The battle over D’Wayne Wiggins’ estate highlights several common probate disputes that can arise after death. In this article, Keystone Law explains why these conflicts occur and how they can be resolved.
Unexpected or unusual estate arrangements often give rise to probate disputes after a person’s death. When close family members are disinherited, major estate planning decisions are made late in life, or suspicious financial activity comes to light, surviving relatives may begin to question whether those decisions truly reflect the decedent’s wishes.
In situations like these, families often turn to the probate courts to seek guidance and resolve conflicts. This appears to be the case in the estate of Tony! Toni! Toné! cofounder D’Wayne Wiggins.
Nearly a year after Wiggins’ death, a dispute has emerged among members of the musician’s family over the validity of his final estate planning decisions and who should control his estate, which is estimated to be worth approximately $700,000.
At the center of the conflict are Wiggins’ three children — Ilhan, Dylan and Jaden — who are challenging the authority of Wiggins’ niece, Veleta Savannah. Savannah claims that Wiggins placed her in charge of his estate and financial affairs, while his children question whether she has legal authority.
Wiggins reportedly executed a will shortly before his death that excludes his three children. The children, however, have expressed doubt that the document reflects their father’s true intentions. Savannah reportedly maintains that Wiggins deliberately chose to disinherit his children and did so while of sound mind.
Wiggins’ children have filed a petition asking the court to appoint Ilhan as administrator of the estate based on the contention their father died without a valid will. Savannah filed a competing probate petition, attaching a pour-over will dated February 25, 2025. The will directs all of the late musician’s assets into the D’Wayne P. Wiggins Living Trust, also dated February 25, 2025. As of this writing, the trust’s beneficiaries have not been publicly disclosed.
The timing of the alleged changes to Wiggins’ will has contributed to the dispute. Reports indicate that modifications to Wiggins’ estate plan may have occurred while he was receiving end-of-life care and taking medications that could have affected his mental capacity. In probate disputes, late-stage changes to estate planning documents are often closely scrutinized when there is doubt about a person’s ability to understand those decisions.
Questions surrounding financial activity before Wiggins’ death have further fueled the conflict. Savannah has reportedly stated that she held financial power of attorney for Wiggins before he died. His children are questioning the validity of that authority and have raised concerns about a roughly $20,000 withdrawal from Wiggins’ bank account that was allegedly made under it.
Adding another layer of uncertainty to the situation is the fact that Wiggins reportedly married Dori Wiggins just months before his death. It remains unclear whether she is included in Wiggins’ estate plan or whether she has asserted any legal claims to the estate. Under California law, surviving spouses may have certain inheritance rights, including potential community property interests, though those rights can sometimes be modified through prenuptial or postnuptial agreements.
Taken together, the circumstances surrounding Wiggins’ estate — including the alleged disinheritance of his children, questions about late-stage estate planning changes, concerns about financial activity under a power of attorney and the presence of a recent spouse — illustrate several issues that frequently arise in probate litigation. This case highlights why estate conflicts occur and what lessons families can learn when navigating the probate process after the death of a loved one.
