DENNIS HOPPER DIVORCE SHOCKER

Dennis Hopper and wife Victoria Hopper

Dennis Hopper, who is reportedly facing his 'final days surrounded by family and friends,' filed for divorce yesterday from his wife of 14 years, Victoria Hopper, the mother of their six-year-old daughter Galen.

Victoria is wife number five, but this marriage has far outlasted the previous four, which included the 8-day marriage to Michelle Phillips. He and Victoria have been together for 18 years. So what happened?

Adding to the confusion, a family friend told Huffington Post that Hopper is mentally incapacitated from the enormous amounts of medication he is on given his state.

A long time friend of the couple said, "It's truly a tragedy, and sadly its all about the money and who inherits what. This is about getting Victoria out of the will, nothing more, nothing less."

Hopper has three grown children, Marin, Henry and Ruthiana, although he reportedly has not spoken with Ruthiana in recent years. Both Marin, her daughter and Henry have lived for years in the same Venice, California compound as Dennis, Victoria and Galen and continue to do so at this juncture.

Hopper has been battling cancer for almost a decade, but has rapidly declined in recent months.

Old Memories: Easy Rider - 1969 - Starring Peter Fonda Dennis Hopper Jack Nicholson

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/15/d...o_n_424589.html

LaoPo

Cancer-stricken Easy Rider star Dennis Hopper files for divorce from his deathbed

By Richard Simpson

Last updated at 8:20 PM on 17th January 2010

Split: Cancer-stricken Dennis Hopper, who is said to be on his deathbed, has applied for divorce from Victoria Duffy, his wife of 13 years

The actor Dennis Hopper has filed for divorce from his fifth wife on his deathbed, according to U.S. reports.

The 73-year-old star of Easy Rider, Rebel Without A Cause and Apocalypse Now has prostate cancer. He is said to have less than a month to live after the disease spread to his bones.

In his final days, Hopper has separated from his wife and is understood to be trying to cap the amount she will receive from his will.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/artic...l#ixzz0cv1zrBGZ

LaoPo

I wonder what he wants to do with the money?

In a case like this, divorce is unlikely to change much. She would probably have a strong case that he isn't mentally fit.

I'm a fan, but he never was.

In a case like this, divorce is unlikely to change much. She would probably have a strong case that he isn't mentally fit.

Probably doesn't matter if he is on his death bed. It takes 6 months and a day from the filing of the petition for the marital status to terminate in California. If he dies prior to that time passing, the divorce action terminates by operation of law and therefore she is legally entitled to the assets as a surviving spouse.

And this differs from what goes on in Thailand in what way?

I liked some of his movies, but I'm not sure if I would like the man... or the ladies he chose to marry.

In a case like this, divorce is unlikely to change much. She would probably have a strong case that he isn't mentally fit.

Probably doesn't matter if he is on his death bed. It takes 6 months and a day from the filing of the petition for the marital status to terminate in California. If he dies prior to that time passing, the divorce action terminates by operation of law and therefore she is legally entitled to the assets as a surviving spouse.

Doesn't this change the situation a bit ?

"Hopper and Victoria Duffy, 41, have been married for nearly 14 years and have a daughter, Galen, who will turn seven in March.

In court papers Hopper lists the date of separation as last Tuesday and offers to pay his wife support.

He is also requesting joint legal and physical custody of Galen.

Reports say Hopper is trying to prevent his wife from contesting his will, which apparently leaves her only a quarter of his estate.

Miss Duffy is understood to be furious after discovering that her inheritance would be exactly what she had agreed to under the couple's prenuptial agreement and no more - despite the relatively long duration of their marriage. A friend of the couple said: 'It's truly a tragedy, and sadly it's all about the money and who inherits what.'

Hopper also hopes the move will force Miss Duffy to move from the Venice Beach compound where he and two of his grown-up children and their families live.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/artic...l#ixzz0cy5U0cu0

LaoPo

In a case like this, divorce is unlikely to change much. She would probably have a strong case that he isn't mentally fit.

Probably doesn't matter if he is on his death bed. It takes 6 months and a day from the filing of the petition for the marital status to terminate in California. If he dies prior to that time passing, the divorce action terminates by operation of law and therefore she is legally entitled to the assets as a surviving spouse.

Doesn't this change the situation a bit ?

"Hopper and Victoria Duffy, 41, have been married for nearly 14 years and have a daughter, Galen, who will turn seven in March.

In court papers Hopper lists the date of separation as last Tuesday and offers to pay his wife support.

He is also requesting joint legal and physical custody of Galen.

Reports say Hopper is trying to prevent his wife from contesting his will, which apparently leaves her only a quarter of his estate.

Miss Duffy is understood to be furious after discovering that her inheritance would be exactly what she had agreed to under the couple's prenuptial agreement and no more - despite the relatively long duration of their marriage. A friend of the couple said: 'It's truly a tragedy, and sadly it's all about the money and who inherits what.'

Hopper also hopes the move will force Miss Duffy to move from the Venice Beach compound where he and two of his grown-up children and their families live.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/artic...l#ixzz0cy5U0cu0

LaoPo

Change what? If you are suggesting that filing the petition for dissolution was to, in effect, underscore his intention of leaving her little by testate should she be inclined to challenge the prenuptial agreement and/or will, then I agree. In reality, it would be the only plausible reason for filing the petition. However, a surviving spouse has the option of taking pursuant to the terms of the last will and testament, or receiving property by virtue of it being community in nature. In other words, a will can not divest a surviving spouse to which he/she is entitled under community property law. After nearly 14 years of marriage, it is conceivable that a significant amount of his estate is community. However, if the prenuptial agreement holds up and addresses what is to occur in the event of his death, then it would all be mapped out (perhaps eliminating the community property characterization of the parties' properties). But then, why would there be a need to file the petition for dissolution? In reality, we really don't know. One can merely speculate.

If his wife is left a quarter of his assets, which a previous article in the Huffington Post says, it's strange since he has three grown up children PLUS the almost seven year old girl with his present wife, which makes five parties to receive a legacy, no?.

So maybe one of his first three kids is left out; is that possible under California Law ?

Or maybe the remaining 75% is to be divided between the 4 children but as you say: guessing.

LaoPo

If his wife is left a quarter of his assets, which a previous article in the Huffington Post says, it's strange since he has three grown up children PLUS the almost seven year old girl with his present wife, which makes five parties to receive a legacy, no?.

So maybe one of his first three kids is left out; is that possible under California Law ?

Or maybe the remaining 75% is to be divided between the 4 children but as you say: guessing.

LaoPo

Yep, all of it's a guess LaoPo. But, I may have misspoken - He's been an actor for a long time and therefore more than likely has a significant separate property estate (assets acquired prior to the 14 year marriage) which, pursuant to a will and/or living trust, could be left to whoever he wishes. To answer your question, no one is required under CA law to bequeath assets to anyone - even to one's children. However, if he were to die intestate (no will) then it's a completely different story. But under that scenario his wife would take 100% of the community and quasi-community property, and a 1/3 of his separate property with 2/3 being divided among his surviving children. But ONLY absent a will are assets subject to being divided among the children, grandchildren, parents, etc.

If his wife is left a quarter of his assets, which a previous article in the Huffington Post says, it's strange since he has three grown up children PLUS the almost seven year old girl with his present wife, which makes five parties to receive a legacy, no?.

So maybe one of his first three kids is left out; is that possible under California Law ?

Or maybe the remaining 75% is to be divided between the 4 children but as you say: guessing.

LaoPo

Yep, all of it's a guess LaoPo. But, I may have misspoken - He's been an actor for a long time and therefore more than likely has a significant separate property estate (assets acquired prior to the 14 year marriage) which, pursuant to a will and/or living trust, could be left to whoever he wishes. To answer your question, no one is required under CA law to bequeath assets to anyone - even to one's children. However, if he were to die intestate (no will) then it's a completely different story. But under that scenario his wife would take 100% of the community and quasi-community property, and a 1/3 of his separate property with 2/3 being divided among his surviving children. But ONLY absent a will are assets subject to being divided among the children, grandchildren, parents, etc.

Is there still a death tax? How much would the gov't get?

If his wife is left a quarter of his assets, which a previous article in the Huffington Post says, it's strange since he has three grown up children PLUS the almost seven year old girl with his present wife, which makes five parties to receive a legacy, no?.

So maybe one of his first three kids is left out; is that possible under California Law ?

Or maybe the remaining 75% is to be divided between the 4 children but as you say: guessing.

LaoPo

Yep, all of it's a guess LaoPo. But, I may have misspoken - He's been an actor for a long time and therefore more than likely has a significant separate property estate (assets acquired prior to the 14 year marriage) which, pursuant to a will and/or living trust, could be left to whoever he wishes. To answer your question, no one is required under CA law to bequeath assets to anyone - even to one's children. However, if he were to die intestate (no will) then it's a completely different story. But under that scenario his wife would take 100% of the community and quasi-community property, and a 1/3 of his separate property with 2/3 being divided among his surviving children. But ONLY absent a will are assets subject to being divided among the children, grandchildren, parents, etc.

Is there still a death tax? How much would the gov't get?

Hence the argument in favor of having a living trust. There still are federal estate taxes (based upon the size of the estate), but I do not believe there is a California State 'death tax' as of 2005. Probate costs can be rather excessive, however, they can be avoided by having a living trust.