Following the tragic passing of legendary actor Gene Hackman, 95, and his wife, Betsy Arakawa-Hackman, 65, in February, questions loom over the future of his $80 million estate. With uncertainty surrounding whether his three estranged children have any legal claim to his fortune, the estate’s fate remains unsettled. Until details of Hackman’s trust — if ever they come to light — are disclosed, no firm conclusions can be drawn.
What is certain is that Hackman’s only surviving heirs are his three children from his first marriage to Faye Maltese: Christopher Allen Hackman, 65, Elizabeth Jean Hackman, 62, and Leslie Ann Hackman, 58. This may make them eligible to inherit, yet they are notably absent from the late actor’s will.
While disputes are common in high-value estates, any potential conflict over the estate of Gene Hackman is unlikely to stem from its size. Instead, probate challenges may arise from gaps in estate planning — particularly regarding contingencies like the simultaneous deaths of spouses or the inability of a spouse to act as successor trustee.
Fortunately, both Hackman and Arakawa designated the same successor personal representative, their attorney Julia L. Peters, to manage their estates in the event of their deaths following their first successor, Hackman’s former attorney Michael G. Sutin, who predeceased them, according to The New York Post.
Hackman and Arakawa had originally named each other as both personal representative and sole beneficiary of their respective estates. Additionally, their wills directed all assets into the Gene Hackman Living Trust, which the late actor established in June 2005, per USA Today.
In essence, the Hollywood legend and his wife had pour-over wills — an estate planning tool that ensures any assets owned by deceased persons at the time of their deaths are transferred to their trust. However, assets governed by pour-over wills that are not properly transferred to decedents’ trusts generally must pass through the probate process first.
While the unusual circumstances surrounding Hackman and his wife’s passing introduce complexity, they don’t necessarily indicate impending litigation. That said, many questions still remain unanswered, despite several months having passed since the couple’s deaths.
As new details continue to emerge, Keystone will continue to provide updates and expert analysis from our probate attorneys.
Section 1
Section 2
Section 3
Section 4
Section 5
What Was Gene Hackman's Cause of Death?
Renowned actor Gene Hackman was found dead, along with his wife Betsy Arakawa, in their Santa Fe, New Mexico, home on February 26, 2025. According to Buzzfeed, two maintenance workers from the couple’s gated community called 911 after noticing that neither Hackman nor Arakawa had been seen for two weeks.
The officials who arrived on the scene immediately determined that the couple had been deceased for some time before being discovered.
Arakawa was found in a bathroom, with a prescription bottle nearby and pills scattered on the counter. A Buzzfeed-obtained search warrant described her body as showing “obvious signs of death, body decomposition, bloating in her face, and mummification in both hands and feet.”
Hackman’s body, discovered in what appeared to be a mudroom, showed similar signs of decomposition. Additionally, one of the couple’s three dogs, which had been crated due to surgery, was found deceased from starvation and dehydration, according to BBC.
Hackman, who had advanced Alzheimer’s disease, is believed to have died after Arakawa. Daily Mail consulted an occupational therapist who specializes in dementia care about Gene Hackman’s last days. She speculated that Hackman may have repeatedly relived the trauma of discovering his wife’s body, forgetting each time due to his condition.
According to The New York Post, an investigation by the New Mexico Office of the Medical Investigator concluded that Hackman likely died around February 18 from hypertensive atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, with advanced Alzheimer’s being a contributing factor. Arakawa, on the other hand, is presumed to have died around February 12 from Hantavirus Pulmonary Syndrome.
Gene Hackman’s autopsy, performed in April, confirmed the medical investigator’s initial findings surrounding the late actor’s date and cause of death, noting that he likely hadn’t eaten for some time beforehand — a complication attributed to Alzheimer’s, per The Guardian. Later that month, Betsy Arakawa’s cause of death also was confirmed through an autopsy.
Although the circumstances surrounding Hackman and Arakawa’s deaths initially were deemed “suspicious enough in nature to require a thorough search and investigation” (based on the accounts of detectives investigating the scene), foul play has since been ruled out through autopsy results and a subsequent investigation, according to NBC4 Washington.
Gene Hackman Death Timeline: Actor's Final Days With Wife
To illustrate the potential legal complexities surrounding Hackman’s estate, Keystone has compiled a timeline of key events that could play a role in potential disputes over his will or trust.
September 1994 – Hackman establishes the GeBe Revocable Trust, naming Arakawa as the beneficiary of the remaining trust assets. (Source: USA Today)
July 7, 2004 – Hackman appears on “Larry King Live,” appearing lucid as he discusses his retirement from acting, a recent heart procedure and other topics. (Source: Dailymotion)
June 7, 2005 – Hackman creates the Gene Hackman Living Trust and amends his will. (Source: USA Today)
September 2005 – Arakawa creates her will.
June 1, 2011 – Hackman gives a clear and composed interview to the magazine GQ.
September 7, 2019 – Sutin, Hackman’s former attorney and the named successor personal representative in both Hackman’s and Arakawa’s wills, passes away.
February 10, 2025 – Arakawa cancels her February 12 appointment with Cloudberry Health, a medical concierge service, stating that she needs to care for Hackman. (Source: Buzzfeed)
February 11, 2025 – Arakawa visits a grocery store, pharmacy and pet store, and exchanges emails with a massage therapist. Data from a garage clicker shows Arakawa arrived home at approximately 5:15 p.m. (Source: Buzzfeed)
February 12, 2025 – Arakawa reaches out to Cloudberry Health again for medical advice regarding congestion. However, the medical concierge service informs her that she must be seen in person since she has not formally established care. Notably, she does not report experiencing shortness of breath, chest pain or respiratory distress. (Source: Buzzfeed)
February 12, 2025 – Arakawa is presumed to have died from Hantavirus Pulmonary Syndrome. (Source: New York Post)
February 18, 2025 – Hackman is presumed to have died from severe heart disease, with Alzheimer’s disease being a contributing factor. (Source: BBC)
February 26, 2025 – Hackman’s and Arakawa’s bodies are discovered after maintenance workers from their gated community call 911, reporting that the couple has not been seen for two weeks. (Source: Buzzfeed)
March 6, 2025 – Peters, the second successor personal representative of Hackman’s estate, files a petition with the court to informally admit Hackman’s will to probate and approve her appointment as personal representative. The court approves her petition on the same day. (Source: USA Today)
March 7, 2025 – Notice of Peters’ appointment as personal representative is mailed to Hackman’s three children. (Source: USA Today)
March 13, 2025 – Peters files a petition with the court stating that “there are trust assets to be administered in both the Gene Hackman Living Trust and GeBe Revocable Trust,” noting that the GeBe Revocable Trust “passes through the will of Gene Hackman to the Gene Hackman Living Trust.” (Source: USA Today)
March 14, 2025 – TMZ reports that Hackman’s son, Christopher Hackman, has hired a well-known California estate planning and probate attorney.
March 17, 2025 – Peters files a petition requesting the appointment of a new temporary successor trustee, as Hackman had designated Arakawa, who predeceased him, as the successor trustee of his trust but had not named an alternate. (Source: Yahoo! News)
March 17, 2025 – At Peters’ request, a New Mexico court grants a temporary restraining order to prevent the public release of any photographs or videos showing Hackman or Arakawa inside their home. Peters argued that the petition was necessary to protect the family’s constitutional right to privacy during their grief under the 14th Amendment. However, the court allowed the release of redacted body cam footage showing authorities’ interactions with the maintenance workers outside the couple’s residence before they entered the home. (Source: AP)
March 20, 2025 – Peters’ petition to appoint Avalon Trust, LLC, as the new temporary successor trustee for Hackman’s trust is granted. (Source: Yahoo! News)
April 2025 – Final autopsy results are released for Hackman and Arakawa, confirming the medical investigator’s initial findings surrounding each’s cause of death. Foul play is ruled out. (Source: The Guardian)
Did Gene Hackman and Betsy Arakawa-Hackman Die “Simultaneous Deaths”?
Hackman and his wife did not die “simultaneous deaths” — at least not according to New Mexico’s Simultaneous Death Act, which requires that spouses die within 120 hours of each other (five days), with no clear evidence suggesting who died first, in order to be regarded as having died “simultaneously.”
In New Mexico, when spouses die “simultaneously,” the estate is handled as if the deceased spouse survived their beneficiary.
In other words, if a husband and wife leave everything to each other and die simultaneously, the husband’s estate would not pass to his wife’s estate and then to her beneficiaries, but instead go directly to his contingent beneficiaries or heirs. Similarly, the wife’s estate would not pass to her husband’s estate, but instead go directly to her contingent beneficiaries or heirs. This approach helps prevent costly court disputes over which spouse passed away first.
An additional layer of complexity in this case is Arakawa’s will, which includes a clause addressing “simultaneous death and survivorship” for beneficiaries. This provision states, “No person will be deemed to have survived me if the person dies within 90 days of my death.”
When a will specifically includes such a clause, it can potentially override state statutes concerning the simultaneous deaths of spouses.
While Arakawa’s will regards her and Hackman’s deaths as simultaneous, given that they died just six days apart, New Mexico’s Simultaneous Death Act doesn’t treat it that way. This creates room for potential challenges.
What Was Gene Hackman’s Net Worth at Death?
According to numerous publications, Hackman’s net worth at death was around $80 million. The Mirror US reports that his estate is composed of the Gene Hackman Living Trust and GeBe Revocable Trust.
Unpacking the Gene Hackman Estate: Will Probate Challenges Arise?
To gain a clearer understanding of how Hackman’s estate will be administered and the legal disputes that could arise, it’s essential to examine the contents of Hackman’s two trusts — the Gene Hackman Living Trust and the GeBe Revocable Trust — along with his will and his wife’s will.
Although definitive conclusions are difficult to reach without reviewing all three documents in detail, several possible scenarios can be anticipated.
What Is In Gene Hackman’s Will?
Hackman’s will, which was last amended on June 7, 2005, names his wife as the personal representative and sole estate beneficiary in her role as successor trustee of the Gene Hackman Living Trust, according to USA Today. Notably, Hackman’s three children are not mentioned in the document.
In the event Arakawa died before him, Hackman had nominated his former attorney Sutin as the successor personal representative of his estate. However, since Sutin predeceased Hackman, Peters, the second successor personal representative named in Hackman’s will, stepped up to the plate.
According to Yahoo! News, Peters is chief counsel at Avalon Trust, LLC, the Santa Fe-based trust company temporarily appointed as successor trustee of the Gene Hackman Living Trust. Peters is overseeing the administration of the late actor’s estate and trust.
Hackman’s will has been informally admitted to probate through Peters’ petition. As part of this process, the will may be authenticated, Hackman’s assets inventoried, and any outstanding debts settled. Once the process is complete, his assets likely will be distributed according to the terms of his will.
That said, Hackman had a pour-over will. This means his assets will not be distributed to his estate beneficiaries but will instead be transferred to the Gene Hackman Living Trust to be distributed to his trust beneficiaries — though the specifics of his trust remain unknown at this time.
New Mexico’s probate process is sometimes simpler than California’s — particularly for uncontested estates, as demonstrated by the informal probate of will and informal appointment of personal representative petitions offered by the New Mexico Courts.
Peters’ request for an informal admission of Hackman’s will to probate and an informal appointment as personal representative may be indicative of her belief that there are no valid challenges to the will. However, whether this holds true as the process progresses remains to be seen.
What Is In Gene Hackman’s Trusts?
Hackman’s $80 million estate primarily comprises two separate trusts: the Gene Hackman Living Trust and the GeBe Revocable Trust, according to USA Today.
The Gene Hackman Living Trust was created on June 7, 2005, with Arakawa appointed as the sole successor trustee. Even though the former actor’s three children are mentioned in the trust, they are reportedly not named as beneficiaries.
According to USA Today, Hackman created the GeBe Revocable Trust in September 1994, with the remaining assets designated in Arakawa’s favor. A petition filed by Peters in March 2025 clarifies that both the Gene Hackman Living Trust and the GeBe Revocable Trust contain assets that need to be administered.
In her petition, Peters explains that the GeBe Revocable Trust “passes through the will of Gene Hackman to the Gene Hackman Living Trust.” This means the assets of the GeBe Revocable Trust will be distributed according to the terms of the Gene Hackman Living Trust. Peters also mentions in her court filing that the Gene Hackman Living Trust primarily benefits “out-of-state beneficiaries.” At this time, this is one of the few details about Hackman’s trust that have been made public.
Peters further clarifies that after specific bequests have been made to the beneficiaries identified in Hackman’s trust, the remaining assets will be distributed according to Hackman’s wishes as outlined in his trust instrument.
While these details provide some insight into Hackman’s trusts, they don’t reveal much about how the trusts will be administered, who the beneficiaries of the trust are, or what potential disputes could arise surrounding them. This lack of transparency may be intentional — as trusts are designed for privacy and are generally not part of the public record.
While trustees must adhere to the terms of a trust, they typically are not subject to court supervision in the same way personal representatives are.
Since the GeBe Revocable Trust passes through Hackman’s will to the Gene Hackman Living Trust, the successor trustee of the Gene Hackman Living Trust holds significant importance in administering Hackman’s overall estate. Unfortunately, Hackman only appointed Arakawa as successor trustee, and since she predeceased him without his having named an alternate successor, Avalon Trust was ultimately appointed to serve as temporary successor trustee of the trust.
The Gene Hackman Living Trust is arguably the most pivotal document in Hackman’s estate plan, influencing both his will and the GeBe Revocable Trust. However, without more information about it being made public, little can be gleaned about who will inherit Gene Hackman’s estate.
“Given the private nature of trusts, we may never find out this information,” says Keystone Managing Partner Shawn Kerendian. “For all we know, Hackman may have created a trust for the specific purpose of keeping his financial affairs private.”
What Is In Betsy Arakawa-Hackman’s Will?
Arakawa created a will in September 2005 at roughly the same time her husband amended his will and created the Gene Hackman Living Trust.
In her will, Arakawa specifies that her “tangible personal property” should be distributed to designated beneficiaries listed in a separate document from the will (it’s unclear whether this document has been found). She also appoints Hackman as personal representative, with Sutin and Peters named as alternates.
Unlike her late husband’s will, which did not plan for this contingency, Arakawa’s will includes a clause addressing “simultaneous death and survivorship,” according to People. It states: “No person will be deemed to have survived me if the person dies within 90 days of my death.” In such a case, she directs for her assets to be placed in charitable trust aimed at achieving “purposes beneficial to the community, consistent with the charitable preferences and interests expressed or indicated by my spouse and me during our lifetimes.”
Since Hackman passed away less than 90 days after Arakawa, this clause could mean that Arakawa’s entire estate will be directed to a charitable trust managed by Peters. If Hackman had survived for more than 90 days, her estate would likely have transferred to the Gene Hackman Living Trust following probate, as Arakawa also had a pour-over will in place.
Currently, Peters is overseeing Arakawa’s estate alongside the estate and trust of her husband.
What Legal Challenges Could Arise Over Gene Hackman’s Estate?
Legal battles over Hackman’s estate may be on the horizon, as suggested by his son’s decision to retain a well-regarded California estate planning and probate attorney. However, this remains merely speculation — as there are many reasons for hiring an attorney after a loved one’s passing that have little to nothing to do with challenging their estate planning documents. At this stage, drawing firm conclusions would be premature.
That said, if any of Hackman’s children do choose to bring a will contest or trust contest, they may face significant legal hurdles. The evidence needed to contest a will or trust successfully tends to be substantial, and dissatisfaction with an inheritance (or lack thereof) does not qualify as legal grounds for seeking to have either estate planning document invalidated. Instead, a contest must be based on legitimate concerns, such as lack of capacity, undue influence or fraud.
Another unresolved issue relates to who will serve as the permanent successor trustee of the Gene Hackman Living Trust. While Avalon Trust has been appointed as an emergency trustee, it remains unclear whether that appointment will be made permanent or if another party will ultimately take on the role.
Does Gene Hackman’s 20-year-old estate plan reflect his final wishes?
Without hearing from the Hollywood icon himself, it’s impossible to say with certainty whether Gene Hackman’s will and trust accurately reflect his final wishes. However, the fact that these documents are nearly two decades old is unlikely to be a decisive factor in any legal challenge. In fact, the will and trust being decades old may render them even more difficult to contest than, say, a will or trust that is created or amended in its creator’s final days — which may suggest lack of capacity or misconduct could have been involved.
While the absence of children from estate planning documents can be a red flag in scenarios where a will or trust creator previously expressed an intent for their children to inherit, the absence of Hackman’s children from his will doesn’t necessarily raise concerns. According to the New York Post, Hackman was known to have a strained relationship with his children — a rift he’s publicly acknowledged was exacerbated by his Hollywood career.
Ultimately, the age of the will alone does not make it suspect. If it had contradicted his other estate planning documents or contained inconsistencies, there might be grounds to question its validity. However, no such evidence has yet surfaced.
Did Gene Hackman have the required mental capacity to create an estate plan?
As of now, there is no indication that Hackman lacked the mental capacity required to create an estate plan. Generally, a will requires testamentary capacity, while a trust requires contractual capacity — both of which “The French Connection” actor likely had when his documents were executed. In fact, video evidence from the year around when his will and trust were created suggests he was lucid during that time.
Due to Hackman’s diagnosis of advanced Alzheimer’s disease, his 20-year-old estate plan is more likely to withstand scrutiny than any documents he may have executed in the recent past. However, this doesn’t mean his estate plan couldn’t be challenged on the basis of incapacity.
While public appearances may suggest he was of sound mind, only medical records or testimony from his physicians can confirm whether he had the capacity required to create an estate plan when he did. Even a temporary lapse in capacity — such as one caused by medication or intoxication — could be grounds to contest the validity of his will or trust.
Could Gene Hackman have been subjected to undue influence or fraud?
If any of Hackman’s children choose to challenge his will or trust, they would most likely do so on the grounds of undue influence or fraud. Undue influence occurs when someone exerts excessive pressure on another person, causing them to act against their own free will. Fraud, on the other hand, involves intentional deception for personal gain.
Given that Arakawa was named as both the sole beneficiary and personal representative of Hackman’s estate, one might assume that she exerted undue influence or engaged in fraud to secure her position. It’s not uncommon in estate disputes for a spouse to manipulate or pressure their partner into altering their estate plan in a way that disadvantages other loved ones.
However, for undue influence or fraud to be a viable claim, the individual making the estate plan must typically be in a vulnerable state — such as suffering from cognitive decline or being dependent on the influencer. Since Hackman executed his will and trust more than 20 years ago, there is no clear indication that he was susceptible to manipulation at that time. Additionally, his estranged relationship with his children suggests Arakawa was not unfairly depriving them for her own benefit.
Proving undue influence or fraud is notoriously difficult. If Hackman’s children intend to contest his will or trust on either of these grounds, they would need substantial and compelling evidence to support their claims.
Do Gene Hackman’s children have inheritance rights?
It remains unclear whether Hackman’s three estranged children have any inheritance rights.
“Although children often operate under the false belief they are entitled to an inheritance from their parent, this couldn’t be further from the truth,” claims Keystone Partner Roee Kaufman. “Unless children are specifically named as beneficiaries or were unintentionally omitted from their parent’s estate planning documents, children generally do not have an automatic entitlement to inherit their parent’s assets.”
While it is confirmed that Hackman’s children were not named in his will, their status in his trust is less certain. Although at least one trust identifies them by name as his children, there is no clear indication they were left an inheritance. However, without access to the trust’s terms, this cannot be definitively confirmed.
There is also the possibility that one or more of Hackman’s children could seek appointment as the permanent successor trustee of his trust, given that Avalon Trust is currently serving only in a temporary capacity. While this role would grant them control over the administration of the trust, it would not entitle them to an inheritance — they would still be bound by the terms of the trust.
Will the close timing of Gene Hackman and Betsy Arakawa’s deaths impact the distribution of their assets?
Although it initially seemed the close timing of Hackman’s and Arakawa’s deaths could significantly impact the distribution of their assets, that concern was eliminated when the final autopsy results confirmed that the couple died more than five days apart — which means they did not die “simultaneous deaths” under New Mexico law.
If their deaths had been determined to be “simultaneous” under New Mexico law (which they ultimately weren’t), any assets Hackman left to Arakawa would’ve instead passed to his contingent beneficiaries or heirs.
A similar rule would have applied to Arakawa’s estate, but her will contained a contingency clause for a scenario in which Hackman died within 90 days of her. Under those terms, her assets were to be directed into a charitable trust rather than transferred to Hackman’s trust.
As of this time, Hackman is confirmed to have died approximately six days after Arakawa. As a result, the New Mexico Simultaneous Death Act will not come into play for his estate — particularly since his will and trusts ostensibly didn’t plan for such a contingency.
Important Takeaways From the Gene Hackman Estate
The tragic passing of legendary actor Gene Hackman and his wife, Betsy Arakawa-Hackman, has left many in shock. While their loss is deeply saddening, their case provides valuable insights into the complexities of estate planning. By examining their situation, we can better understand how to protect our loved ones from legal complications and ensure our final wishes are carried out as intended.
Plan for Every Possibility
While Arakawa’s will carefully accounted for contingencies, Hackman’s estate plan left significant gaps. Despite the seemingly straightforward nature of his wishes, his personal representative had to petition the court to resolve trust administration issues simply because no alternate successor trustee had been named. This oversight added unnecessary complexity to an already difficult time.
No estate plan can predict every scenario, but a skilled estate planning attorney can help you prepare for the most common and foreseeable contingencies. Proper planning spares your loved ones from costly legal battles and ensures that your estate is distributed according to your wishes without confusion or disputes.
“As Hackman and Arakawa’s situation illustrates, life is unpredictable — spouses can pass away within days of each other, estate and trust representatives can predecease you, and laws can change,” warns Kerendian. “When it comes to estate planning, being overprepared is always better than being underprepared.”
Revisit your Estate Plan Regularly
The documents governing Hackman’s estate and trust were created two decades ago. While they may have reflected his intentions at the time, it’s impossible to know whether they still aligned with his wishes when he passed.
A lot can change in 20 years — you could marry, divorce, have children or grandchildren, acquire significant wealth, or experience major shifts in your relationships. That’s why it’s crucial to review your estate plan regularly to ensure it remains current, legally sound and reflective of your true intentions. An outdated estate plan can lead to unintended consequences, unnecessary legal hurdles, and even potential disputes among your beneficiaries and heirs.
A Probate Attorney is your Greatest Resource After a Loved One’s Death
Probate attorneys do far more than just contest wills and trusts. They play a vital role in guiding beneficiaries, personal representatives and trustees through the legal complexities of estate and trust administration.
“Whether it’s securing a copy of a deceased person’s will or trust, interpreting its terms, holding fiduciaries accountable for misconduct, or navigating inheritance disputes, a probate attorney is an invaluable ally,” says Kaufman.
If you have concerns about your rights, the validity of an estate planning document, or the actions of a trustee or executor, seeking legal help is the best step you can take to protect your interests. With the right probate attorney by your side, you can ensure that your loved one’s estate and/or trust is handled fairly, efficiently and in accordance with the law.
Have probate-related questions?
The experienced probate attorneys at Keystone Law Group are here to ease your burden after the passing of a loved one. We handle the legal complexities so you can focus on grieving and honoring their memory.
Keystone has grown to become the largest probate litigation firm in California. Our exclusive focus on probate law means we have the in-depth knowledge and experience required to navigate even the most complex estate and trust matters effectively.
If you need guidance, we’re here to help. Contact us today to learn more about our services — we’re ready to support you through this challenging time.
