At a star-studded premiere, Michael Jackson's children joined forces for a unique appearance honoring their father's legacy. On Wednesday night, the Prince Edward Theatre in the West End of the capital city hosted the 10-time Tony Award-winning production of MJ: The Musical. Among the well-known figures sighted on the red carpet were Prince, Paris, and Blanket Jackson, the children of the King of Pop.

Born Bigi through surrogacy, Blanket, the 22-year-old youngest artist, bore a striking resemblance to his brother's ensemble. Dressed in a slim-fitting suit and a white shirt with an open neck, he seemed anxious as he posed with his siblings on the red carpet. Blanket's seeming circumspect demeanor may stem from his ongoing legal dispute with Michael's mother Katherine around the star's £90 million fortune. It is said that he filed legal action to prevent Katherine from funding an appeal of an earlier decision using the money left over from his father's estate. "They were recently working together to stop the executors of [Michael] Jackson's estate from going through with a huge business transaction that they were very much against," reports indicate of Blanket and his grandma.

According to the site, Bigi describes in the records how he and his grandma argued against the agreement, the court rejected their reasons, and the matter was closed. However, Blanket disagrees with Katherine's decision to appeal the decision and does not want his father's money to cover Katherine's legal costs. Additionally, it states that Blanket states in the paperwork that he does not think the appeal "truly benefits the beneficiaries of the trust" and that the cost should not fall on his father's estate. In addition, he has requested the court to award his grandmother "reasonable attorney's fees incurred from the pre-appeal battle" based on its best judgment.

It happens soon after Katherine's executors allegedly stated she "receives a seven-figure allowance for the year". According to documents submitted to the court in June of last year, Blanket had wanted to retain "confidentiality" on the legal case and his position. The records purportedly noted that Blanket "is a very private person and may have said nothing if he knew that his words or positions could become public," adding that "that would have denied the trial court the ability to hear and con