Cool Justice: Unfit To Serve: The Farce Known As Probate Court

Editor's note: Sure sounds like the Estate of Alice R. Gore.
 Alice R. Gore Estate value about 1 million dollars: Alice R. Gore, deceased, a disabled 99 year old ward of the Probate Court of Cook County, Judge Kawamoto’s courtroom was hours away from ending up in the Cook County Morgue. Alice's estate was depleted by probate court parasites and there were reportedly no funds to bury her. Her loving family paid for the burial expenses so that Alice would not have to suffer the indignity of being stacked like an Auschwitz inmate in the Cook County morgue. The judge allowed an easily manipulated, court documented, mentally disabled granddaughter to be appointed as Alice’s guardian and yet no sanctions were instituted against the judge or court officers for this blatant infraction of the law.


Strangely, 16 of Alice’s annuity checks, two of which show forged endorsements, disappeared. Alice’s daughter has a copy of a check with her signature possibly forged. The daughter’s attorney has been trying to obtain copies of the 16 other annuity checks for two years without success. Even more puzzling is a $150,000 life insurance policy owned by Alice and not inventoried into the estate by the court. The Probate Court of Cook of Cook County refuses to investigate these blatant infractions of the law. Makes one wonder what the involvement of the insurance companies was? Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Cool Justice: Unfit To Serve: The Farce Known As Probate Court

Tuesday, October 16, 2012



By Andy Thibault

tntcomm82@cs.com

@cooljustice on Twitter



Going to certain probate courts is still like watching a crooked card game where there is no sheriff in town. Question a fixed hand and they’ll plug you full of lead.



Silly me, I thought the great state of Connecticut reformed the probate system in the 1980s after a relatively young state representative named Chris Shays put a laser beam on one of the most grotesque corruption cases in our history.



Shays was outraged by the actions of a Hartford probate judge who oversaw the looting of a $35 million estate by lawyers acting as conservators. Ethel Donaghue, ill and in her 80s, was conserved – losing all control of her finances, health care and mansion across from the governor’s residence – without her knowledge. Two lawyers ran up fees of more than $100,000 a year each “managing” her estate while also hosting private parties and concerts in which guests said Donaghue seemed oblivious.



When no serious action was taken – other than by investigative reporters – Shays pursued complaints before a Superior Court judge, calling reprimands against the lawyers “ridiculously” lenient. Shays argued that both lawyers and the judge should have been disbarred. He refused to stop speaking when ordered to do so, was found in contempt and sentenced to jail.



While serving two days at the Bridgeport Correctional Center, Shays said he felt safer in jail than in a courtroom.



No additional penalties were imposed on the lawyers. The probate judge resigned in the face of impeachment proceedings by the Legislature.



Having observed probate court proceedings for several months in 2012, I am persuaded we need legislators like the Chris Shays of the Donaghue case now more than ever. There is plenty of material for investigations, hearings and reform legislation from cases throughout the state.



Sure, the disciplinary committee for lawyers known as the Statewide Grievance Committee has become more aggressive in recent years. Sadly, that entity had nowhere to go but up. Even in the face of blatant wrongdoing, it hasn’t gone very far.



Take the case of Southington attorney John Nugent, found by the committee this year to have defrauded a landowner he never met while serving as conservator for her once-valuable estate. Nugent’s penalty? You guessed it, a reprimand.



In Torrington, there is an ongoing probate case in which a court-appointed attorney has admitted falsely accusing a client’s girlfriend of stealing $1,981. The lawyer, Marc Ford Greene, told my colleague Jack Coraggio of the Litchfield County Times he wasn’t worried about disciplinary action, saying, “It hadn’t occurred to me.”



A motion before Torrington Probate Judge Michael Magistrali – to be heard Thursday, Oct. 18 at 10:30 a.m. at the Litchfield Woods Health Care Center – questions the fitness of Greene and conservator Lorraine Seely to serve in their appointed positions on behalf of retired university professor Eli Schutts.



“This is reckless and outrageous conduct by a Fiduciary and a Court-appointed Attorney, as it turns out that it was Ms. Seely herself who withdrew the $1,981 in Social Security funds from the Bank of America account on August 15, 2012,” attorney Matthew Lefevre wrote in the motion. “Curiously, this was done at a time at which Ms. Seely apparently was not serving in any Fiduciary capacity – our understanding is that the Temporary Conservatorship … may have terminated on August 12, 2012.”



Greene himself raised additional issues about the handling of the Schutts case.



“On August 27,” Greene said, “my client chose [a voluntary] conservatorship by Ms. Seely. Judge Magistrali made the suggestion, which I had not completed until that Monday. He avoided a hurtful controversy.”



Theoretically, there is a high standard of evidence for involuntary conservation. Certain protections are lost via voluntary conservation. Protection from inappropriate or over-medication? Forget about it.



Greene said he tried unsuccessfully to get Schutts to sign a voluntary conservator form the day before the hearing.



“That wouldn’t count as ex-parte,” Greene said last week about the suggestion from the judge. “Nothing unethical happened.”



Ex-parte, as it’s known in the business, means one side only, and is a grave violation of due process.



State Probate Court Administrator Paul Knierim, while openly admitting problems in the system, characterizes them as aberrations. Among his steps to inspire public confidence in the probate courts is a new provision in the Practice Book specifically prohibiting lawyers from making substantive communications outside of a hearing to a judge. Still, Knierim said he is unaware of any discipline imposed on a judge for ex-parte communications.



Andy Thibault is a contributing editor for Journal Register Co.’s Connecticut publications and the author of Law & Justice In Everyday Life. He formerly served as a commissioner for Connecticut’s Freedom of Information Commission. Reach Thibault by email at tntcomm82@cs.com. Follow him on Twitter @cooljustice.



URL: http://www.registercitizen.com/articles/2012/10/15/opinion/doc507ce6738bf5d263326872.prt



http://www.registercitizen.com/articles/2012/10/15/opinion/doc507ce6738bf5d263326872.txt?viewmode=default

KamotoDragon.com