log in or register to remove this ad

 

E. Gary Gygax Sr. May Have Had Another, More Recent Will?

Zardnaar

Legend
So, what's Gails issue with Garys stuff? Why wont she say, sale the Greyhawk Castle stuff or allow its use to be sold etc? Why is she hording everything except what she chooses to auction?

Seems pretty counter to Gary who wanted people to play games and not horde them like a dragon.

Up to her she could set it on fire.

I highly doubt there's actually that much and even less in a state that could be published.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

darjr

I crit!
Up to her she could set it on fire.

I highly doubt there's actually that much and even less in a state that could be published.
I would have loved a decent treatment though.

Maybe not so much as an adventure or RPG book.

More like a history piece like the Art and Arcana book or one of Petersons other history works or the Judges Guild volumes from Goodman Games.
 

Zardnaar

Legend
I would have loved a decent treatment though.

Maybe not so much as an adventure or RPG book.

More like a history piece like the Art and Arcana book or one of Petersons other history works or the Judges Guild volumes from Goodman Games.

Yeah even seeing old notes or whatever. Theresy not be that much idk.
 




So, what's Gails issue with Garys stuff? Why wont she say, sale the Greyhawk Castle stuff or allow its use to be sold etc? Why is she hording everything except what she chooses to auction?

Seems pretty counter to Gary who wanted people to play games and not horde them like a dragon.

It's not 'Gary's stuff'. It is Gail's 'stuff'. She can do with it as she pleases. Perhaps she's already destroyed it. Perhaps she's waiting to see what the market will bear.

Or maybe she just wants to move on with her life.
 

Omand

Adventurer
It's not 'Gary's stuff'. It is Gail's 'stuff'. She can do with it as she pleases. Perhaps she's already destroyed it. Perhaps she's waiting to see what the market will bear.

Or maybe she just wants to move on with her life.
Is it though?

I am not a lawyer, and not as well-versed as some who have been following this and have posted in this thread. But from what I have been able to gather, there s a real question about who owns what from Gary's Estate. Yes, Gail has claimed to be the 100% beneficiary, but Luke challenged that based upon questions over the legitimacy of the will.

At least, that is what I have been able to gather.

If Gail is not the 100% beneficiary, then it is not necessarily Gail's stuff.

Cheers :)
 

Zardnaar

Legend
Is it though?

I am not a lawyer, and not as well-versed as some who have been following this and have posted in this thread. But from what I have been able to gather, there s a real question about who owns what from Gary's Estate. Yes, Gail has claimed to be the 100% beneficiary, but Luke challenged that based upon questions over the legitimacy of the will.

At least, that is what I have been able to gather.

If Gail is not the 100% beneficiary, then it is not necessarily Gail's stuff.

Cheers :)

It is until the court decides otherwise.
 

Omand

Adventurer
It is until the court decides otherwise.
Is it though?

Again, not a lawyer. but if there is a dispute over the disposition of an estate it is my general understanding that the contents of the estate remain in the estate, they do not go or belong to any of the possible claimants. They remain in the estate until probate or whatever local legal requirement applies is fulfilled and then are distributed and become property of the appropriate heirs/recipients.

I will fully admit, however, that this is a very complex case based upon what I have read here. So, my interpretation and knowledge may well be off. Being Canadian, I am also not familiar with US law.

Cheers :)
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Is it though?

I am not a lawyer, and not as well-versed as some who have been following this and have posted in this thread. But from what I have been able to gather, there s a real question about who owns what from Gary's Estate. Yes, Gail has claimed to be the 100% beneficiary, but Luke challenged that based upon questions over the legitimacy of the will.

At least, that is what I have been able to gather.

If Gail is not the 100% beneficiary, then it is not necessarily Gail's stuff.

Cheers :)
It is until it isn't. There are negotiations in place and the case will probably settle, but until that happens(and maybe after) the stuff is hers.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Is it though?

Again, not a lawyer. but if there is a dispute over the disposition of an estate it is my general understanding that the contents of the estate remain in the estate, they do not go or belong to any of the possible claimants.

This dispute is recent. If I recall correctly, she's had clear title to the rights for something like a decade.
 


Omand

Adventurer
Again, I concede my lack of US legal knowledge, but reading all of the latest summaries, it seems to me the Estate is still intact.

At least in a legal sense.

That is why there are three attorneys involved. One for Gail, one for Luke and one for the Estate.

@Alzrius in his summaries has referred to the Estate existing multiple times, and that part of the early proceedings were about Gail disputing a separate lawyer being appointed by the court for the Estate, as she did not have the money to pay for said lawyer.

Not trying to be disruptive here, but it seems to me that those saying Gail could burn all of Gary's manuscripts right now since she owns them (pending the outcome of this case) are jumping the gun a bit. I highly suspect the court would take a dim view of such action.

I will go back to lurking now and we will eventually see how this turns out.

Cheers :)
 

Again, I concede my lack of US legal knowledge, but reading all of the latest summaries, it seems to me the Estate is still intact.
The estate is not intact. It has been probated, which means that it has been transformed from the estate of a deceased person to being the private property of a living person (Gail).

So no, it is not intact. As Zard noted, until a court rules otherwise, it is over. And given the amount of time that has passed, the odds of a court re-opening the matter are very slim to none.
 

MNblockhead

A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
Well, she couldn't legally just burn it as it is evidence in an ongoing litigation. That would be spoliation of evidence and would--at a minimum--result in an adverse inference sanction.
 

Well, she couldn't legally just burn it as it is evidence in an ongoing litigation. That would be spoliation of evidence and would--at a minimum--result in an adverse inference sanction.

A sizeable chunk of the estate is intellectual property rights. Kinda hard to light intangible objects on fire. I guess David Benioff and DB Weiss managed to do it, though.
 

Nikosandros

Golden Procrastinator
It's not 'Gary's stuff'. It is Gail's 'stuff'. She can do with it as she pleases. Perhaps she's already destroyed it. Perhaps she's waiting to see what the market will bear.

Or maybe she just wants to move on with her life.
If you follow the link in Alzrius post above, you'll see that it hasn't been destroyed and the intention of eventually publishing the material is there.
 

Well, she couldn't legally just burn it as it is evidence in an ongoing litigation. That would be spoliation of evidence and would--at a minimum--result in an adverse inference sanction.
In a criminal matter, you are right. But this is a civil matter, and until a court rules that its ownership is in question, it is her property.
 

If you follow the link in Alzrius post above, you'll see that it hasn't been destroyed and the intention of eventually publishing the material is there.
pexels-photo-931317.jpeg


I'm aware. I was pointing out her options, not her intent.
 

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top