 (16:32):
Return for your investments pretty good. So there may be
when there are children. A lot of times there's some
gifting going into trust for shares for children. You're using
your annual gift exclusion to the best of your ability.
Maybe you're using that for cash. And when I say
(16:52):
annual gift exclusion, i'm talking about you can roughly give
twenty thousand a year per person out of your estate.
That does not count and Stewart ultimate gift tax or
a state tax liability. So you have a you have
an exemption amount right now. It's pretty high, about thirteen
million dollars for an individual or twenty six million for
(17:12):
a couple. But if you own a sports team, that's
not going to cover very much a bit. Brent, did
you see anywhere what he paid for the padres. I
didn't see that, but I'm sure we're talking hundreds of
millions of dollars.
Speaker 2 (17:24):
And he got in a little bit later. He got
in it looks like as a minority owner in twenty twelve,
and finally in twenty twenty is when he took over
a majority stake. So I'm sure he paid a little
bit more than the mirrors and the Steinbrunner.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
Yes, absolutely, so, and just because I think it's interesting
and it does a little bit apply to what we do.
To do something like that, there would be a valuation
of the business, all right, and that in this case
it's a franchise, right, just in some ways much like
a dunkin Donuts franchise. Right. There's rules that Major League
(17:57):
Baseball sets forth. You have to have a controlling owner
first of all, right, you can't have multiple people speaking
for the team, which frankly makes a lot of sense
because it's just like you can't have two people in
your healthcare proxy because you have two people who disagree,
you don't have an agreement.
Speaker 2 (18:14):
So so to.
Speaker 1 (18:19):
Go from a minority owner to a majority owner, you
have to come up with evaluation of the team, evaluation
of your share of the team, and then evaluation of
the share of the team that you're buying. And sometimes
there will be discounts two minority shareholders, because the theory
(18:41):
is that someone is not going to pay the same
amount for a share of a team, that they can't
dictate what happens, right, it makes sense. Sometimes there's what
we call a marketability discount, which means that I just
can't go out on the open market and somebody by
my share. That really probably doesn't apply to a to
(19:05):
a major league team. I think there's going to be
a lot of people chomping at the bit. But if
I wanted to sell my share of the firm, well, one,
I would only be able to sell it to someone
who is a lawyer, So that would be a marketability issue, right.
And oh, by the way, my partner might want you know.
Speaker 2 (19:24):
I had to have a say, and who becomes the.
Speaker 1 (19:27):
New part There are things to think about, right, And
certainly I'm sure that there's a very elaborate partnership agreement
for the owners of the padres, and I'm sure that
they had to agree on the admittance of a new partner.
A lot of times it's unanimity required, right, meaning everybody
has to agree because having a partner is it's a
(19:48):
pretty big step. So Peter dies in twenty twenty two
or twenty three, twenty three, twenty three, so it's pretty fresh, right, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (20:02):
I think it was either April or June of twenty
twenty three.
Speaker 1 (20:06):
Right, So, and that's really when these triggering events are
going to happen in a lot of these trusts. Okay,
And so I think to get into the actual, the
real deep part of it, I'm going to save till
after the break. But all of these cases involve what
we call fiduciary duties, right, And this is something that
(20:29):
people get tripped up on a lot, normal people, non lawyers.
What's a fiduciary, right? And a fiduciary is someone who
has to act in your best interests.
Speaker 2 (20:41):
Not their own, often the beneficiary, that's right.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
So if I'm the trustee of a trust for my children,
I have to act in my children's best instrants, not mine,
or you know, they're often corporate trustees. They have to
act according to not only internal dynamics right because they're
going to have practices and procedures, but they have to
(21:05):
make sure they're doing right by the beneficiaries. For a
corporate trustee, that means generally paying out when they're supposed
to pay out, not paying out when they're not supposed
to pay out, Managing investments that grow over time hopefully
or provide income depends on the trust. If it's a
special needs trust, we generally aren't going to pay income
(21:25):
out of it, right, So.
Speaker 2 (21:28):
It almost always involves not paying themselves and explos.
Speaker 1 (21:32):
Right, they're due a commission, right, but no self dealing correct.
Self dealing is a big no no as far as
fiduciary duties go. And you know, so that's what we're
talking about. We're going to have a trustee acting for
the benefit of Peter's children, which who are surprisingly young
in my mind, and we'll kind of go over those
(21:55):
details again before we get into the nitty gritty of it.
But we are coming up on the break, so when
we come back, we will dig into this Padre situation
and how the padre left everything for his children and
his wife. So this is Life Happens Radio, w G Watt.
(22:18):
We'll be back right after the news. Welcome back to
Life Happens Radio. Aaron Connor, Piroconnoran Trouse joined by Brent Stack,
also of piro Connor and Trauss. We are discussing a
new case, a pretty pretty interesting case of what's going
(22:42):
on with control of the San Diego Padres. Obviously they're
not local, but the same thing happens in families with
businesses about who's going to control what after. It also
happens in family trusts and often people come in and
they are like I don't have enough money for a trust.
(23:04):
Well that's wrong. Okay, if you own a house, you
have something to protect, and you have enough of an
asset to have a trust.
Speaker 2 (23:12):
Could I put my cell phone in trust? Aaron?
Speaker 1 (23:15):
Technically, I mean you could or you could, right, you know,
I don't know how much of that you want to
save into perpetuity or not. But hey, it's there you
I mean, we we It's not just cash, is the point.
That's right. You can do money life insurance with a
cash value lots of times goes into a trust. Collectibles, right,
(23:36):
I've had several people with large sports memorabilia collections that
we need to put into a trust because if you
do it right, you buy stuff and it appreciates in value,
and if you sell those things during your lifetime, you're
subject to capital gains tax.
Speaker 2 (23:54):
Right.
Speaker 1 (23:55):
If you own those items at death, your errors get
them at date of day value, so you can generally
say between twenty and twenty five percent and tax. By
doing that. That doesn't mean that you know you shouldn't
sell anything. It just means that if you don't need
the money, maybe oftentimes it's better to hang on to it.
Speaker 2 (24:14):
Right, So.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
This case is not about memorabilia at least yet, so
it's about the actual team now Here. Here's a factor
that is out of control of all of these people
that I see as a problem. It says that Peter
had nine siblings. Okay, the more people in the room,
(24:38):
the worse it gets.
Speaker 2 (24:39):
Oh. Absolutely, it's hard.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
To get three people to agree. And I'm not saying
that all ten of them had to agree, but picking
three of them to be involved certainly says there's reasons
not to pick the others, right, whether it's business acumen,
personal dynamics, whatever, Right, But there's probably already some hurt feelings.
(25:05):
And it seems, Brent, that Peter did not pick his
wife for any of these roles.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
That seems clear, at least in what's been shared publicly. Again,
we're talking about this case without actually having seen the
trust documents, right, So at this point we're taking and
we may never write, we're taking each party's word for it,
at whatever that's worth. But yet it seems like Sheiel,
(25:32):
which is the Peter's, the late owner's wife, was not
considered one of the trustees to manage the trust which
owns the baseball team.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
Right, which is an indication, right, so Peter could have
picked anybody could have picked Sheel for sure, right, She's
not in the chain of control anywhere, I guess, at
least from what we can see, it seems right that way.
And the brother who is in control is actually a
(26:06):
minority owner.
Speaker 2 (26:08):
Yes, it seems from my understanding, She'll would have inherited
Peter's majority ownership She'll and the children, right.
Speaker 1 (26:19):
So, and that's the other kind of.
Speaker 2 (26:20):
What we're talking about here, is team control, right.
Speaker 1 (26:23):
Startling thing is that Peter's children are pretty young. Yes,
I mean, Peter wasn't an old person when he passed away. Unfortunately,
his kids are all minors.
Speaker 2 (26:32):
I believe, right, right, not someone who you leave in
charge of the baseball team.
Speaker 1 (26:36):
Right, And maybe the document provides that when they get
to be a certain age they do I don't know, right.
Generally with us, that is a discussion point with our clients.
I've had people who say they don't want their child
to have control until they're fifty or sixty, and I say,
that's not okay. We're not going to do that, okay
unless there's a real reason for that, right, right, And
(26:59):
if they have a special or supplemental need or something
then we're going to put it into that type of
trust anyway. Right, But typically, and especially in a wealthier family,
we might say it maybe thirty or thirty five, the
child would become a co trustee with somebody else to
(27:20):
kind of get their feet wet, right, learn how the
trust is operating, see what's what. We certainly don't do
it at twenty one or generally at twenty five. I
can't speak for anybody else, but I'm certain that I
made financial decisions that I would not make now then, Okay,
And oftentimes after five or so years of being a
(27:43):
co trustee, we give the child the ability to trigger
the other person off. Right Now, It doesn't mean they
have to, I mean most times they do. But let's
say they thought, like I don't know, uncle Bobby was
a great with finances and they wanted to keep them
they could, right, or their aunt was giving them really
good advice about how they should handle things for their
(28:04):
whatever it may be. So I'm going to imagine that
this trust document is very long, absolutely and complicated, because
I'm sure it also had provisions for estate tax purposes. Right,
(28:25):
Because at least on the first death in a married couple,
there's an unlimited exemption. The problem with that is in
a situation like this is if you don't use some
of the exemption, you may lose it. Now right now,
we have what's called portability, meaning that the wife can
(28:45):
use the husband's unused exemption. So let's just try to
speak like a person for a minute.
Speaker 2 (28:50):
Ere So what does that mean?
Speaker 1 (28:53):
So about twenty six or twenty seven million of the
assets can pass the state tax free, okay, combining husband
and wife. But in terms of the controlling interest of
a baseball team, that's really like a drop in the
buckup right. So oftentimes in a situation like this, there
(29:13):
might be life insurance which would be huge, right to
make any kind of state tax payment? Or do you
have any idea where their wealth came from. I haven't
seen anything like that, so, you know, I say this
is different in the NFL for a team like let's
(29:34):
say the Broncos, right they're owned by a Walmart air
as opposed to the Giants or the Pittsburgh Steelers, who
have been in a family, you know, for one hundred years. Basically,
their wealth mostly comes from the team itself. Where if
you have outside money, well to buy in your you're
(29:56):
significantly wealthy.
Speaker 2 (30:00):
Jerry Jones loyal.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
Right, Whereas my fraternity brother from Louisiana would say, Oh,
I don't know what you're saying, but so so those
are factors. So there may be money in this trust
as well, not just control, or there may be a
separate trust for that. Maybe there's a trust that shield,
(30:24):
which is the wife does control right for the children.
We don't know that. We only know really about the Padre.
Speaker 2 (30:32):
Portion private equity. Arin his wealth came from private equity. Yep.
Speaker 1 (30:39):
Well, if you're good at that, that's the way to
do it, right. Stock markets, as I said to you
the other day, if you have real money, like a
stock I bought the other day went up forty dollars
in a day. Right, if you had ten million dollars,
you could have made one point six million dollars in
that day. It's a lot, right, But I did not
(31:03):
because I do not have that anywhere near anything like that.
I think I bought three shares and I made one
hundred and twenty dollars. But so private equity means he
probably has sources of other funds, right, pretty large. Yeah,
And so I'm sure that the wife and the children
(31:24):
are well taken care of from a financial standpoint, But
this isn't about that.
Speaker 2 (31:29):
No, this is this is strictly about team control, and
she doesn't have it and she wants it, so she
filed suit for that purpose to become named the I
think it's just called very basically the team control person.
Speaker 1 (31:46):
Clearly didn't get the thesaurus out for that one.
Speaker 2 (31:49):
Right, pretty basic designation.
Speaker 1 (31:53):
They put it out to fifth graders. What would we
call this person? Team control person TCP?
Speaker 2 (32:00):
Right?
Speaker 1 (32:00):
All right, Well, now that person has a lot of responsibilities.
They are the one going to the Major League Baseball
meetings and voting on behalf of the padres yep, right,
they would be maybe dealing with the least.
Speaker 2 (32:16):
For all of that, you interfacing with petcow yes, pet
Co Park okay, yep, interfacing with free agents right, and
working directly with the general manager on trades, right, and
other personnel issues.
Speaker 1 (32:31):
And in this case, that person doesn't own the majority share, correct,
They own a minority share, correct, So they have somewhat
aligned interest I would say, right, because if the majority
is making money, the minority owners share owners should be
also making money. But so do you think this is
(32:54):
about anything other than ego.
Speaker 2 (32:57):
It's hard to tell. I mean, one of the allegations
was that the current trustee who is the one who
according to these articles, the trust gave the trustee the
authority to name the team control person. Yes, And one
of the allegations that Shiel made was that she believes
(33:22):
that he would possibly relocate the team. Now, that may
have just been something to get to get the fans
really riled up right and get the public opinion on
her side, But it could be it could come down
to those issues which direction is the team going. Notably,
(33:42):
after Peter's death, the team immediately stopped it's it's extravagant
spending spree. Luckily the team still had success. But I
would say it probably comes down to a little bit
of ego, but also some different opinions on how the team,
what team, what direction the team is going to go on.
Speaker 1 (34:03):
Yeah, I think that, you know, just from a baseball standpoint,
I'm not sure that that's spending was sustainable for them.
A lot of major league teams now face this problem
where they don't have.
Speaker 2 (34:16):
Like local TV rights.
Speaker 1 (34:19):
The Diamond Sports I don't know if you're familiar with it,
but they went to bankruptcy. So there's a lot of
teams that don't know where their cable money is coming from. Right, Thankfully,
not the Yankees, because they own their own network and
people really want to watch the Yankees.
Speaker 2 (34:32):
So but.
Speaker 1 (34:35):
I think that's true of the Red Sox and you know,
whatever with the Mets. But no bitterness, no business. But
you know other teams, that's harder for Texas or San Diego.
I mean, I'm sure the Dodgers are okay too, you know,
but so that is a big part of it. I mean,
relocating a major league team is not easy. No, I
(34:58):
mean Oakland, the former Oakland A's got a little bit
of a pass since they had really been going at
it with the city of Oakland for a long time
and they were having like sewage leech into their locker room,
which is probably not a sign of a good stadium.
But moving a team, and I think that would be
(35:20):
unlikely out of San Diego.
Speaker 2 (35:22):
Yeah, in any event, he Matt Seidler is the trustee.
He denied that allegation and said that's preposterous and laffable.
Speaker 1 (35:30):
I think that that that's a bad allegation, frankly.
Speaker 2 (35:33):
But it sounds like just like in any family going
through these issues trust and estate litigation, there's also a
lot of personal bitterness. Yes that has come out correct,
So that's where EGO would come into play.
Speaker 1 (35:49):
Yeah, so I think now it's a good time to
take our last break. When we come back, we'll kind
of talk about what would happen next and how that
would go. This is Life Happens Radio. I'm Aaron Connor
from Piro, Connor and Strauss Still joined by Brent Stack,
and we'll be back right after this. Welcome back Still
(36:12):
Life Happens Radio. Still Aaron Connor, pier O'Connor and Strauss
joined by Brent Stack, also of pierro' connor and Strauss.
We have been getting into the nitty gritty of a
trust case which involves the widow of the well the
late owner of the San Diego Padres at least the
majority share against his brother, who owns a minority share
(36:37):
of the team, but is in control of the trust
that has shares of the team and gets to designate
the quote team control person who is the face of
the team, essentially the face of the French.
Speaker 2 (36:52):
And really kind of an end run around not being
a majority owner. That's right, as a trustee of the
trust that owns the baseball team, he gets to act
like a majority owner.
Speaker 1 (37:03):
Right, And so one I can tell you a trust
like this isn't just pulled off the internet. Okay, this
is a very involved process, and I'm sure at this
level a very very involved process about if, what and
when and how? Probably right, not where. I'm pretty sure
(37:24):
we got where.
Speaker 2 (37:25):
But you know, I think, like we discussed earlier, this
sort of thing doesn't just come out of the blue.
Speaker 1 (37:30):
That they may have been well, and they knew Peter
was ill to write.
Speaker 2 (37:34):
So this has been going on informally for probably since
the day he died, right, and it has without successful resolution.
Now it's in the courts, and now it's in the public, right.
Speaker 1 (37:47):
So from there, so Sheiel has filed essentially what would
be a complaint in New York in a surrogate quarter
would be called a petition, right yep, But that's really
just nomenclature. It's the same thing as like a complaint.
Speaker 2 (38:03):
So I'm sure take the safe thing to call it
as a lawsuit.
Speaker 1 (38:06):
Right sure, And the trustee is then going to answer that. Now,
great thing for the trustee is and guess where the
money comes to defend this lawsuit out of the trust, okay,
and that will stay that way unless they're able to
show essentially that there was bad faith and bad acts,
(38:28):
which a disagreement isn't that right? Right? I would guess
that they are going to file emotion to dismiss out
of the gate on this one.
Speaker 2 (38:39):
That sounds about right.
Speaker 1 (38:40):
Right now, we don't know exactly what the trust says,
So at this stage in a litigation, you have two chances,
two opportunities, right, two things you can do. You can
file an answer, and then you essentially go to discovery
and you'll be in this marass for a year or
(39:00):
two or three. Right, You'll be a slow processes, be
document discovery, depositions, all sorts of disagreements, a lot of
back and forth, what.
Speaker 2 (39:14):
Are called interlocatory motions, which are are not just positive motions,
but they decide and determine other issues that impact the
lawsuit as a whole.
Speaker 1 (39:26):
They're just as exciting as the word interlocatory. So most aggressively,
generally in a case like this, would be a motion dismiss. Now,
it's hard to win on a motion to dismiss because it's
basically all facts have to be taken as true for
(39:48):
the other side. So essentially, what you're saying is the
law under no circumstances supports this case. Now, jurisdiction doesn't
appear to be an issue, although this happening in Texas,
but that must be where these people reside, Okay, because
that's an easy one. You can't. I can't go sue
(40:08):
Brent in Indiana if Brent doesn't have, like live in
Indiana or some real connection to Indiana, like.
Speaker 2 (40:14):
The asset we're fighting over being located in exactly.
Speaker 1 (40:18):
Okay, I'm sure that personal jurisdiction is not an issue,
meaning that they've been served, they know, they've responded to it,
all right. This isn't the type of case where a
statue of limitations would apply, Okay. So generally speaking, you'd
be saying, even if every allegation Shield has made is true,
(40:39):
we still didn't violate our fiduciary duties. It's a tough standard.
We don't know what they have documentary evidence wise. Right,
they may have emails from Shield saying hey, you're great,
I love you. Keep being the TPC, right.
Speaker 2 (40:55):
Right, Yeah, and that's that's one of the allegations that
Sheiel herself said that she thought Matt would would make
a great TPC. And on the other side, she also
said that Peter, the former owner, told her that she
would make a great TPC. So with neither statement which
(41:17):
would be admissible in court, but using it to sway
the public opinion here, Well, do you.
Speaker 1 (41:22):
Think maybe that Peter, knowing he's dying, might say to
his wife something that was not true to make his
life easier While he was dying.
Speaker 2 (41:32):
He probably told all his friends and family that they
would be great tps.
Speaker 1 (41:35):
That's right, you can run the padres. You can run
the padre.
Speaker 2 (41:39):
Including the minor children. That's right.
Speaker 1 (41:42):
So it's not uncommon for a person in that situation
to say things that aren't true to make their life easier, right,
I mean, can you imagine breaking the news if she
thought if you, she were the type of person who's said, oh,
you're leaving this to me. And she may have business acumen,
(42:03):
I have nothing. I don't know anything about it.
Speaker 2 (42:04):
We don't know much about her background.
Speaker 1 (42:06):
Right, but she may be perfectly qualified to run the team,
and he may still have decided not to allow her
to do that.
Speaker 2 (42:14):
Right, Right, they were his shares, right, so so, really,
in this case, it's going to come down to the
ins and outs of that trust agreement, and in my opinion,
I think the brothers have more of an advantage in
this case because, regardless of any discussions that he may
have had with anyone involved, if the trust truly states
(42:36):
that Matt be the trustee right and subsequently that the
trustee have the sole authority to name the what are
we calling it TPC. We like acronyms in our line
of TPC sawgrass now not TPC. We immediately resort to acronyms. Yes,
Aaron's really good at making them up. But I think
(42:59):
the trust in this case is going to be controlling
at the end of the day, like you said, unless
there's some proof of some some breach of fiduciary duties
real mouth's I think that's real malfeasance, and I think.
Speaker 1 (43:12):
Not a disagreement, and over course, right, it would have.
Speaker 2 (43:15):
To be objectively bad, right, and I think that there
have been some allegations of that. I believe that she's
alleging that, under Matt's direction, they have not been allowed
into the team's ownership lounge. That would be gross and
that right unnecessary and certainly not.
Speaker 1 (43:34):
Unless they're disruptive, right right.
Speaker 2 (43:36):
I mean that's where you don't know exactly right, So
those are the types of things that could overcome whatever
clear language is in the trust, right.
Speaker 1 (43:44):
And I think Peter Signsander Bogart's that big deal. So
you can't you can't throw dirt at this guy, right, right,
So those were certainly when they were going for it.
You know, signing guys that are about thirty to twelve
year deals are not really ideal.
Speaker 2 (43:59):
That's become a popular contract in MLB. Yeah, and I
frankly don't understand it because you know that towards the
tail end of those deals, those guys are not going
to be getting up off the bench much no, let
alone hitting home runs.
Speaker 1 (44:11):
When you hit forty, your body doesn't really bounce back
the way it did. Now when exactly that stops and starts,
I don't know, but I can tell you through my
mid thirties, fine, yeah, right, And I'm certainly no athlete.
Speaker 2 (44:24):
Not everybody's Lebron James or Tom Brady, that's right.
Speaker 1 (44:27):
And have you ever seen what Lebron James does or eat?
Speaker 2 (44:30):
Yeah? I mean he like a lot of sacrifices.
Speaker 1 (44:32):
That's right, yes, And I mean Tom Brady had his
face pulled weird like, you know, to continue to look young.
So I'm not going to necessarily do what he does.
So we're just about at the end here. But so
I think moral of the story is a plan is
always better than no plan, but you have to actually
think about what may happen in the plan that you
have to make sure it's the best plan.
Speaker 2 (44:54):
And we don't know. This could be a case of
bad bad planning, bad drafting.
Speaker 1 (44:58):
It could be. It could be just a case of
just someone wants to litigate.
Speaker 2 (45:02):
Yep, it's just a sign. It's a sign that not
every plan works, that's right, even the better, best laid plans.
That's right. But what would you think for a trial
on this, Aaron, two three years if it goes that far.
Speaker 1 (45:13):
Yeah, absolutely, and probably a few million.
Speaker 2 (45:15):
Dollars in this case. So well, we'll keep our eye
on it.
Speaker 1 (45:18):
Absolutely, and if we have further developments, we will let
you know. Thank you for tuning in today. In the
very near future, we're going to be at the nine
am slot, so keep your eye out for that. Thank you.
I'm Aaron Connor Puire O'Connor. And Strauss have a great weekend.
Speaker 2 (45:31):
Everybody
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com