Jackson Jambalaya

If you're talking about the article in today's Clarion, I would agree (with her current attorney) that she has a right to any part of her own file, which, as stated in the paper, is all she's seeking. To claim any part of her own file is confidential, therefore not available to HER, makes no sense. I have no doubt 'family agents' convinced Stu to write her out of the will but can't imagine how that can be proved unless one outs the group.

Stuart committed suicide Jan. 18, 2012.

Sorry it was actually Jan. 17

WHO CARES WHEN HE DID IT, THE FAMILY MANIPULATED HIM,.. SHE'S OUT, THEY NEW SHE WAS GONA GET PARDONED, SOOOO, NOW GIVE HER WHAT SHE WAS PROMISED IN THE WILL... SO NOW GET OVER IT !!! AND LETS PUT THIS WOMAN, AND THE FAMILY SHE MARRIED INTO BEHIND US,...REALLY!!!

All caps, huh? Angry??? I didn't say anything negative about Karen or Stuart. I sincerely hope she gets what was promised to her in the first will. Not that's any of my business or yours.

FYI - I'm not getting into a pissing match with anyone on here on what his/her opinion is of the Irby siuation.

P.S. - You need to take a fkin chill pill or don't read this blog! :)

The all caps wasn't intentional, and I don't really care what she receives or doesn't receive either, but manipulation on him or her, whether it be direct or indirect via; physically or mentally, ....I mean blah blah, blah blah blah blah, .

And this wouldn't be a pissing match either, because I couldn't care less what she does or doesn't get!

So...FYI : don't comment ignorantly, cause I don't know the family either....

Unfortunate, she's connect to our Alleged Philanthrapist of the Metro area, who wasn't a good tipper a had a pretentious ass Attitude.

So, just kinda over them....Really ...: )

There is no question that Stuart's child with Karen is an Irby.

There is no question that the child is innocent.

There is no question that Stuart was regarded as legally competent prior to the accident.

There is no question that, when Stuart filed divorced papers, COMPETENT legal counsel would have advised him to add a clause to an existing will changing the distributions in the event of a divorce from Karen. Such an addition would be an easy thing to do and common when this much money is involved. Indeed, any will by Stuart should have already had language addressing the possibility of a divorce or death of spouse.

Has the will written after the accident been probated? If so, was the judge informed that a prior will existed?

That a post accident will favors the guardians and disinherits a minor child screams fraud.

And, frankly, if there aren't criminal statutes in MS to deal with such shenangians on the part of guardians and attorneys and judges who would alter a will, contracts or legal agreements made prior to a ruling of incompetence, there should be.

Why would she NOT be entitled to her OWN file? Haven't we just been reading (on this site) quite a few threads about lawyers representing themselves instead of their clients?

1:56
Could care less. Couldn't care less says that you really do care.

If our wills made while we are legally competent can be changed by those who become guardians of our affairs should we get Alzheimer's or have some other brain altering event, we should all care.

We should care even more if those guardians and lawyers can profit from making those alterations and worse, that a probate court judge would ignore a pre-existing will made and paid for by the deceased while competent.

He was not competent when these greedy people changed his will. If you love your brother, then you honor his wishes along with his first will. Karen Irby deserves her share as well as her daughter. They were married for a long time and you had no right to "divorce" them period. Stuart earned that money, not you or your attorneys. Do what Jesus wants; give her and her daughter (she was like a daughter to Stuart im sure) their share of the money.