Children win family dispute over Ladue man's $50 million fortune
2015-03-23T23:25:00Z 2015-03-29T14:04:03Z Children win family dispute over Ladue man's $50 million fortune stltoday.com
March 23, 2015 11:25 pm • By Nicholas J.C. Pistor
CLAYTON • A bitter family dispute over a real estate magnate’s millions culminated on Monday when a jury decided the man’s socialite widow used undue influence to gain control of his company.
The high-stakes drama has featured sensational allegations, a dash of Missouri political intrigue and a glimpse into the life of a wealthy Ladue family. It pitted the adult children of the late Robert Kaplan against their stepmother, Christine Murray-Kaplan, his widow.
The case featured St. Louis lawyer Catherine Hanaway, a former U.S. attorney and current GOP candidate for governor who is representing the children, against Robert Blitz, the man co-leading an effort to build a new NFL stadium in St. Louis, who represents Murray-Kaplan.
And in another twist, the defendant was a donor to and friend of the leading Democratic candidate for governor, Chris Koster.
The children — Michael Kaplan, Julie Salomon and Elizabeth Wright — painted Murray-Kaplan as a manipulative woman who schemed to turn her husband against his family and steer his extensive $50 million wealth into her control. Murray-Kaplan has denied their allegations, saying the children weren’t attentive to their father in the last years of his life — and that he himself made the final decisions about his assets.
Jurors were quick to side with plaintiff Michael Kaplan, Robert Kaplan’s son and the original primary trustee. After two hours of deliberation, jurors decided Murray-Kaplan used “undue influence” to cause her husband to effectively transfer ownership interest in his company, Kaplan Real Estate, to her control a few months before he died in 2013.
The approximate value of the company’s stock wasn’t known. The jury’s decision places the stock back into the trust. Judge Carolyn C. Whittington will decide later on a petition to invalidate amendments to Kaplan’s estate.
Russell Piccoli, a lawyer representing Kaplan’s children, argued Monday that Murray-Kaplan isolated her husband and used his failing health to force him to make changes to his massive trust while relegating him to their mansion’s guest house.
Originally, 90 percent of Robert Kaplan’s assets were set to go to his children. By the time he died, the trust had been amended to give his wife the 90 percent, and his children 10 percent. Piccoli said Murray-Kaplan desperately wanted to keep her lifestyle, which included private jets, a million-dollar wine collection and expensive clothes befitting a socialite.
Several jurors hugged Kaplan’s children after the verdict Monday. The children wouldn’t comment to a reporter, and neither did Murray-Kaplan as she quickly left the courtroom following the jury’s decision.
The couple married in 2001, after 15 months of negotiations over a prenuptial agreement, according to testimony. It was his second marriage and her third.
After the marriage, Piccoli said the children, one whose husband worked for Kaplan’s real estate company, went on Murray-Kaplan’s “hit list.”
He said she banished their pictures from their mansion and turned Kaplan against them.
Murray-Kaplan denied all of the claims.
St. Louis lawyer Steve Stone, who had represented Robert Kaplan for decades, testified that Kaplan eventually made amendments to his trust at Murray-Kaplan’s urging, giving her more wealth upon his death.
A lawyer for Murray-Kaplan said that was done because she was taking care of him while he was sick.
“She stayed with a difficult man for 12 years because love will allow you to endure the quirks of another human being,” said Christopher Bauman, a Murray-Kaplan lawyer, referencing testimony from several witnesses who depicted Kaplan as a gruff, quick-tempered man.
But Stone said Murray-Kaplan threatened her husband with divorce if he didn’t make the changes. Stone made notes to his file of her alleged “relentless yelling and screaming” over the amendments.
Stone, who had worked for Kaplan since the early 1980s, was eventually fired by Kaplan and replaced with new lawyers because Stone wanted to give more of the estate to the children, according to testimony.
The children alleged Murray-Kaplan forced her husband to live in the guest house of his sprawling Ladue mansion after he became ill in 2010 with diverticulitis. The children’s lawsuit alleged Murray-Kaplan wouldn’t enter the guest house because it smelled like feces and urine.
His health quickly deteriorated after a surgery. He also reported that he “had trouble thinking” since he began taking appetite-stimulant drugs in 2010, according to testimony.
Bauman, Murray-Kaplan’s lawyer, said his client was forced to listen to comments about plastic surgery, claims that she was destitute before marrying Kaplan and insinuations of infidelity — even though no evidence of any affair was presented.
“That’s because she didn’t,” Bauman said.
Murray-Kaplan’s team presented evidence from Dr. Richard Bligh, a St. Louis County physician specializing in age management who treated both Kaplan and Murray-Kaplan.
Bligh testified that Kaplan had no “cognitive difficulties of any type,” although other doctors and medical reports indicated problems.
One intriguing subplot was not specifically mentioned at trial. Affidavits from the children that were not presented to the jury zeroed in on Murray-Kaplan’s “well publicized socialite lifestyle, virtually always in his absence,” which they said demoralized Kaplan. In particular, she “flaunted” her relationship with Koster, Missouri’s attorney general, in front of Kaplan, one affidavit claims.
“Perhaps most oppressing, Murray-Kaplan grandstanded her relationship with Koster by having him squire her to social galas at which they were photographed and made coy statements to the press,” said Michael Kaplan in an affidavit.
Koster reported two donations, $7,075 and $26,238.54, from Christine Murray-Kaplan in 2012. Ed Martin, Koster’s Republican opponent for attorney general that year, lodged an ethics complaint questioning the nature of the donation because it was listed as “in kind,” usually meaning goods or services instead of cash.
“To add insult to injury, Murray-Kaplan diverted Kaplan Real Estate office staff to working on Koster campaign activities,” says an affidavit from David Wright, the son-in-law who worked for Kaplan and was later fired.
Koster’s campaign spokeswoman didn’t return messages for comment on Monday.
Catherine Hanaway, a Republican candidate for Missouri governor who could face Koster, a Democratic candidate in the race, filed the original court petition on behalf of the children.
Hanaway said after Monday’s court victory that she decided against presenting such evidence to the jury because it may not have been relevant.
“We put the very best evidence we had and the most persuasive evidence before the jury,” Hanaway said. “I evaluated it like any other case. This was a case about whether Christine Murray-Kaplan used undue influence.”
The high-stakes drama has featured sensational allegations, a dash of Missouri political intrigue and a glimpse into the life of a wealthy Ladue family. It pitted the adult children of the late Robert Kaplan against their stepmother, Christine Murray-Kaplan, his widow.
The case featured St. Louis lawyer Catherine Hanaway, a former U.S. attorney and current GOP candidate for governor who is representing the children, against Robert Blitz, the man co-leading an effort to build a new NFL stadium in St. Louis, who represents Murray-Kaplan.
And in another twist, the defendant was a donor to and friend of the leading Democratic candidate for governor, Chris Koster.
The children — Michael Kaplan, Julie Salomon and Elizabeth Wright — painted Murray-Kaplan as a manipulative woman who schemed to turn her husband against his family and steer his extensive $50 million wealth into her control. Murray-Kaplan has denied their allegations, saying the children weren’t attentive to their father in the last years of his life — and that he himself made the final decisions about his assets.
Jurors were quick to side with plaintiff Michael Kaplan, Robert Kaplan’s son and the original primary trustee. After two hours of deliberation, jurors decided Murray-Kaplan used “undue influence” to cause her husband to effectively transfer ownership interest in his company, Kaplan Real Estate, to her control a few months before he died in 2013.
Russell Piccoli, a lawyer representing Kaplan’s children, argued Monday that Murray-Kaplan isolated her husband and used his failing health to force him to make changes to his massive trust while relegating him to their mansion’s guest house.
Originally, 90 percent of Robert Kaplan’s assets were set to go to his children. By the time he died, the trust had been amended to give his wife the 90 percent, and his children 10 percent. Piccoli said Murray-Kaplan desperately wanted to keep her lifestyle, which included private jets, a million-dollar wine collection and expensive clothes befitting a socialite.
Several jurors hugged Kaplan’s children after the verdict Monday. The children wouldn’t comment to a reporter, and neither did Murray-Kaplan as she quickly left the courtroom following the jury’s decision.
The couple married in 2001, after 15 months of negotiations over a prenuptial agreement, according to testimony. It was his second marriage and her third.
After the marriage, Piccoli said the children, one whose husband worked for Kaplan’s real estate company, went on Murray-Kaplan’s “hit list.”
He said she banished their pictures from their mansion and turned Kaplan against them.
Murray-Kaplan denied all of the claims.
St. Louis lawyer Steve Stone, who had represented Robert Kaplan for decades, testified that Kaplan eventually made amendments to his trust at Murray-Kaplan’s urging, giving her more wealth upon his death.
A lawyer for Murray-Kaplan said that was done because she was taking care of him while he was sick.
“She stayed with a difficult man for 12 years because love will allow you to endure the quirks of another human being,” said Christopher Bauman, a Murray-Kaplan lawyer, referencing testimony from several witnesses who depicted Kaplan as a gruff, quick-tempered man.
But Stone said Murray-Kaplan threatened her husband with divorce if he didn’t make the changes. Stone made notes to his file of her alleged “relentless yelling and screaming” over the amendments.
Stone, who had worked for Kaplan since the early 1980s, was eventually fired by Kaplan and replaced with new lawyers because Stone wanted to give more of the estate to the children, according to testimony.
The children alleged Murray-Kaplan forced her husband to live in the guest house of his sprawling Ladue mansion after he became ill in 2010 with diverticulitis. The children’s lawsuit alleged Murray-Kaplan wouldn’t enter the guest house because it smelled like feces and urine.
His health quickly deteriorated after a surgery. He also reported that he “had trouble thinking” since he began taking appetite-stimulant drugs in 2010, according to testimony.
Bauman, Murray-Kaplan’s lawyer, said his client was forced to listen to comments about plastic surgery, claims that she was destitute before marrying Kaplan and insinuations of infidelity — even though no evidence of any affair was presented.
“That’s because she didn’t,” Bauman said.
Murray-Kaplan’s team presented evidence from Dr. Richard Bligh, a St. Louis County physician specializing in age management who treated both Kaplan and Murray-Kaplan.
Bligh testified that Kaplan had no “cognitive difficulties of any type,” although other doctors and medical reports indicated problems.
One intriguing subplot was not specifically mentioned at trial. Affidavits from the children that were not presented to the jury zeroed in on Murray-Kaplan’s “well publicized socialite lifestyle, virtually always in his absence,” which they said demoralized Kaplan. In particular, she “flaunted” her relationship with Koster, Missouri’s attorney general, in front of Kaplan, one affidavit claims.
“Perhaps most oppressing, Murray-Kaplan grandstanded her relationship with Koster by having him squire her to social galas at which they were photographed and made coy statements to the press,” said Michael Kaplan in an affidavit.
Koster reported two donations, $7,075 and $26,238.54, from Christine Murray-Kaplan in 2012. Ed Martin, Koster’s Republican opponent for attorney general that year, lodged an ethics complaint questioning the nature of the donation because it was listed as “in kind,” usually meaning goods or services instead of cash.
“To add insult to injury, Murray-Kaplan diverted Kaplan Real Estate office staff to working on Koster campaign activities,” says an affidavit from David Wright, the son-in-law who worked for Kaplan and was later fired.
Koster’s campaign spokeswoman didn’t return messages for comment on Monday.
Catherine Hanaway, a Republican candidate for Missouri governor who could face Koster, a Democratic candidate in the race, filed the original court petition on behalf of the children.
Hanaway said after Monday’s court victory that she decided against presenting such evidence to the jury because it may not have been relevant.
“We put the very best evidence we had and the most persuasive evidence before the jury,” Hanaway said. “I evaluated it like any other case. This was a case about whether Christine Murray-Kaplan used undue influence.”
Nicholas J.C. Pistor • 314-436-2239
@nickpistor on Twitter
npistor@post-dispatch.com
@nickpistor on Twitter
npistor@post-dispatch.com
Tags
Children win family dispute over Ladue man's $50 million fortune
2015-03-23T23:25:00Z 2015-03-29T14:04:03Z Children win family dispute over Ladue man's $50 million fortune stltoday.com
March 23, 2015 11:25 pm • By Nicholas J.C. Pistor
CLAYTON • A bitter family dispute over a real estate magnate’s millions culminated on Monday when a jury decided the man’s socialite widow used undue influence to gain control of his company.
The high-stakes drama has featured sensational allegations, a dash of Missouri political intrigue and a glimpse into the life of a wealthy Ladue family. It pitted the adult children of the late Robert Kaplan against their stepmother, Christine Murray-Kaplan, his widow.
The case featured St. Louis lawyer Catherine Hanaway, a former U.S. attorney and current GOP candidate for governor who is representing the children, against Robert Blitz, the man co-leading an effort to build a new NFL stadium in St. Louis, who represents Murray-Kaplan.
And in another twist, the defendant was a donor to and friend of the leading Democratic candidate for governor, Chris Koster.
The children — Michael Kaplan, Julie Salomon and Elizabeth Wright — painted Murray-Kaplan as a manipulative woman who schemed to turn her husband against his family and steer his extensive $50 million wealth into her control. Murray-Kaplan has denied their allegations, saying the children weren’t attentive to their father in the last years of his life — and that he himself made the final decisions about his assets.
Jurors were quick to side with plaintiff Michael Kaplan, Robert Kaplan’s son and the original primary trustee. After two hours of deliberation, jurors decided Murray-Kaplan used “undue influence” to cause her husband to effectively transfer ownership interest in his company, Kaplan Real Estate, to her control a few months before he died in 2013.
The approximate value of the company’s stock wasn’t known. The jury’s decision places the stock back into the trust. Judge Carolyn C. Whittington will decide later on a petition to invalidate amendments to Kaplan’s estate.
Russell Piccoli, a lawyer representing Kaplan’s children, argued Monday that Murray-Kaplan isolated her husband and used his failing health to force him to make changes to his massive trust while relegating him to their mansion’s guest house.
Originally, 90 percent of Robert Kaplan’s assets were set to go to his children. By the time he died, the trust had been amended to give his wife the 90 percent, and his children 10 percent. Piccoli said Murray-Kaplan desperately wanted to keep her lifestyle, which included private jets, a million-dollar wine collection and expensive clothes befitting a socialite.
Several jurors hugged Kaplan’s children after the verdict Monday. The children wouldn’t comment to a reporter, and neither did Murray-Kaplan as she quickly left the courtroom following the jury’s decision.
The couple married in 2001, after 15 months of negotiations over a prenuptial agreement, according to testimony. It was his second marriage and her third.
After the marriage, Piccoli said the children, one whose husband worked for Kaplan’s real estate company, went on Murray-Kaplan’s “hit list.”
He said she banished their pictures from their mansion and turned Kaplan against them.
Murray-Kaplan denied all of the claims.
St. Louis lawyer Steve Stone, who had represented Robert Kaplan for decades, testified that Kaplan eventually made amendments to his trust at Murray-Kaplan’s urging, giving her more wealth upon his death.
A lawyer for Murray-Kaplan said that was done because she was taking care of him while he was sick.
“She stayed with a difficult man for 12 years because love will allow you to endure the quirks of another human being,” said Christopher Bauman, a Murray-Kaplan lawyer, referencing testimony from several witnesses who depicted Kaplan as a gruff, quick-tempered man.
But Stone said Murray-Kaplan threatened her husband with divorce if he didn’t make the changes. Stone made notes to his file of her alleged “relentless yelling and screaming” over the amendments.
Stone, who had worked for Kaplan since the early 1980s, was eventually fired by Kaplan and replaced with new lawyers because Stone wanted to give more of the estate to the children, according to testimony.
The children alleged Murray-Kaplan forced her husband to live in the guest house of his sprawling Ladue mansion after he became ill in 2010 with diverticulitis. The children’s lawsuit alleged Murray-Kaplan wouldn’t enter the guest house because it smelled like feces and urine.
His health quickly deteriorated after a surgery. He also reported that he “had trouble thinking” since he began taking appetite-stimulant drugs in 2010, according to testimony.
Bauman, Murray-Kaplan’s lawyer, said his client was forced to listen to comments about plastic surgery, claims that she was destitute before marrying Kaplan and insinuations of infidelity — even though no evidence of any affair was presented.
“That’s because she didn’t,” Bauman said.
Murray-Kaplan’s team presented evidence from Dr. Richard Bligh, a St. Louis County physician specializing in age management who treated both Kaplan and Murray-Kaplan.
Bligh testified that Kaplan had no “cognitive difficulties of any type,” although other doctors and medical reports indicated problems.
One intriguing subplot was not specifically mentioned at trial. Affidavits from the children that were not presented to the jury zeroed in on Murray-Kaplan’s “well publicized socialite lifestyle, virtually always in his absence,” which they said demoralized Kaplan. In particular, she “flaunted” her relationship with Koster, Missouri’s attorney general, in front of Kaplan, one affidavit claims.
“Perhaps most oppressing, Murray-Kaplan grandstanded her relationship with Koster by having him squire her to social galas at which they were photographed and made coy statements to the press,” said Michael Kaplan in an affidavit.
Koster reported two donations, $7,075 and $26,238.54, from Christine Murray-Kaplan in 2012. Ed Martin, Koster’s Republican opponent for attorney general that year, lodged an ethics complaint questioning the nature of the donation because it was listed as “in kind,” usually meaning goods or services instead of cash.
“To add insult to injury, Murray-Kaplan diverted Kaplan Real Estate office staff to working on Koster campaign activities,” says an affidavit from David Wright, the son-in-law who worked for Kaplan and was later fired.
Koster’s campaign spokeswoman didn’t return messages for comment on Monday.
Catherine Hanaway, a Republican candidate for Missouri governor who could face Koster, a Democratic candidate in the race, filed the original court petition on behalf of the children.
Hanaway said after Monday’s court victory that she decided against presenting such evidence to the jury because it may not have been relevant.
“We put the very best evidence we had and the most persuasive evidence before the jury,” Hanaway said. “I evaluated it like any other case. This was a case about whether Christine Murray-Kaplan used undue influence.”
The high-stakes drama has featured sensational allegations, a dash of Missouri political intrigue and a glimpse into the life of a wealthy Ladue family. It pitted the adult children of the late Robert Kaplan against their stepmother, Christine Murray-Kaplan, his widow.
The case featured St. Louis lawyer Catherine Hanaway, a former U.S. attorney and current GOP candidate for governor who is representing the children, against Robert Blitz, the man co-leading an effort to build a new NFL stadium in St. Louis, who represents Murray-Kaplan.
And in another twist, the defendant was a donor to and friend of the leading Democratic candidate for governor, Chris Koster.
The children — Michael Kaplan, Julie Salomon and Elizabeth Wright — painted Murray-Kaplan as a manipulative woman who schemed to turn her husband against his family and steer his extensive $50 million wealth into her control. Murray-Kaplan has denied their allegations, saying the children weren’t attentive to their father in the last years of his life — and that he himself made the final decisions about his assets.
Jurors were quick to side with plaintiff Michael Kaplan, Robert Kaplan’s son and the original primary trustee. After two hours of deliberation, jurors decided Murray-Kaplan used “undue influence” to cause her husband to effectively transfer ownership interest in his company, Kaplan Real Estate, to her control a few months before he died in 2013.
Russell Piccoli, a lawyer representing Kaplan’s children, argued Monday that Murray-Kaplan isolated her husband and used his failing health to force him to make changes to his massive trust while relegating him to their mansion’s guest house.
Originally, 90 percent of Robert Kaplan’s assets were set to go to his children. By the time he died, the trust had been amended to give his wife the 90 percent, and his children 10 percent. Piccoli said Murray-Kaplan desperately wanted to keep her lifestyle, which included private jets, a million-dollar wine collection and expensive clothes befitting a socialite.
Several jurors hugged Kaplan’s children after the verdict Monday. The children wouldn’t comment to a reporter, and neither did Murray-Kaplan as she quickly left the courtroom following the jury’s decision.
The couple married in 2001, after 15 months of negotiations over a prenuptial agreement, according to testimony. It was his second marriage and her third.
After the marriage, Piccoli said the children, one whose husband worked for Kaplan’s real estate company, went on Murray-Kaplan’s “hit list.”
He said she banished their pictures from their mansion and turned Kaplan against them.
Murray-Kaplan denied all of the claims.
St. Louis lawyer Steve Stone, who had represented Robert Kaplan for decades, testified that Kaplan eventually made amendments to his trust at Murray-Kaplan’s urging, giving her more wealth upon his death.
A lawyer for Murray-Kaplan said that was done because she was taking care of him while he was sick.
“She stayed with a difficult man for 12 years because love will allow you to endure the quirks of another human being,” said Christopher Bauman, a Murray-Kaplan lawyer, referencing testimony from several witnesses who depicted Kaplan as a gruff, quick-tempered man.
But Stone said Murray-Kaplan threatened her husband with divorce if he didn’t make the changes. Stone made notes to his file of her alleged “relentless yelling and screaming” over the amendments.
Stone, who had worked for Kaplan since the early 1980s, was eventually fired by Kaplan and replaced with new lawyers because Stone wanted to give more of the estate to the children, according to testimony.
The children alleged Murray-Kaplan forced her husband to live in the guest house of his sprawling Ladue mansion after he became ill in 2010 with diverticulitis. The children’s lawsuit alleged Murray-Kaplan wouldn’t enter the guest house because it smelled like feces and urine.
His health quickly deteriorated after a surgery. He also reported that he “had trouble thinking” since he began taking appetite-stimulant drugs in 2010, according to testimony.
Bauman, Murray-Kaplan’s lawyer, said his client was forced to listen to comments about plastic surgery, claims that she was destitute before marrying Kaplan and insinuations of infidelity — even though no evidence of any affair was presented.
“That’s because she didn’t,” Bauman said.
Murray-Kaplan’s team presented evidence from Dr. Richard Bligh, a St. Louis County physician specializing in age management who treated both Kaplan and Murray-Kaplan.
Bligh testified that Kaplan had no “cognitive difficulties of any type,” although other doctors and medical reports indicated problems.
One intriguing subplot was not specifically mentioned at trial. Affidavits from the children that were not presented to the jury zeroed in on Murray-Kaplan’s “well publicized socialite lifestyle, virtually always in his absence,” which they said demoralized Kaplan. In particular, she “flaunted” her relationship with Koster, Missouri’s attorney general, in front of Kaplan, one affidavit claims.
“Perhaps most oppressing, Murray-Kaplan grandstanded her relationship with Koster by having him squire her to social galas at which they were photographed and made coy statements to the press,” said Michael Kaplan in an affidavit.
Koster reported two donations, $7,075 and $26,238.54, from Christine Murray-Kaplan in 2012. Ed Martin, Koster’s Republican opponent for attorney general that year, lodged an ethics complaint questioning the nature of the donation because it was listed as “in kind,” usually meaning goods or services instead of cash.
“To add insult to injury, Murray-Kaplan diverted Kaplan Real Estate office staff to working on Koster campaign activities,” says an affidavit from David Wright, the son-in-law who worked for Kaplan and was later fired.
Koster’s campaign spokeswoman didn’t return messages for comment on Monday.
Catherine Hanaway, a Republican candidate for Missouri governor who could face Koster, a Democratic candidate in the race, filed the original court petition on behalf of the children.
Hanaway said after Monday’s court victory that she decided against presenting such evidence to the jury because it may not have been relevant.
“We put the very best evidence we had and the most persuasive evidence before the jury,” Hanaway said. “I evaluated it like any other case. This was a case about whether Christine Murray-Kaplan used undue influence.”
Nicholas J.C. Pistor • 314-436-2239
@nickpistor on Twitter
npistor@post-dispatch.com
@nickpistor on Twitter
npistor@post-dispatch.com
Copyright 2015 stltoday.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
