There’s also a vaccine for a type of epidemic meningitis that exists, to my knowledge, only in parts of sub-Saharan Africa. I learned about this while looking at health rules for people who wish to attend the Hajj, and if they’re from affected countries in equatorial Africa, they need this vaccine in order to be admitted into the country.
My cousin was a very healthy 50. She had the flu and was taking it easy. She got up to use the bathroom and collapsed on the floor. She was dead a day later. I believe it turned into sepsis.
Not sure how ugly it will get. There is no one named on the other side except Betsy’s lawyer. It only gets ugly when there are two sides battling it out.
Wouldn’t she have named specific charities?
One would think those charities would be willing to battle some.
Didn’t even know there was such a thing. Also can perhaps understand if it works by gravitational acceleration (towards the planet) that if you do not fall flat out but kind of crumble it won’t be triggered.
My 96 year old mom has had what I guess is the usual kind for years - where if you press it they will call you and if you don’t answer they will send help. Unfortunately, while not wearing it, she spent almost 3 days with a broken leg on the bathroom floor before a wellness check and the cops broke in. She always wears it now. I’ll ask her about the “fall” detector next time.
While I find the money to be the least interesting part of this case, I think I read that his will had not been updated in some time. Which, I suppose, opens up more possibilities to challenge it.
As far as meningitis goes, it’s a diagnosis of location, not organism; viral, bacterial, fungal. Neisseria meningococcus is a particularly nasty type (ask me how I know). I’m no expert on the Hajj, but my understanding is that close quarters are associated with increased risk, military barracks, college dorms, etc. According to this site, it’s vaccines for all and antibiotic prophylaxsis if you travel from certain parts of Africa, but it’s still Neisseria meningitis they’re worried about. Hajj and Umrah Health Requirements | The Embassy of The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
I feel I have to push back on this. Christian Science was founded in 1879. Medical science had made huge leaps earlier in the 1800s, including the germ theory of disease, the use of ether or nitrous oxide during surgery, advancements in surgical techniques, the smallpox vaccine, standardized training of physicians, advances in sanitation and public health, etc. Someone in 1879 had access to much better medical care than in 1779, especially in a major city like Boston.
Triggered by acceleration of the watch on the hand. So rough housing with grandkids can do it.
You do have 30 seconds to cancel.
Any mcycle accident for me would certainly trigger it.
I had one false alarm for reasons unknown tho I swatted the dog playing with her. Lots of time to cancel.
A slow crumple would not trigger but one hopes the person is conscious and can activate the emergency - you can even speak to it without touching the watch by saying Hey Siri then asking her to send a message and it will send the message you dictate to who you want to get it. All without touching th watch.
My mom (in NY) is 96 - still of sound mind - yet knows little of anything tech, except power button for the tv remote and “what you touch” for channels, or on her very basic phone, how to make a call.
Had she had her watch/pendant (I believe there are both) when she went to the bathroom, fell and broke a leg she’d have been able to use the medic-alert. She came perilously close to the first “survival rules of three” - days without water. Good that she has concerned friends and now someone (paid) comes by twice a day for errands or whatever.
My Uncle in Dublin has Alzheimer’s and what I’ve heard - he recognizes no one - is terrible. As I’ve heard Gene Hackman would go round and back and not know what was happening is awful I’ve heard that Hantavirus or whatever killed his wife has a quick onset and demise.
I thought that in these circumstances, the older person was deemed to have died first. This resolves the issue where the two have different wills, or no wills.
This article suggests that if Arakawa predeceased Hackman, Hackman’s estate will be probated under intestacy rules and his kids will inherit everything. It’s qualified as saying “if” there is no residuary beneficiary. So far, no residuary beneficiary for Hackman’s estate has been reported.
If anyone sues, it will be the Arakawa’s residuary beneficiary, which is seemingly a charity. If Hackman predeceased, the charity would get everything from both estates. If Arakawa predeceased, as seems likely, Hackman’s kids get everything, even though they weren’t named in either will.
This could be a failure of the estate planning attorneys or it could be a failure by the clients to coordinate their estate plans, coupled with Hackman’s failure to recognize that his wife might die first. It could also be that different people in the marriage had different ideas for what should happen to all the money when they were both dead and this is exactly how Hackman wanted it if he went last.
I don’t think this will turn into $20 million of litigation. Hackman’s kids seem pretty likely to prevail. Perhaps they will settle by giving some or all of Arakawa’s estate to Arakawa’s charity but it’s quite possible they will tell the charity to go away and win handily in court if the charity presses the matter.
The ugliness comes in when family members are on opposite sides. If a charity is involved on one side, if they have a legal claim they will be much more likely to reach a settlement for much less than a family member who is full of emotion.
For any that are interested, here’s how New Mexico Probate law considers time of death in a case like this, and its potential influence on how the estate gets Probated:
The Simultaneous Death Act and the Estate of Gene Hackman and Wife
There’s a lot riding on establishing the time of death for Gene and Betsy.
In this case, with none of the kids being named in the will, they would all get an equal share. Suing isn’t going to change that.
Interesting. I think the latest estimates on time of death have Arakawa dying approximately six days before Hackman. If the charity can push that to less than five days, they get Arakawa’s estate, so there is indeed a lot riding on the time of death.
Although they have adjusted her time of death a bit it still seems clear she died well before him. Looks like they are going to say she most likely died on the 12th and he died on the 18th. That puts it outside of the simulatanious death window.
Did anyone watch the ABC special on Gene Hackman last night. Pretty disappointing. It was 90% fluff and not any new information. They did lay out the timeline pretty clearly.
I’m not better off having read that article.
We have reports that her will specified that within 90 days is simultaneous for estate considerations. We don’t know whether his will states the same but for the sake of discussion assume his will contains the same provision. Five days then is of no issue. In that case:
the estate is administered as if the deceased survived their beneficiary. The purpose is to administer estates efficiently and avoid court battles to determine who died first.
So each of the estates is handled as if the other survived? Huh? How does that play out? If she had survived him then it all goes to charity. If he had survived her then no named beneficiaries so presumably goes to kids equally.
Huh?
IANAL, and maybe one will weigh in, but …
ISTM that everything will ride on the Will, possible expert testimony, and the decisions made by a Probate Court Judge.
This part of the article:
Typically, wills include a standard simultaneous death clause mirroring the state statute. However, Hackman and his wife may have wills dictating what should happen if they die simultaneously or if their order of death cannot be determined. For example, they could stipulate that the time period extend to 30 or 90 days.
To me … says that you can say that – if we die within 30 or 90 days of each other – we’d like the Probate Court to treat our deaths as if they were simultaneous.
So … if that’s in the Will … and if the Judge decides that it’s valid and controlling … it seems that the estate of each will go to the beneficiaries designated by each.
The 120hr law seems like it applies barring any other expressed wishes (or a valid Will – Intestacy) by the decedents, though it only seems like a stricter standard than a theoretical 30/90 day standard expressed in a Will.
IOW, how far apart their deaths occurred matters, but the ‘cutoff line’ for when they don’t leave their estates to one another may be 120 hours, 30 days, 90 days, or another time frame explicated in the Will.
But this could easily become a classic ‘battle of the experts’ with no end of forensic pathologists and medical examiners arguing about the actual time of death … unless … there is a (longer than 120hr) 30 or 90 day clause in the Will, it is deemed to be valid by the Probate Court Judge, and there’s no argument that both deaths fell within that time period.
Anybody want to check my homework for me??
Lemme’ just go one step further.
If – AIUI – the estate is worth some $80 million, then it’s highly unlikely that any interested party who thinks they have a snowball’s chance in Hell of wresting a chunk of change from another … will decide out of conscience not to do so.
It … sounds complicated (from an hour ago):
News Nation: Gene Hackman, Betsy Arakawa’s $80M estate: Who will inherit it?
ETA: fixing an error
Something like this happened to a prominent local family some years back, with a large estate (much of it land). Their estate plans were drawn up with the expectation that the husband would die first, but she predeceased him and when he died the inheritors were forced to sell off chunks of the land to pay the taxes that resulted. All this happened in an old money, Yankee aristocracy family who should have known better and could afford the best legal services.
It appears that the $80M amount being kicked around is somehow based on the value of the trust. Wills don’t apply to trusts. (That’s one of the key benefits of trusts, no probate.) The trust document itself will specify who gets what under various circumstances.
While wills are filed in probate court and are made publicly available after a while (some Important People manage to have theirs sealed because they are Important People), no such availability is common for trust documents. It would take someone who is deemed to have valid reason to see the documents and then that person releases it before they could become public. A fairly high bar.