Grossman children battling wife for $20-million estate





Richard Grossman

Richard Grossman

The fight over the multimilliondollar estate of renowned plastic surgeon and burn treatment pioneer Richard Grossman, who died last March at age 81, is headed for trial this year amid new allegations against his widow.

In a lawsuit filed in August, the doctor’s sons, Peter and Jeffrey, accused the doctor’s fourth wife, Elizabeth Grossman, of manipulating her ailing husband into leaving an inheritance believed to be worth tens of millions of dollars to her and nothing to his two children.

Then, on Feb. 10, a new complaint against Elizabeth Grossman and her attorney, Peter Wakeman, alleged that the two interfered with a contract directing that Richard Grossman’s estimated $20-million Hidden Valley estate in Thousand Oaks, known as Brookfield Farms, go to his children and grandchildren. The lawsuit said Elizabeth Grossman instead redirected the property to herself. The suit also accused the woman and her attorney of committing elder financial abuse and seeks an unspecified amount in damages.

“Richard suffered from mental and physical limitations, which restricted his ability to protect his rights and made him susceptible to the exercise of fraud and undue influence,” the suit states, adding that Richard Grossman had been taking Aricept for treatment of mild to moderate dementia associated with Alzheimer’s disease “for many years prior to 2012, when Elizabeth wrongfully induced the redirection of Brookfield Farms to herself.”

Alex Weingarten, an attorney for Richard Grossman’s children, said Elizabeth Grossman was aware of her husband’s weak mental state before he changed his will.

“Elizabeth Grossman took advantage of Richard’s diminished mental capacity,” Weingarten told The Acorn this week. “She essentially took all of his money while he was alive.”

Wakeman called the claims “ludicrous.” He said that two months after amending his will, Richard Grossman “had a full neurological workup and the doctor wrote an opinion that he was of sound mind and quite capable of making his own financial and estate planning decisions.

“The situation is you have children who are upset by a decision that their father made. The reality is those decisions were his decisions,” Wakeman said.

Fight over Brookfield Farms

The case will likely go to trial this year, Weingarten said. The next court hearing is in June, when a trial date may be set.

Exactly what is at stake is unknown because the size of Grossman’s estate hasn’t been disclosed

“The problem is that Elizabeth is hiding that information from us,” Weingarten said. “They filed a final state tax return that they will not provide us. . . . It’s tens of millions of dollars, but they’re not giving us the information we need to get the exact amount.”

Grossman amassed his fortune as the founder of the Grossman Burn Center in Los Angeles. He retired from his medical practice in 2013.

Lawyers for his children and widow now disagree on what Grossman intended to do with that wealth before he died. Weingarten said Richard and Elizabeth Grossman had a prenuptial agreement when they married in 2000 that kept the property of each separate.

His clients want to stop her from selling Grossman’s main asset, Brookfield Farms, because the doctor had wanted to keep the estate in his family, the attorney said.

He asks that the estate be distributed in trust for the benefit of Jeffrey Grossman, who has a neurological condition and depends on his family to support him, and for Peter Grossman’s children, age 8 and 10.

Richard Grossman had bought the property in 1979 for about $1.2 million.

Wakeman says Elizabeth Grossman has a right to sell the estate.

“Richard directed that the ranch be sold upon his passing,” Wakeman said. “If she is in fact doing that, it would be consistent with what his desires were.”

Asked why Richard Grossman’s kids were omitted from his will, Wakeman said that he and Peter have a “contentious history.”

“He was concerned that if his son Peter got his hands on the money, the money would never benefit his other son, Jeff, or his grandkids,” Wakeman said. “He knew that Elizabeth was going to be a much better steward of the money than would his son.”

Weingarten called that claim “preposterous and offensive.”

“If their claim is that Elizabeth would be the better steward for the money for Jeff and the kids, then why not give the money to Jeff and the kids and make Elizabeth the trustee, as opposed to leaving all the money to Elizabeth? Elizabeth took all the money for herself.”


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *