Attorney Mark Papazian says he may be guilty of misconduct, but that shouldn't nullify the will and keep him and his kids from receiving more than $14 million from a client he says was a dear friend.
The will and trust that resulted left the bulk of Mardigian's fortune — more than $17 million after taxes when Mardigian died in 2012 — to Papazian and his two children.
The problem is, Mardigian wasn't related to Papazian and the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct are clear in saying attorneys "shall not" prepare a will for a non-related client that includes a substantial gift for the attorney.
Mardigian's survivors want the gifts to Papazian and his children disallowed, and a county judge has ruled in their favor. The case is now before the Michigan Court of Appeals and a ruling could come soon.
"For over 100 years, the Supreme Court has 'bluntly warned' lawyers not to receive gifts from clients under wills they themselves have drafted," Gerald Gleeson, an attorney for Mardigian's brother Edward, said in a court filing which argues that Edward Mardigian of Bloomfield Hills and his two children are the lawful heirs.
"Mark Papazian did it anyway ... in flagrant disregard of his ethical duties as a member of the bar," the filing said.
Papazian, a divorce attorney and partner with Detroitin Troy, declined to talk about the case Friday. In court filings, he says he may be guilty of attorney misconduct, but that shouldn't nullify the will and keep him and his kids from receiving bequests of more than $14 million from a client he says was also his dear friend of 30 years.
Mardigian, who was born in Detroit but later became a resident of Florida and Charlevoix County in northern Michigan, was 59 when he died of lung cancer at an Ann Arbor hospital in January 2012. He was divorced with no children.
In November 2013, Charlevoix County Probate Judge Frederick Mulhauser threw out the June 2011 will and 2010 trust, which Papazian admits he drafted at the direction of Mardigian. Papazian appealed Mulhauser's ruling to the Court of Appeals, which heard oral arguments in March and is expected to issue a ruling soon.
The will and trust named Papazian as Mardigian's personal representative and awarded Papazian all of Mardigian's personal property. The documents also created $5-million trusts for each of Papazian's two children, and left Papazian the residual value of the estate after expenses and specific gifts to other beneficiaries, which totaled less than $1 million.
Under the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct, which the Michigan Supreme Court adopted in 1988, attorneys can only receive gifts through wills they drafted if the client is a relative. Papazian is not related to Mardigian, though he testified they were so close Mardigian often called him "cousin."
Papazian argues the will should only be nullified if there is evidence he exerted "undue influence" on its drafting. There's no evidence of that, he argues.
The Michigan Supreme Court "has held that the proper way to address an attorney's alleged violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct is by filing an attorney grievance," Papazian attorney Rodger Young said in a court filing.
Papazian "presented evidence that Bobby consulted repeatedly with both an independent attorney, and with Comerica Bank wealth management officials, about his estate documents in the six months after he executed the contested will and trust," Young's filing said.
"Even after consulting these independent professionals, Bobby made no changes to the documents which Mr. Papazian had participated in drafting."
Young said that if the Michigan Legislature wanted to ban bequests to attorneys in such cases, it would have passed a statute that explicitly said so, as a handful of other states have done.
Just as Edward Mardigian challenged the will, so did two of Bobby Mardigian's nieces, Susan Lucken and Nancy Varbedian, and his girlfriend, Melissa Goldberg. They say courts can't enforce a will that violates the public policy of Michigan, and the attorney rules of professional conduct express public policy.
"Papazian ducked and weaved for months in the probate court," where he first asserted one of his then law partners drafted the trust documents, attorney Gleeson said in a court filing.
But when that attorney, Roy Luttman, was deposed in the case, he denied any role in drafting the will or trust, court records show.
"Absolutely not, unequivocally no, never, did not do it, and I told Mark that and I ... can't believe I'm sitting here answering these questions, it's ridiculous," Luttman testified.
Five days before the case was set for trial in probate court, in November 2013, Papazian admitted through his attorneys that he prepared both the will and trust, according to pleadings in the case. That's when the Charlevoix judge revisited an earlier decision and ruled in favor of Edward Mardigian, saying there was no need for a trial.
It's not the first time Papazian has been personally involved in an estate fight before the Court of Appeals.
In 2007, a three-judge panel ruled against Mark Papazian and in favor of Papazian's father and sister in a fight involving control of his father's estate and the Hunter House restaurant in Birmingham. In that case, Papazian's father Albert Papazian, who owned the restaurant, accused Mark Papazian of fraudulently obtaining a deed to the restaurant property, an allegation Mark Papazian denied.
"That (case) has no relevance whatsoever," Mark Papazian told the Free Press on Friday. "The parties don't even know each other."
Contact Paul Egan: 517-372-8660 or pegan@freepress.com. Follow him on Twitter @paulegan4.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for commenting.
Your comment will be held for approval by the blog owner.