CANADA Canada - Barry, 75, & Honey Sherman, 70, found dead, Toronto, 15 Dec 2017 #16

[MistyWaters]

If the hundreds of pages of docs unsealed last week were in a box... I'm assuming that is 'one copy' of the hundreds of pages.. I'm assuming that not only KD has access to these documents, but all media would have the same access?? How long does it take the court to make copies upon request? Are copies allowed to be made, or must the docs be viewed AT the courthouse? Are all of the media keeping silent about what is in B's 'second will'?

ETA: to add:

Also... is it possible there may have ALSO been a publication ban, in addition to the documents being 'sealed'? Or is it possible that immediately following the SCC ruling to unseal the docs, the TPS sought a pub ban? Would KD and other media tell us if there was a pub ban, or is it possible that part of the pub ban could potentially include that there IS a pub ban? imo.

"After the Supreme Court of Canada ordered the entire Sherman estate file unsealed, the Star found the documents late Friday in a courthouse sealed in multiple yellow packages in a plain, unmarked box. "

Barry Sherman’s will divided his estate among Barry and Honey’s four kids when they reach 35 years of age

It wouldn’t surprise me if the Estate Trustees applied for a publication ban on the secondary will, even if the documents were included in the unsealed probate file unsealed by the court. The only reason I can think of which might stand in the way, as Honey had no will, is the Court would’ve also appointed/approved of the estate trustees as opposed names stated in a will.

If the entire estate was decided equally amongst the four adult children, where’s the mention of minor children or a beneficiary who wouldn’t normally be linked to them? There must be more IMO.

 

[ldlager]

So what was so earth shattering in the estate documents that the family worried would put them in danger, cause embarrassment and require the need for extra security??
- apparently nothing left to charities?
- less inheritance than one might expect?
-the adult kids do not get full payout till the age of 35?
Maybe i am missing something, or the big deal estate secrets have not yet been revealed?
imo, speculation.

Ostensibly the family/trustees didn't want the names, addresses, etc. of the Trustees and beneficiaries made public.

 

[deugirtni]

I find it strange that even if Honey did not have money, property etc in her name (I don't know this of course). I still think that she would have a will distributing jewellery, family heirlooms, art work etc. I am not wealthy but have done this for my children and grandchildren.

It seems that H had more money than most people I know who have died and left wills? To me, it is very odd that she wouldn't have had a will, and especially considering the story told by one of her service providers. imo.

"Honey had $45.9 million in personal property and $9.5 million in real estate."

Barry Sherman’s will divided his estate among Barry and Honey’s four kids when they reach 35 years of age

 

[deugirtni]

Does anyone know/remember if it was ever written that the executors/trustees of BOTH of B's wills were the exact same, and that both wills had been updated in the year of his death, to only include four people, 2 of which were family members?

"When Barry made his will in 2005, he appointed eight trustees (sometimes called executors). Those eight were Jack Kay (his right hand man at Apotex); Mike Florence (his sister’s husband); Craig Baxter (a family holding company executive); Allen Shechtman (honey’s sister’s husband); and his four children.

In March of 2017, Barry added a codicil to his will, changing his trustees to just four: Jack Kay, Jonathon Sherman, Alex Glasenberg (a family holding company executive), and Brad Krawczyk, the husband of Barry and Honey’s daughter Alexandra."

Barry Sherman’s will divided his estate among Barry and Honey’s four kids when they reach 35 years of age

 

[deugirtni]

this media report states he had 6 million in real estate?

Slain billionaire Barry Sherman's will divided estate equally among four children

This article talks about Barry's will and is a lot about Honey and her death. It appears that Barry owned everything and was making the decisions of what will be one with it until he AND Honey died. Twice it is referenced/ stated that after Honey dies the money goes to the 4 kids.

Curious now even if she did have a will, how legal would it be if it did not follow Barry's lead and what he wanted to be done with HIS assets.

It reads as if it is the will and testament for the two of them, a combined will. Maybe Honey did not feel the need to do a personal primary one as well, since it was all covered in Barry's, why create another one and complicate the matter?

It appears that Barry was in complete control, Honey legally could not change the direction of Barry's bequests created in his will even if he died before her, she was to be under a trust and kept well, not given anything that would be hers to bequeath to anyone other than the 4 children that are already earmarked for the inheritance.

This rings of some truth with the rumor that Honey was speaking of Barry gifting her a large amount of money soon. Possibly she did meet with a lawyer to draw up a personal/primary will for when she did have something to bequeath in her name, we will never know.

We know they had a lot of money, we assume from the intel we can garner that Barry controlled all of the purse strings and money was always an issue with the family coming to him for it. It still surprises me that JS would keep asking for more and more money if he had all of these successful businesses and lives in great luxury why did Barry need to pay for the surrogacies? It appears that JS would not spend any of his earnings to create a family, and if the reports are true he has been gifted 10's if not hundreds of millions of $$, why go to Barry for 300K? what happened to all that money he had?

I am SO confused. I believe that when people are married, and during the time of that marriage, one of them works everyday at building an empire, the value is shared, as per the Family Law Act - at least the difference between the value at time of marriage and the value at time of death?

But it has been said that Barry and Honey borrowed funds from different family members, so it seems there was not much 'value' prior to the marriage, and I believe any real growth in Apotex value came during their marriage.

I can see how Barry would want to protect his 'heirs', if he died first, by only giving H an allowance of sorts, to include all of the 'income', but none of the 'assets', while meanwhile, the actual assets were managed by the Apo trustees.. ie H didn't just inherit everything, which would potentially allow her to marry someone new, sell everything, and leave all of her money to her new mate when she died, rather than her kids.

Not saying that would've ever happened, but seems B was preventing that as even a possibility. But I'm not understanding why H wouldn't have been entitled to the same wealth/assets upon Barry's death, as she would have been had they instead divorced.

And if he had died while she remained living, she could have contested that.. but I believe it would need to be contested in order for it to be changed to equal assets.. but as it stands, she is not alive to contest it, .... can anyone follow my lame attempt to explain what I'm talking about? If they were deemed to share equally in their assets gained during their marriage, but they may have individually had separate and different ideas about how they wanted to distribute their estates upon their respective deaths, that could make quite a substantial difference to perhaps many things/people.

It is inconceivable to me that H really had no will and died intestate. It also seems scary to me somehow, that JK is no longer an executor/trustee of B's estate. imo.

 

[ldlager]

I am SO confused. I believe that when people are married, and during the time of that marriage, one of them works everyday at building an empire, the value is shared, as per the Family Law Act - at least the difference between the value at time of marriage and the value at time of death?

But it has been said that Barry and Honey borrowed funds from different family members, so it seems there was not much 'value' prior to the marriage, and I believe any real growth in Apotex value came during their marriage.

I can see how Barry would want to protect his 'heirs', if he died first, by only giving H an allowance of sorts, to include all of the 'income', but none of the 'assets', while meanwhile, the actual assets were managed by the Apo trustees.. ie H didn't just inherit everything, which would potentially allow her to marry someone new, sell everything, and leave all of her money to her new mate when she died, rather than her kids.

Not saying that would've ever happened, but seems B was preventing that as even a possibility. But I'm not understanding why H wouldn't have been entitled to the same wealth/assets upon Barry's death, as she would have been had they instead divorced.

And if he had died while she remained living, she could have contested that.. but I believe it would need to be contested in order for it to be changed to equal assets.. but as it stands, she is not alive to contest it, .... can anyone follow my lame attempt to explain what I'm talking about? If they were deemed to share equally in their assets gained during their marriage, but they may have individually had separate and different ideas about how they wanted to distribute their estates upon their respective deaths, that could make quite a substantial difference to perhaps many things/people.

It is inconceivable to me that H really had no will and died intestate. It also seems scary to me somehow, that JK is no longer an executor/trustee of B's estate. imo.

Thankfully AG is an independent Trustee (ie not a family member). Unfortunately for him, he likely is the "ham in the sandwich" when there is a disagreement between BK and JS re estate matters.

 

[ldlager]

I am SO confused. I believe that when people are married, and during the time of that marriage, one of them works everyday at building an empire, the value is shared, as per the Family Law Act - at least the difference between the value at time of marriage and the value at time of death?

But it has been said that Barry and Honey borrowed funds from different family members, so it seems there was not much 'value' prior to the marriage, and I believe any real growth in Apotex value came during their marriage.

I can see how Barry would want to protect his 'heirs', if he died first, by only giving H an allowance of sorts, to include all of the 'income', but none of the 'assets', while meanwhile, the actual assets were managed by the Apo trustees.. ie H didn't just inherit everything, which would potentially allow her to marry someone new, sell everything, and leave all of her money to her new mate when she died, rather than her kids.

Not saying that would've ever happened, but seems B was preventing that as even a possibility. But I'm not understanding why H wouldn't have been entitled to the same wealth/assets upon Barry's death, as she would have been had they instead divorced.

And if he had died while she remained living, she could have contested that.. but I believe it would need to be contested in order for it to be changed to equal assets.. but as it stands, she is not alive to contest it, .... can anyone follow my lame attempt to explain what I'm talking about? If they were deemed to share equally in their assets gained during their marriage, but they may have individually had separate and different ideas about how they wanted to distribute their estates upon their respective deaths, that could make quite a substantial difference to perhaps many things/people.

It is inconceivable to me that H really had no will and died intestate. It also seems scary to me somehow, that JK is no longer an executor/trustee of B's estate. imo.

There are various ways to structure the shareholdings of APO so that all of the increase in the value of APO would have effectively accrued solely to BS over the years. Maybe a trust was involved that held the common shares of APO, and so all increase in value of APO would accrue to the trust. The beneficiary of the trust could have been just BS. I don't know in Ontario how family law works when this sort of structure is in place.
Barry set up whatever structure existed for what he perceived to be valid and important reasons. Barry was a very smart man, and it would have been simple for him to leave a good portion of his wealth to HS. But for reasons that were meaningful and important to to Barry, HE DID NOT.... why not?

 

[MistyWaters]

There are various ways to structure the shareholdings of APO so that all of the increase in the value of APO would have effectively accrued solely to BS over the years. Maybe a trust was involved that held the common shares of APO, and so all increase in value of APO would accrue to the trust. The beneficiary of the trust could have been just BS. I don't know in Ontario how family law works when this sort of structure is in place.
Barry set up whatever structure existed for what he perceived to be valid and important reasons. Barry was a very smart man, and it would have been simple for him to leave a good portion of his wealth to HS. But for reasons that were meaningful and important to to Barry, HE DID NOT.... why not?

Why not? You’re assuming this wasn’t discussed between the two of them. Not many 70ish year old wives of deceased wealthy businessmen would be interested in the responsibility of running an international company if they had no involvement in doing so during the entire course of their longterm marriage. It would seem to me her need would be financial security, which he provided through his will.

 

[Bobbi Pearl]

I am SO confused. I believe that when people are married, and during the time of that marriage, one of them works everyday at building an empire, the value is shared, as per the Family Law Act - at least the difference between the value at time of marriage and the value at time of death?

But it has been said that Barry and Honey borrowed funds from different family members, so it seems there was not much 'value' prior to the marriage, and I believe any real growth in Apotex value came during their marriage.

I can see how Barry would want to protect his 'heirs', if he died first, by only giving H an allowance of sorts, to include all of the 'income', but none of the 'assets', while meanwhile, the actual assets were managed by the Apo trustees.. ie H didn't just inherit everything, which would potentially allow her to marry someone new, sell everything, and leave all of her money to her new mate when she died, rather than her kids.

Not saying that would've ever happened, but seems B was preventing that as even a possibility. But I'm not understanding why H wouldn't have been entitled to the same wealth/assets upon Barry's death, as she would have been had they instead divorced.

And if he had died while she remained living, she could have contested that.. but I believe it would need to be contested in order for it to be changed to equal assets.. but as it stands, she is not alive to contest it, .... can anyone follow my lame attempt to explain what I'm talking about? If they were deemed to share equally in their assets gained during their marriage, but they may have individually had separate and different ideas about how they wanted to distribute their estates upon their respective deaths, that could make quite a substantial difference to perhaps many things/people.

It is inconceivable to me that H really had no will and died intestate. It also seems scary to me somehow, that JK is no longer an executor/trustee of B's estate. imo.

Couple's Will - Writing Wills as a couple in Canada.

Who knows what type of will Barry had, seems to be a combination of a few types mentioned here? The will was written in 2005, 12 years later it is reported that a codicil to remove trustees only was appended to the will, the contents of the will did not change. And this was 8 months earlier in Mar 2017 that the trustees were removed, long before the family disagreements and very rare requests from Barry for repayment of " family loans" that was happening before their deaths.

If Honey did have 45 million in personal money, why was she discussing that she had no money of her own with her friends? This leads me to wonder if those assets were really Barry's assets and were under her name for tax relief, thus she did not see them as hers, or she did not know Barry had stuff in her name is another possibility?

It gives the impression that Barry saw/treated Honey as a dependant and not so much as a spouse or equal partner, at least at the time the will was written in 2005. Barry was 62/63 and Honey was 56 /57ish when the will was drawn up, we are not sure if this preceded another will or not, maybe she did not have anything to claim 12 years ago and this is why she was getting around to her own personal will?

 

[Bobbi Pearl]

Why not? You’re assuming this wasn’t discussed between the two of them. Not many 70ish year old wives of deceased wealthy businessmen would be interested in the responsibility of running an international company if they had no involvement in doing so during the entire course of their longterm marriage. It would seem to me her need would be financial security, which he provided through his will.

very well articulated!

 

[ldlager]

Why not? You’re assuming this wasn’t discussed between the two of them. Not many 70ish year old wives of deceased wealthy businessmen would be interested in the responsibility of running an international company if they had no involvement in doing so during the entire course of their longterm marriage. It would seem to me her need would be financial security, which he provided through his will.

The will was drafted 2005, and at that time HS would have been 57. Hardly an advanced age, so I suspect she would have been concerned about her finances if Barry suddenly passed away.
I have no reason to believe, nor do I assume that HS would have had any interest in "running" Apotex at age 57. But she well may have liked to know that she would receive the value of the company (or sale proceeds) if BS suddenly died.
having said that, I bet that HS would have been at least as competent in overseeing the management of the company as an advisor or Trustee, working with management, as JS was at 33 when his parents were killed.

 

[deugirtni]

It's hard for me to imagine if H was supporting her sister financially while she was living, as she seems to have been, (ie the credit card charges that B was never to see, the request from her sister's son to buy clothes on her credit card while out of town, M telling KD that he would be able to tell when the money stopped by looking at her home with no curtains, the report of a seemingly verbal promise from H to soon be giving M 300-500 million dollars, etc.) that she wouldn't have wanted to also look after her sister if she were to die. The two were said to have been very close, best friends, etc. imo.

 

[nuff]

having said that, I bet that HS would have been at least as competent in overseeing the management of the company as an advisor or Trustee, working with management, as JS was at 33 when his parents were killed.

I think we have lots of evidence that BS, whatever his virtues, was not a feminist! I think HS was a very shrewd woman, by all accounts, and there's no reason to imagine that the daughters aren't at least as capable as their brother.

 

[MistyWaters]

The will was drafted 2005, and at that time HS would have been 57. Hardly an advanced age, so I suspect she would have been concerned about her finances if Barry suddenly passed away.
I have no reason to believe, nor do I assume that HS would have had any interest in "running" Apotex at age 57. But she well may have liked to know that she would receive the value of the company (or sale proceeds) if BS suddenly died.
having said that, I bet that HS would have been at least as competent in overseeing the management of the company as an advisor or Trustee, working with management, as JS was at 33 when his parents were killed.

If Honey wasn’t keen to become actively involved in Apotex’s business dealings at the age of 57, it’s unlikely she’d intend to dive into it in her later years. I don’t think it’s unusual at all that Barry didn’t have plans to turn over Apotex to his wife. It’s not an indication of distrust, seems to be a decision based on his common sense, kindness and consideration toward her. He supported her financially throughout their marriage and his will indicated he had no intention of leaving her high and dry in the event his death preceded hers.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/apotex-barry-sherman-succession-1.4462150
“An Apotex spokesperson — who had declined to discuss specific details prior to their funeral, out of respect for the Shermans — said Friday that he wanted to set the record straight.

"Barry had developed a robust succession plan which he began implementing five years ago when he stepped down as CEO," Apotex spokesman Jordan Berman said in an email Friday. …”

 

[ldlager]

Maybe HS

It's hard for me to imagine if H was supporting her sister financially while she was living, as she seems to have been, (ie the credit card charges that B was never to see, the request from her sister's son to buy clothes on her credit card while out of town, M telling KD that he would be able to tell when the money stopped by looking at her home with no curtains, the report of a seemingly verbal promise from H to soon be giving M 300-500 million dollars, etc.) that she wouldn't have wanted to also look after her sister if she were to die. The two were said to have been very close, best friends, etc. imo.

Maybe HS wasn't in a rush to do so as maybe she/they felt that she/they had already provided significant funds/assets to MS including numerous houses and rental properties, as well as a florida condo and who knows what else. IMO

 

[Windsorite]

It still surprises me that JS would keep asking for more and more money if he had all of these successful businesses and lives in great luxury why did Barry need to pay for the surrogacies? It appears that JS would not spend any of his earnings to create a family, and if the reports are true he has been gifted 10's if not hundreds of millions of $$, why go to Barry for 300K? what happened to all that money he had?

It might speak to JS' maturity level, it reminds me of a college kid's use of "the bank of Mom and Dad". It could also be it's an ingrained habit. Why spend your own money if you don't have to.

 

[MistyWaters]

I think we have lots of evidence that BS, whatever his virtues, was not a feminist! I think HS was a very shrewd woman, by all accounts, and there's no reason to imagine that the daughters aren't at least as capable as their brother.

Equally dividing the estate equally amongst the four children seems fair to me, one does not hold greater control than another. I notice none of the children stepped into Barry’s President of the Board of Directors chairman of Apotex, which is presently held by JW.

Our Leadership

 

[MistyWaters]

Maybe HS


Maybe HS wasn't in a rush to do so as maybe she/they felt that she/they had already provided significant funds/assets to MS including numerous houses and rental properties, as well as a florida condo and who knows what else. IMO

Didn’t MS and her sister embark on a real estate investment company together? Who says Honey provided significant funds/assets to MS including numerous houses and rental and vacation properties? That resembles exactly what Barry did for KW prior to shutting off the money tap.

 

[ldlager]

If Honey wasn’t keen to become actively involved in Apotex’s business dealings at the age of 57, it’s unlikely she’d intend to dive into it in her later years. I don’t think it’s unusual at all that Barry didn’t have plans to turn over Apotex to his wife. It’s not an indication of distrust, seems to be a decision based on his common sense, kindness and consideration toward her. He supported her financially throughout their marriage and his will indicated he had no intention of leaving her high and dry in the event his death preceded hers.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/apotex-barry-sherman-succession-1.4462150
“An Apotex spokesperson — who had declined to discuss specific details prior to their funeral, out of respect for the Shermans — said Friday that he wanted to set the record straight.

"Barry had developed a robust succession plan which he began implementing five years ago when he stepped down as CEO," Apotex spokesman Jordan Berman said in an email Friday. …”

How do you know that at 57 she discussed it with Barry? Maybe they did, maybe not, I have no idea. Maybe in fact she thought she was being left the shares of Apotex in Barry's will, that is possible also.
I am not suggesting she wanted to be actively involved at any age. Being left the asset in the Will does not mean she needed to be actively involved.
Barry likely thought he had a succession plan, but his death resulted in the emergence of different one, ie one that didn't include either JK or JD. Mr. Berman was trying to provide "comfort" when the reality involved a different cast of characters.
JMO

 

[ldlager]

Equally dividing the estate equally amongst the four children seems fair to me, one does not hold greater control than another. I notice none of the children stepped into Barry’s President of the Board of Directors chairman of Apotex, which is presently held by JW.

Our Leadership

JW has worked for APO for many years, and was one of the people Barry wanted to manage the company after he was no longer involved.
In reality, 1 child exercises more control than the other 3, at least currently. As a Trustee, he has considerable influence into many areas of Apotex' business, acknowledging of course that there are 2 other Trustees currently (one of which is his brother in law). I suspect the 2 other sisters want nothing to do with any of it.