June 2 (Bloomberg) -- Brooke Astor’s longtime estate lawyer said he was “enraged” to learn in early 2004 that he had been fired and that Astor’s son, who wrested millions of dollars from his mother, was given sole power of attorney over her fortune.

Henry Christensen III, 64, said yesterday he believed his termination was engineered by Astor’s son, Anthony Marshall, who is on trial in New York State Supreme Court on charges of fraud and grand larceny; his co-defendant, Francis X. Morrissey, 66, a lawyer who represented Astor after Christensen was fired, was charged with forging Astor’s signature. Both pleaded not guilty.

Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, where Christensen was a partner, had drafted wills for Astor over five decades; they left the bulk of her money to non-profit institutions, such as the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Christensen said he learned his firm had been replaced in a Feb. 5, 2004, letter from Astor’s new attorney, G. Warren Whitaker of Day, Berry & Howard LLP.

A month before his firing, Christensen had rejected Marshall’s request for “full discretionary authority” managing her estate, he testified. Marshall, 85, had said he was “concerned regarding my future economic welfare.”

A week after his termination, Christensen said he confronted Marshall and his wife, Charlene Marshall, at a “tension-filled” meeting at their East 79th Street apartment, during which he chastised Marshall for inducing a 101-year-old woman to change lawyers.

Sole Executor

The Feb. 5 letter stated Astor had signed documents “naming Anthony Marshall as sole executor” of her estate.

“I said I do not believe she is competent to sign an entirely new will,” Christensen said of his former client, who suffered from Alzheimer’s disease.

Christensen’s fourth day of testimony as the prosecution’s witness provided new details in a case where Marshall is accused of swindling millions of dollars from his mother. Christensen spoke of the months leading up to the firing, portraying himself as peacemaker as Marshall pressured Astor for money and control.

Christensen represented the son as well as the mother, who died in 2007, aged 105.

In August 2003, Marshall proposed that Astor give him $5 million outright and pay the resulting “gift tax” of about $2.5 million, Christensen said. Marshall wanted the money for his wife, in case he predeceased her, the lawyer said. Astor snubbed Charlene Marshall in her will, he said.

‘Indecisive, Reluctant’

The lawyer described visiting Astor at her Westchester estate, where she was recovering from hip surgery; she was in her robe, in pain, “indecisive and reluctant to make the gift,” he said.

“You think she felt pressure that day?” Assistant District Attorney Elizabeth Loewy asked.

“Not from me, but that doesn’t mean she didn’t feel pressure from Mr. Marshall,” Christensen said.

She made the gift, in a letter she signed and addressed to her son.

Hours later, Christensen said he received a call at home from Chris Ely, Astor’s butler. He recalls Astor also got on the phone and said she had second thoughts about signing the letter and wanted to see it again.

Christensen said he talked to Marshall, who promised to “take the letter to her and make sure she sees it.” Christensen said he didn’t tag along.

No Distrust

“I saw no reason to distrust” Marshall since he’s the son, said Christensen. Marshall told Christensen later he had visited his mother and allayed her concerns about the gift.

In the drafting of a December 2003 codicil to her 2002 will, Marshall had also wanted more say in the beneficiaries of Astor’s charitable giving after she died, Christensen said.

“She had given him virtually no role,” the lawyer said. “He was going to be left with nothing, bereft, no clout.”

Christensen said Marshall wanted control over all the money in the so-called Vincent Astor Trust, named for her late husband. Astor and Marshall settled on giving him control of 49 percent of the remaining assets in the Astor Trust.

“Did you feel he was twisting your arm?” Loewy asked.

“My arm and his mother’s arm,” Christensen said.

The case is People v. Marshall, 06044-2007, New York Supreme Court, New York County (Manhattan).

To contact the reporter on the story: Philip Boroff in New York at pboroff@bloomberg.net;

Last Updated: June 2, 2009 03:08 EDT