Man's Colorado probate court loss might change state law

denver and the west


Man's Colorado probate court loss might change state law

By David Olinger

The Denver Post

Posted: 03/01/2011 01:00:00 AM MSTUpdated: 03/02/2011 06:14:16 PM MST

Matthew Keenan lost an emotional legal battle with the bank he decided to dismiss as the court-appointed conservator of his estate. But he might change Colorado law.

Last week, the state appeals court upheld a ruling that Colorado State Bank and Trust reasonably contested the efforts of Keenan, a man who recovered from a catastrophic brain injury, to terminate the bank as his conservator.

But the judges left open the question of whether the bank can collect $217,466 from Keenan for the costs of fighting his bid for independence.

In the wake of his case, pending legislation would not allow Colorado guardians and conservators to "oppose or interfere" with petitions to oust them.

The Denver Post highlighted Keenan's case last year in one of a series of stories examining problems in Colorado's probate courts.

Keenan, a 46-year-old man who awoke from a coma 10 years ago and regained the use of his body and brain, contended Colorado State Bank and Trust had an inherent conflict of interest when it used his money in a fight to retain control of his assets.

But the appeals court judges held that under Colorado law, "opposition to the protected person does not necessarily breach the conservator's fiduciary duty."

They rejected a Boulder court decision to award the bank all of its legal expenses and costs from Keenan's trust funds, however, and ordered the court to review what compensation would be fair.

Spencer Crona, an attorney for the bank, called the court decision well-reasoned and extensively analyzed.

Chester "Skip" Morgan, Keenan's attorney, was shocked at first. "I was kind of sleepless and upset for two days after I read the opinion," he said. "I couldn't believe it."

But he praised the appeals court for vacating the award of legal fees, as well as legislation forbidding guardians and conservators to oppose petitions to terminate their services.

Keenan agreed.

"We may have lost this battle," he said, "but we have won the war by assuring that this kind of treatment never will happen again."

While ruling against Keenan, the appeal court judges said they agreed conservators are apt to have a conflict of interest in maintaining their role when their ward wants it severed because it ensures they continue to get paid.

But, they noted, "even where a statute is troubling, a court must resist the temptation to change the statutory language."

The legislative proposal that could affect future cases like Keenan's lies within a Senate bill to revise Colorado probate court laws.

It would allow guardians and conservators to file a written report or a motion for instructions from the court if a ward or protected person petitions to terminate their services. With those exceptions, a guardian or conservator "may not take any action to oppose or interfere in the termination proceeding."

Read more: Man's Colorado probate court loss might change state law - The Denver Post

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_17506322

Editor's note:  Your Shark Research team has discovered a similar conflict of interest between a bank, healthcare providing rehabilitation type company and an aged ward in the Probate Court of Cook County. An employee of the healthcare company took the aged ward to visit the Shedd Aquarium.  The bank employees then forced the locks on the aged ward's home and took valuable belongings, including money, gold, jewelery and a Luger pistol...all without the  aged ward's knowledge or permission.  To our researcher's knowledge, none of the stolen items were ever cataloged for the court.  Nor was a police report ever initiated.  Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com