Heath Ledger's Will Excludes Michelle And Matilda, Leading To Ledger Family Crisis

Posted by Molly Friedman at 4:39 AM on March 11, 2008

Though Heath Ledger was busy racking up film roles in the years leading up to his death that fattened his wallet, there was one practical economic task he overlooked: updating his will. According to the Daily Mail, Ledger hadn't rewritten the document since 2003, one year before he met Michelle Williams on the set of Brokeback Mountain. As a result, the actor's sole beneficiaries will be his parents and now-estranged sisters, which leaves his daughter Matilda and Michelle out of the picture. But a surprising lack of assets in New York begs the question: how much did Ledger have to give, exactly?

"A series of documents filed in Manhattan Surrogate's Court revealed that the actor had less than $145,000 in New York assets at the time, including a $25,000 Toyota Prius and $20,000 in furniture and fixtures."

 

Both the Daily Mail and the NY Daily News are quick to speculate that Ledger most likely had trust funds, not to mention properties in Australia, but one of his priciest assets included the Brooklyn townhouse he'd shared with Michelle, originally bought in 2005 for $3.6 million. So why the (relatively) paltry sum given by the courts? As an estates specialist told the News, trusts and "jointly held assets" aren't included in Surrogate's Court findings. In the meantime, his father Kit has assured the press that Matilda and Michelle "will be taken care of," though the How factor is currently missing in the equation.

Tags: heath ledger | michelle williams | post mortem mayhem

Comments (AU Comments · US Comments)

Trish

Posted March 11, 2008 8:17 AM

Matilda's inheritance should not be left up to Kim Ledger's goodwill. The story goes that he already estranged himself from two brothers over money. Money makes people do strange things. Matilda should get the entire estate. If Heath had wanted it split with parents, siblings as well as his own daughter, he should have done up a new will. What were his advisors / account(s) thinking?? Or not thinking?!!!! With the birth of his child, all of that should have been taken care of.

As it stands, I only hope that the daughter's preeminent rights are upheld, Kim Ledger et al probably have enough money already, it should go to the baby.

Post Your Comment

Defamer Australia moderates comments to avoid spam and abuse. We're looking for comments that are interesting, substantial and/or highly amusing. HTML is not accepted.

You must supply a name and your email address.