paris jackson is pressing for major changes in the way her late father’s estate is being handled, taking direct aim at the lawyers running it. The dispute is heading into a Wednesday morning hearing in Century City, with scrutiny on payments, gifts, and what her side describes as a lack of accountability to beneficiaries. The fight lands in probate court with tensions already high and no ruling expected the same day.
Hearing set in Century City with no immediate ruling expected
The next flashpoint comes Wednesday morning, with a hearing scheduled to start at 9: 00 a. m. PT and expected to run all day in Century City. Retired Judge Mitchell Beckloff, who has been on the case since Michael Jackson’s death in 2009, is set to preside. While the filing and the stakes point to a combustible session, the court is not expected to issue a ruling that day.
In the days leading up to the hearing, a pre-hearing brief was filed late last week in which paris jackson’s legal team trained its criticism on estate co-executor John Branca. The brief uses a pointed film reference, describing Branca as “Aping the infamous Colonel Jessup, ” and asserts he testified that he had neither the time nor inclination to explain himself to beneficiaries and would rather they simply expressed thanks and moved on.
Paris Jackson is expected to attend the hearing, and the filing signals that her presence and probable testimony would align with the positions taken in court papers now on the L. A. Superior Court docket.
Paris Jackson’s filing disputes fees, “premium payments, ” and alleged gifts
At the center of the current court clash is a conflict over money and oversight—specifically more than $600, 000 in bonuses described as “premium payments, ” as well as payouts to various law firms and individuals for work portrayed as largely unaccounted for. The dispute also includes allegations involving gifts such as cars and fancy watches.
A 15-page filing dated March 6 argues that Branca’s reliance on a fee application is deeply flawed and claims there has been an insistence on “doling out gifts” to colleagues in ways that violate the Probate Code, a court order, and objections raised by Michael Jackson’s children. The filing states these actions demonstrate that Branca has “lost sight of his fiduciary obligations, ” and says that “must change. ”
The hearing is set against co-executors John Branca and John McClain, placing the estate’s current leadership directly under pressure in open court as beneficiaries contest the handling of payments and decision-making.
Immediate reactions and direct claims from the court papers
The sharpest reactions are contained inside the court filings themselves. In the March 6 brief, paris jackson’s legal team alleges that the executors’ “constant claims of transparency and diligence” are contradicted by the contested fee application and the alleged gifts and payments. The filing frames the disagreement not as a minor accounting dispute, but as a test of whether fiduciary standards are being met inside an estate that has remained in probate proceedings for years.
The estate, acting through Branca, has fought back in court against paris jackson’s actions. In recent months, the estate won an anti-SLAPP motion against Paris Jackson, and the court determined that Branca and the estate were due lawyers’ fees.
Quick context on a long-running probate battle
Nearly 17 years after Michael Jackson died in 2009, his will remains in flux beyond the confirmation of Branca and McClain to oversee the estate, with many affairs still tangled in a prolonged probate court battle. With Paris Jackson and her brothers Prince and Bigi now adults, the family’s ability to press for more direct control sits in the background of the current confrontation.
What’s next after Wednesday’s all-day session
Wednesday’s hearing is positioned as a key test of how the court will handle disputes over executors’ fees, bonus-style payments, and the claims of improper gifts—issues that paris jackson has put squarely on the record. With the court not expected to rule that day, the immediate next development is likely to be further filings and additional hearings as both sides continue to argue over fiduciary obligations and the estate’s spending decisions in the probate process.
