Prosecutors Say Tex McIver's Wife Told Five People About Her New Will
As the murder trial of a former Fisher & Phillips partner gets underway, prosecutors want to introduce hearsay testimony that Diane McIver changed the terms of her will to her financially-strapped husband's detriment.
March 06, 2018 at 05:26 PM
6 minute read
Fulton County prosecutors have at least five reasons to argue that Diane McIver drew up a new will before her husband killed her.
Before Atlanta attorney Claud “Tex” McIver shot his wife to death in 2016, Diane McIver told as many as five people—including three friends and two employees at Corey Airport Services where she was the company president—that she drew up a new will and named new beneficiaries, according to prosecutors.
In a notice of their intent to introduce hearsay evidence at Tex McIver's ongoing murder trial, prosecutors cited emails showing that, for at least three years before he shot his wife, the couple wrangled with Atlanta lawyer Harold Hudson over the terms of her new will.
Diane McIver also told two people at Corey Airport Services that her husband's salary as a Fisher & Phillips partner was cut, and that she was “tired of carrying Tex,” prosecutors said.
Prosecutors never found a new will.
The hearsay testimony about Diane McIver's alleged new will and her husband's finances would bolster prosecutors' contention that Tex McIver had a financial motive to shoot his wife and that her death was not the accident he and his lawyers claim. Jury selection began Monday.
McIver's defense team has filed a motion asking Fulton County Superior Chief Judge Robert McBurney, who is presiding over the trial, to exclude the hearsay prosecutors want to introduce.
The will on file in Fulton County Probate Court was signed in 2006, shortly after the couple married. In it, Diane McIver made Tex McIver her executor. She also bequeathed him her share of the couple's Putnam County ranch and all furniture, art and furnishings at the double condominiums she owned.
That will also left her husband, or his estate if he did not survive her, her wedding ring. It gave Tex McIver her interest in an investment group, DRS Investments Inc., that she set up with a Corey colleague prior to her marriage.
Although she designated Corey general counsel Kenneth Rickert as trustee of all her other properties and assets, she directed that net income from those properties go to her husband to provide for his support “in his accustomed manner of living.”
After five years of marriage, Diane McIver apparently changed her mind.
In 2011, she and her husband began working with Hudson to substantially revise her will, according to email exchanges between Hudson and the McIvers on file in the murder case. Prosecutors said Diane McIver told longtime friend Dani Jo Carter, “I updated my will and left you money.”
Carter was driving the McIvers' SUV as the trio returned from a weekend at the couple's ranch when Tex McIver shot his wife with a gun he stored in the SUV's console.
Diane McIver told friend and neighbor Janie Calhoun and also Anne Schwall, the mother of the McIvers' godson, Austin, “I am leaving the ranch and everything else I have to Austin.”
Austin is the son of Fulton County Superior Court Judge Craig Schwall. Anne Schwall is the judge's ex-wife.
Diane McIver also told Calhoun, “I am leaving you $100,000,” prosecutors said in the notice.
Diane McIver also identified her “new will” for her executive assistant, Terry Brown, according to the notice. And, after asking her friend and longtime bookkeeper, Rachel Styles, to copy a sheaf of documents, she told Styles, “You just made copies of my new will.”
In a 2011 email obtained by prosecutors, Hudson spelled out the terms of Diane McIver's new will. Her share of the ranch and the contents of her condominiums would still go to her husband. But if he did not survive her, they would pass into a trust for Austin Schwall.
Her share of DRS Investments Inc. and the condos would be held in trust for her husband, but if he did not survive her, they, too, would be held in trust for Austin.
The remainder of the assets held in trust would provide for her husband's health, education, maintenance and support, as well as for Austin's education. If Diane McIver outlived her husband, all would be held in trust for Austin and would be paid over to him when the child turned 30. Austin is not a beneficiary of the will now in probate.
Diane McIver also bequeathed $1 million to Calhoun, $100,000 to the couple's housekeeper and $100,000 to a Corey handyman and his wife who also worked for the McIvers. According to Hudson, her new will would allow the ranch caretaker to continue to live on the premises as long as he still worked there. It bequeathed him $100,000 if he was no longer employed.
In a return email, Diane McIver had questions. She “had a problem” with the caretaker's “deal.” She questioned the age at which Austin would inherit. She wanted to know why her husband's son, via her husband's estate, would get her wedding ring after she died. She wanted to know who got the ranch if she and her husband died together. And, she asked, “Why is my trust paying for Tex's education at this time of his life?”
Three years later, the McIvers were still wrangling over the new will's terms. In one email Tex McIver sent his wife about “Our Wills” on Feb. 26, 2014, he asked, “When can we finish them?”
By October that year, the couple communicated a renewed urgency to complete new wills. On Oct. 14, 2014, Tex McIver wrote to his wife and copied her assistant, “This would be such a good week to complete our wills,” although he added that he was unavailable two days that week. Diane McIver replied, “I agree. … But let's get it done!”
More emails obtained by prosecutors suggest that by June 2016, just three months before he shot his wife, Tex McIver also was facing financial difficulties and was trying to refinance or acquire a second mortgage on a property he owned. “I am seriously trying to reduce my monthly expenses,” he wrote in a June 15, 2016, email to his wife. “Debt is my biggest obstacle right now. Plan on hitting the Lotto sometime next week.”
In her reply, Diane McIver suggested that her husband read the job description for their ranch caretaker. “That is your next life chapter,” she said, adding that it would “save you … moola.” And, she noted, “You will be standing there with your hand out when I get in the door.”
“Oh well,” Tex McIver replied, “back to Gigoloing.”
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 AllFowler White Burnett Opens Jacksonville Office Focused on Transportation Practice
3 minute readGeorgia High Court Clarifies Time Limit for Lawyers' Breach-of-Contract Claims
6 minute readSoutheast Firm Leaders Predict Stability, Growth in Second Trump Administration
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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