B
Birdie
Guest
Years ago when he was about 25 years old, my father came to this country from Portugal with his father, mother, two sisters, and brother. My grandfather forced all of his children, except the youngest, to work full time and turn over all of their paychecks to him for several years. He then used that money to invest in rental property. It was always agreed that someday, when my grandfather and grandmother passed away, all of the properties would be divided amongst the four children (my father included). My father, unfortunately, did not outlive his father and expired at age 50 of cancer. My grandfather, still unable to understand English, thought that his will was written in such a way that my father's 25% share of these properties would automatically go to his children (my sister and I) when he died. This was what my father and grandfather both wanted. When my grandfather eventually died two years ago, my sister and I did not contest the will (which actually was written so that only surviving children would inheirit the properties) because my two aunts and uncle promised us from the beginning that they would honor their father and my father's wishes and give 25% of the properties to my sister and I. We trusted them. Now that the probates are closed, it seems that one of my aunts has had a change of heart. I am getting the impression that she now feels my sister and I are not entitled to a full fourth of the properties. My question is this: Since my father was forced to work to earn the money that purchased those properties, and by all rights was a 1/4 owner in them even though his name was never actually on the deeds, do we, my sister and I, have any legal leg to stand on to sue for 1/4 of their value in our father's name? Or is this just another one of those harsh life lessons learned?