Fitness icon Richard Simmons, known for his flamboyant personality, high energy, and trademark attire, passed away in July 2024 following a fall at his Los Angeles home. I remember his television exercise shows.
Because of a legal dispute between his longtime housekeeper, Teresa Reveles Muro, and his brother, Leonard (Lenny) Simmons, the star's estate is now sweating out a legal dispute over control of Richard’s trust.
Teresa, who worked for and lived with Richard starting in the late 1980s, claims she was pressured to resign as co-trustee of Richard’s living trust.1 Lenny has voiced concerns about assets belonging to the estate being misappropriated.2
The case highlights the sometimes-overlooked role of attorney representation for key decision-makers, such as trustees or executors, in an estate plan. It also demonstrates how legal conflicts can unexpectedly arise following a loved one’s death and why the choice of a neutral third-party trustee can help avoid similar disputes.
Richard Simmons believed fitness is for everyone, a message he delivered with positivity, usually while wearing sparkling tank tops and shorts—an outfit that he was buried in under regular clothes.3 He is best known for his Sweatin’ to the Oldies series of workout videos, which sold over 20 million copies.4
The Richard Simmons estate includes a Trust at the center of a legal dispute involving Lenny and Teresa.5 Richard was close to both and named them as co-trustees of his trust.6
As recently as July, Lenny had positive things to say about Teresa. He told People magazine that Richard’s live-in companion of 35 years was “extremely loyal and trustworthy” and that “we are blessed to have Teresa in our lives.”7
However, she alleges that, immediately after an open casket viewing of Richard, Lenny and his wife, Cathy, brought her to a meeting at a law firm to discuss the Simmons estate, where she was coerced into signing away her role as co-trustee.8
According to the TODAY show, her attorneys have asked a judge to reinstate her as co-trustee and requested that Lenny be prevented from selling any of Richard’s personal possessions or licensing or selling Richard’s name and likeness until she has been reinstated as co-trustee.9
According to In Touch Weekly, Teresa’s lawyers wrote in a motion that Lenny is preparing to dispose of Richard’s personal effects without her input, which is against what Richard envisioned in the trust.10 Teresa also accuses Lenny of working with Richard’s estranged manager on a documentary that she doesn’t think Richard would approve of.11
Lenny contradicts this claim in a recently filed response to her petition, asking that Teresa not be added back as a co-trustee.12 His response contends that Teresa refused to vacate Richard’s home for months after his death, and when she left, she took nearly $1 million worth of jewelry that had not been returned.13 He further alleges that Teresa was working on her movie project about Richard.14
According to Yahoo! News, court documents state that Lenny and his attorneys “need to appraise any property to be sold and may need to sell it to pay taxes. Teresa should not be permitted to interfere with this process absent serious, legitimate concerns about the estate administration that do not exist here.”15
Despite not being seen in public for more than a decade before he passed, Richard Simmons will be remembered as a fitness trailblazer whose enthusiasm brought joy and healthy habits to millions of fans worldwide.
Unfortunately, the conflict over his trust also puts him with other celebrities such as Prince, Aretha Franklin, and Heath Ledger, whose estates have likewise become the subject of headlines for the wrong reasons.
Richard made no significant mistakes in the planning process, such as not having a will or trust. However, his reclusiveness in his later years made it difficult to determine where he stood regarding his legacy and those responsible for preserving it.
Where Richard may have erred, or at least may not have made the best decision, is naming co-trustees of his trust who were also beneficiaries of his estate. Based on public statements, Lenny and Teresa shared no ill will before Richard died. Maybe Richard did not tell them they would share trustee duties, and they learned of this arrangement only after his death, possibly exacerbating an underlying rift that may have been kept private. We may never know.
Having co-beneficiaries serve as co-trustees can be a recipe for disaster. Trustees have a legal duty to act in the best interests of the trust’s beneficiaries. Since the trustees are also beneficiaries, incentives are introduced for each one to maximize their control over the trust. Also, depending on the language used in the trust, having co-trustees may have required that they agree on actions taken on the trust’s behalf. This requirement can slow down the administration process and breed conflict if the two parties are not used to working together.
Given the circumstances here, it may have been a more prudent move to have a corporate trustee from the start. Lenny’s court filing mentions the possibility of the judge appointing a corporate trustee,16 and it is not beyond question that the court would do so.
The Richard Simmons estate legal battle also draws attention to the rights of key decision-makers, such as trustees in an estate plan, and how they may need to retain legal counsel at different stages of settling an estate.
Attorneys for Teresa contend that Leonard used false statements and intimidation to coerce her into signing a document to decline to serve as co-trustee.17 If this allegation proves to be true—and Teresa did not make an informed decision to sign the document, the court could void it since signing a contract under duress can make it unenforceable.
The Richard Simmons estate case shows that trust documents should give detailed instructions on decision-making authority, asset distribution, and dispute resolution.
An estate plan cannot stop beneficiaries from fighting over what the deceased intended in their estate plan. Suppose a beneficiary feels strongly about a loved one’s final wishes and has reason to believe those wishes are not fulfilled. In that case, it is their right to file a claim challenging a trustee’s or executor’s actions. And it is their right—and their responsibility—to retain counsel about the best way to mount a legal challenge.
The trustee or executor also has the right to hire a lawyer to defend them against such claims. They may even pay for an attorney using trust or estate funds. Beneficiaries in trust litigation can, sometimes, recover their legal fees from the trust.
However, mounting a legal challenge ultimately means less money for everyone to inherit, potentially damaging the deceased’s legacy and any relationship between the parties involved.
While many clients ask that I name their children as beneficiaries and trustees, I sometimes suggest otherwise and recommend having an independent trustee, personal or corporate. Clients believe their children will always do the right thing and ensure that the trust assets are used as the client wants; however, once the money is distributed, there is no way to prevent how it is used.
Whether creating an estate plan or carrying out somebody else’s plan, timely advice from an estate planning attorney can help avoid and mitigate disputes and keep a legacy untarnished by conflict. Call the attorneys at Altman & Associates at 301-468-3220 or contact us via the website at altmanassociates.net.
