'A Lot of Fighting': Retired Attorney Battles Siblings for $100 Million Fortune
Retired attorney Ronald Dubner filed trust, probate and tort actions in Palm Beach and Broward counties.
April 13, 2018 at 01:29 PM
4 minute read
A retired Boca Raton attorney is in a fight with his siblings over the family's $100 million-plus real estate fortune, including assets in a frozen Morgan Stanley brokerage account.
Ronald N. Dubner's attorneys say he spent decades helping his father, Harold, develop a vast real estate empire with office buildings, multi-tenant holdings and commercial shopping centers in Florida. But they say most of that wealth went to Dubner's half-sister Leslie Strupp and the estate of his half-brother Bradley when their father died in 2004.
“Our client is eager for his day in court,” said Ronald Dubner's attorney, Daniel L. McDermott of Adrian Philip Thomas in Fort Lauderdale. “Ninety-seven percent of the family empire ended up with his siblings, to the detriment of my client.”
Ronald Dubner filed three lawsuits in Palm Beach County — trust, probate and tort actions — and one in Broward Circuit Court, claiming unjust enrichment, constructive fraud, tortious interference with a business relationship and exploitation of a vulnerable adult, according to an appellate ruling.
He alleged his siblings fraudulently influenced their elderly mother into changing her estate plan to give them millions in gifts during her lifetime. He then added the brokerage firm as a defendant because it held accounts for his siblings and family-owned entities.
“I grew up here in Palm Beach. I can't tell you how often we see this here,” said family attorney Gregory Coleman, counsel for the personal representative of brother Bradley Dubner's estate. “Anytime you see a family that has a substantial net worth and one of the children … feels slighted … the first thing they do is lawyer up. They create a case out of whole cloth with nothing to back it up. But the system is what it is. And that's what they've done in the case. It's a this-isn't-fair type of case, with no legal basis to it.”
Ronald Dubner's pleadings claim he only wants his fair share — a third of an estimated $100 million to $135 million fortune.
“We're not at the end of the road,” his attorney said after a Fourth District Court of Appeal panel decided an interlocutory appeal on the Morgan Stanley funds in his favor Wednesday. “There's a lot of fighting that remains.”
Dubner, 75, retired as an attorney because of an undisclosed medical condition. His attorneys say he used his professional skills over the years to help his father — a Chicago doctor who retired to Florida — amass a multimillion-dollar commercial real estate portfolio.
But his siblings' court pleadings paint a different picture — of greed and dissatisfaction on their attorney-brother's part.
“It's insulting to his father to say he helped build this. … That's just fantasy,” said Coleman, a partner at Critton Luttier & Coleman in West Palm Beach. Stepmother Annette Dubner “found a way to direct millions of dollars to the plaintiff and made arrangements for millions more to go to him after she passed. He just didn't like the number of millions … and thought it should be more.”
The litigation came before the appellate court on a challenge to a Palm Beach Circuit Court order removing a unilateral freeze of some of the family's brokerage accounts.
After the brokerage firm froze the accounts without a court order, Palm Beach Circuit Judge Roger B. Colton granted injunctive relief to one of the siblings and ordered the funds released.
The appellate panel disagreed and ordered the trial court to lift the injunction that stopped Morgan Stanley from freezing the funds at the center of the ownership dispute.
“The trial court failed to make the requisite findings, and the defendants failed to
demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success or irreparable harm,” Judge Melanie May wrote in a unanimous decision with Fourth DCA Judges Burton C. Conner and Jeffrey T. Kuntz concurring.
Ronald Dubner's side hailed the appellate ruling as a victory as he and his relatives continue their fight.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Courts of Appeal Conflicted Over Rule 1.442(c)(3) When Claims for Damages Involve a Husband and Wife
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250