Paris Jackson’s Petition Against Dad’s Estate Partially Struck by Judge, Model Vows to ‘Continue’ Fighting for Fair Treatment of Her Family

NEED TO KNOW

• In July 2025, Paris Jackson raised concerns over “premium payouts” made by Michael Jackson’s estate for unrecorded attorney time

• The estate responded, saying the attorneys were “instrumental and critical” in achieving “unprecedented results” for the $2 billion estate. The Oct. 14 court filing reveals Paris Jackson has received $65 million in benefits from her father’s estate

• On Nov. 10, Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff sided with Jackson’s estate and ordered Paris Jackson to pay for the estate’s legal fees

Paris Jackson‘s attempt to challenge the executors managing her father’s vast estate has ended with a decisive loss — and a court order that could leave her responsible for paying the estate’s attorneys’ fees.

Los Angeles Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff granted the estate’s special motion to strike most of Paris’ petition on Monday, Nov. 10, siding firmly with executors John Branca and John McClain. The decision found that her legal claims largely targeted the estate’s own court filings, meaning they were protected under California’s anti-SLAPP statute, which shields legal petitioning activity from retaliatory lawsuits.

What remains is just a small portion of the 27-year-old musician’s filing — while the estate walks away with both a legal and financial victory. Two days later, the executors formally filed notice of the judge’s ruling, underscoring the court’s endorsement.

In a statement to PEOPLE, a spokeperson for Paris Jackson said, “This order is limited to minor procedural issues and does not change the facts: the pattern of behavior displayed by the executors and their attorneys raises significant red flags, and Paris will continue working to ensure her family is treated fairly. We will be submitting an updated filing shortly.”

At the heart of Paris’ challenge was a fight over accountability and transparency. She had asked the court to revisit the 2010 order that allows the executors to pay their lawyers “on account,” meaning without waiting for formal court approval. Her petition sought to compel the executors to “file petitions for orders allowing or authorizing payment of compensation for attorneys and reimbursement of costs … for the years 2019 [through] 2023 within 90 days,” effectively demanding a full review of years of legal fees.

Paris’ filing accused the estate of operating with little oversight and indulging in irregular payments, including what she alleged as non-contractual gifts of $125,000 and $250,000 to counsel. The court, however, clarified that the Executors’ motion to strike didn’t dispute those alleged payments, it focused instead on the timing and substance of filings before the probate court, not on whether such “gratuities” were appropriate.

To Paris, it wasn’t simply a question of numbers — it was about trust. “The five-year and growing lag inherently prejudices the ability of the court and the beneficiaries to provide effective oversight,” the filing argued, suggesting that the estate’s delay in filing for fee approvals had left her and her brothers Bigi and Prince who are also beneficiaries of the estate — in the dark about how their father’s fortune was being managed.

The estate’s attorneys fired back, arguing that her petition was built entirely on the very filings she was criticizing — documents, they noted, that are explicitly protected under the First Amendment and California law. By invoking the state’s anti-SLAPP statute, they argued her case should be thrown out unless she could show a likelihood of winning.

The judge agreed. The ruling found that Paris’ petition was “based directly on the substance of the Executors’ probate court filings … statements made before a judicial proceeding,” and that even her claims about the “glacial pace” of filings arose from protected activity. Nearly all of her petition was struck from the record, with only a handful of allegations left standing, like those tied to the pace of the estate’s filings, the executors’ oversight of attorney billing and whether the beneficiaries should be given greater transparency moving forward. The court also ruled that the estate is “entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees,” underscoring how thoroughly Paris’ case was dismantled.

For Branca and McClain, the decision is a validation of the power they’ve wielded since Michael Jackson’s death in 2009. In their filings, the executors emphasized that they inherited an estate “burdened with hundreds of millions of dollars in debt” and transformed it into “a powerhouse and a force in the music business today.”

They also pointed out that Paris herself has “received roughly $65 million” in benefits since her father’s death, a detail they used to counter her claims of mismanagement in October. “Few have benefited more from the Executors’ business judgment than Petitioner herself,” the filing alleges. “She would have never received that had the Executors followed a typical playbook for an estate like this one in July 2009.”

But for Paris, the loss cuts deeper than numbers, leaving only a few limited claims under consideration, such as questions about certain premium payouts for unrecorded attorney time. The decision underscores that the executors retain broad authority over the estate’s administration, including financial and operational decisions. The filing itself sought court review of the estate’s management practices, but the judge found that the majority of the claims did not meet the legal standard for relief.

The decision comes amid ongoing developments in the Jackson estate, including multiple legal complaints like Wade Robson and James Safechuck $400 million lawsuit, licensing agreements and the upcoming biopic Michael, directed by Antoine Fuqua, whose teaser trailer garnered more than 116.2 million views in its first 24 hours. The estate’s financial and administrative decisions continue to govern how Michael Jackson’s intellectual property and legacy are managed, from music reissues to image and branding rights. These are the same areas Paris’ petition sought to examine, though the court largely declined to intervene.

Still, the ruling makes clear that the estate remains firmly in charge. The surviving paragraphs of Paris’ petition may allow for limited follow-up, but the larger war she waged for oversight, transparency and a say in her father’s legacy — appears, for now, to be over.

Sixteen years after Michael Jackson’s death, the empire built in his name continues to generate fortune and controversy in equal measure. For Paris, who has spent her adult life balancing her artistic ambitions, this recent courtroom defeat is more than a legal setback — it’s another chapter in a lifelong negotiation between inheritance and independence.

On Monday, Nov. 10, she told her TikTok followers that past drug use had taken a toll on her nasal tissues. In a two-minute video, Paris explained that the “really loud whistle” from her nose comes from a perforated septum, holding up a light to show the hole.

“That is what you think it’s from,” she said, before issuing a gentle warning: “Don’t do drugs, kids. Or, I mean, do. You know, everyone’s gonna have the experience you need to have with life.” She added that she has no plans to undergo surgery to fix it. “I don’t want to get plastic surgery to fix it because I’m almost six years sober,” she said. “You have to take pills when you do a surgery that gnarly.”

The “Hit Your Knees” singer continued, “I’ve been living with this since I was about 20, and it’s a bitch when you’re in the studio.” Paris has been open about her sobriety and mental health struggles for years; in January, she celebrated five years “clean & sober from all drugs and alcohol.” As her father’s estate endures — still powerful and profitable — Paris carries the weight of both her loss and her lineage, keeping his legacy alive while navigating life outside the empire he built.

Read the original article on People