It’s the end of the month. That means it’s time for the end of the month round up. This month, my googling brought me to two stories – the Hseigh estate and the Guinness estate. The stories themselves aren’t necessarily from this month. But, they are interesting and both have been in the news recently.
Mystery will and witnesses leads to court battle over $500 million estate
The Estate of Tony Hseigh the former CEO of Zappos. Hseigh died in 2020 at the age of 46, in a fire that was later deemed an accident. He left behind a $500 million dollar estate and his parents and brother survived him. He did not leave behind a will, or at least, that’s what everyone thought.
In March of 2025, a seven-page, typed will arrived at a law firm in Reno, Nevada with a letter. The letter states that the will was found in Pakistan with the possessions of of a recently-passed, 91-year-old man. The Pakistani man, Pir Muhammad, was one of five witnesses to the will. Hseigh had no connection to Pakistan, or Pir Muhammad according to Hseigh’s family. The person who sent the will, Pir Muhammad’s grandson, hasn’t been able to be located and has been silent since the letter. The other four witnesses to the will haven’t been found either. Many believe that they are fictional people and the will is a forgery.
Aside from the missing witnesses, the Will is odd. It names two respected, Nevada attorneys, whom Hseigh had no relationship with, as co-executors. It also leaves money to an irrevocable trust that no one has found. The will benefits several charitable organizations like the Red Cross and the Gates Foundation, which Hseigh has no prior history with; and, it doesn’t mention any of the dozens of businesses and charities that he had invested in during his lifetime. There is a misspelling of Hseigh’s middle name in the will. And, the will includes strange language, like a line that he wants his beneficiaries to “live in the Wow.”
But is the will valid?
Despite the oddities, the will meets the threshold for consideration in Nevada courts. It appears to be signed by Hseigh and it has the requisite number of witnesses. The family contests the validity will. They argue that it’s a forgery.
According to friends, Hseigh lived the last months of his life in a manic state of psychosis fueled by drugs. While strange, friends report leaving his will with a Pakistani octogenarian wouldn’t necessarily be out of character for Hseigh.
But, erratic behavior could also open up another opportunity for the family to contest. If evidence shows that Mr. Hseigh didn’t have testamentary capacity in 2015 when he executed the will, the family could argue that the will is not valid on those grounds.
The family, unwilling to settle could be looking at years and potentially millions in attorneys fees to resolve the dispute. The most recent update to the story is that the Court will allow for the will to be “forensically tested.” It is unclear what testing might look like.
Netflix vs. Reality: House of Guinness
The ABA Real Property, Trust and Estate Law Section covered the story of the Guinness family. In the Article, the authors compare the actual story of the estate of Sir Benjamin Lee Guinness and Netflix’s recounting in their popular show, House of Guinness. The Netflix series opens on the reading of the will of Sir Benjamin in the late 1800s. This dramatic reading sets up the plot for emotional manipulation and family drama. The will punishes the heirs for their wrongdoings and forces them to participate in the family business. It rewards obedience and loyalty. For example, a clause in the will states that if either of Guinness’s two sons choose not to participate in the business, they shall forfeit their inheritance.
The Article argues that the actual will tells a different story. Instead of Sir Guinness using the will to punish the heirs, he actually intended “to preserve a family business, minimize conflict among heirs, and secure a lasting legacy.” In reality, Sir Benjamin’s will actually included a way for sons to buy one another out of the business.
The article also explores how Guinness’s wishes about retaining family control could be better served through the framework of a modern trust. As the business adapted to modern business practices and law, the business’s ownership and control has been dispersed over generations.
Other Stuff
- More than 35% of Gen Z homebuyers are single women and they need an estate plan according to this CNBC Article.
- Boxing legend Tommy Hearns under guardianship amid exploitation claims.
- Judge denies Cher’s Petition for Emergency Conservatorship over son.
- Will my inheritance effect my Arizona public benefits?
