View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Another Attorney Charged in RICO Case,
Accused of Paying Texas Judge for Rulings
Posted Aug 23, 2011 12:51 PM CDT
By Martha Neil
An Austin attorney has been federally indicted concerning his alleged role in a Texas court corruption scheme in which a former state district judge and two other lawyers have already taken pleas.
Marc Garrett Rosenthal, 49, is accused in a 13-count indictment unsealed yesterday of paying ex-Judge Abel Corral Limas for favorable rulings, as well as bribing witnesses, conspiring to file state and federal personal injury cases relying on false testimony and directing others to pay nonlawyers for referrals of cases to his firm, according to the Associated Press.
Rosenthal faces charges of conspiracy to violate the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations statute, witness-tampering and fraud charges, among others, reports the Brownsville Herald. (The American-Statesman provides a full rundown.)
The Herald says Rosenthal is also accused of arranging for others to manipulate the Cameron County District Court case assignment system, so that cases went to the courts they preferred.
Rosenthal, whose law firm has a satellite office in the Rio Grande Valley, turned himself in yesterday in Brownsville and was released on $100,000 bond. In addition to the substantial prison time to which he could be sentenced, if convicted, the government is seeking to recoup from him nearly $6 million in claimed profit from the alleged scheme.
He pleaded not guilty and his lawyer, Ernesto Gamez Jr., blamed a former Texas lawmaker, Jose Santiago "Jim" Solis, who served as counsel to Rosenthal's firm in Brownsville, calling Solis a rogue lawyer who is trying to pin blame on Rosenthal, the AP reports.
Rosenthal's law firm, Rosenthal & Watson, in a written statement called admissions of guilt by others "disheartening," but said the firm knew nothing about the others' actions and expressed confidence that Rosenthal will be vindicated.
Rosenthal told the Herald that he is innocent, that he looks forward to clearing his name and that he is hurt by the accusations against him. "The families of South Texas, the working men and women of South Texas, know I am fighter, that I do what it takes within the law and I am a champion of right and wrong," Rosenthal said.
Limas, Solis and another lawyer, Jose Martin "Joe" Valle, earlier pleaded guilty to various charges related to a racketeering and extortion scheme related to the operation of Limas' courtroom and await sentencing. None of the articles indicate that there was any relationship between Rosenthal and Valle.
Please read entire article at link below:
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/another_attorney_charged_in_racketeering_case_allegedly_paid_corrupt_texas_/
Editor's note: Chicago FEDS, Texas gets a RICO case for a handful of judges being paid off. The dozens of judges in the corrupt Probate Court of Cook County are up to their eyeballs in payoff money from nursing home interests, lawyers, case management companies, insurance companies and fiduciaries with no action being taken. Shame on you! Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Lawyer Acting as Guardian Disbarred for Helping Ward Will $5M Estate to His Wife
View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Legal Ethics (Are they kidding?)
Lawyer Acting as Guardian Disbarred for Helping Ward Will $5M Estate to His Wife
Posted Aug 30, 2011 12:51 PM CDT
By Martha Neil
Despite a hitherto unblemished disciplinary record over a 30-year legal career, a New York attorney appointed as a guardian to an incapacitated person has been disbarred for helping her prepare a will in favor of his wife.
John M. Aversa was appointed in July 2009, and the next month his ward got a settlement of over $5 million in a personal injury suit, recounts the Fourth Judicial Department of the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division in an opinion (PDF) earlier this month.
A court told Aversa to retain independent counsel to help the woman prepare a will. Instead he prepared the will himself without bringing in independent counsel or evaluating the woman's testamentary capacity. It named Aversa as the executor and his wife, under her maiden name, as the beneficiary. Two members of his immediate family were witnesses.
Besides committing what the court described as serious misconduct for personal gain, Aversa also "demonstrated a shocking lack of candor in this proceeding," the court wrote, "by belatedly presenting to the Grievance Committee a document designed to conceal his misconduct and by providing explanations for his conduct that lack credibility."
Aversa had claimed that the will was drafted in an effort to distribute his ward's assets to charity, as she wished, via his wife. He presented an unsigned, undated will addendum giving instructions to that effect after he was asked to resign as guardian, the opinion says.
Please read complete article in link below:
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/lawyer_acting_as_guardian_disbarred_for_helping_ward_will_5m_estate_to_his_/
Editor's note: Do believe the gall of this pompous hypocrite Aversa? "distribute his ward's assets to charity, as she wished, via his wife." This reminds me of the IL Tyler case, where a bunch of vultures drugged a healthy Aunt Lyda, pulled her teeth and had her sign a new will. Aunt Lyda died soon after. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Legal Ethics (Are they kidding?)
Lawyer Acting as Guardian Disbarred for Helping Ward Will $5M Estate to His Wife
Posted Aug 30, 2011 12:51 PM CDT
By Martha Neil
Despite a hitherto unblemished disciplinary record over a 30-year legal career, a New York attorney appointed as a guardian to an incapacitated person has been disbarred for helping her prepare a will in favor of his wife.
John M. Aversa was appointed in July 2009, and the next month his ward got a settlement of over $5 million in a personal injury suit, recounts the Fourth Judicial Department of the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division in an opinion (PDF) earlier this month.
A court told Aversa to retain independent counsel to help the woman prepare a will. Instead he prepared the will himself without bringing in independent counsel or evaluating the woman's testamentary capacity. It named Aversa as the executor and his wife, under her maiden name, as the beneficiary. Two members of his immediate family were witnesses.
Besides committing what the court described as serious misconduct for personal gain, Aversa also "demonstrated a shocking lack of candor in this proceeding," the court wrote, "by belatedly presenting to the Grievance Committee a document designed to conceal his misconduct and by providing explanations for his conduct that lack credibility."
Aversa had claimed that the will was drafted in an effort to distribute his ward's assets to charity, as she wished, via his wife. He presented an unsigned, undated will addendum giving instructions to that effect after he was asked to resign as guardian, the opinion says.
Please read complete article in link below:
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/lawyer_acting_as_guardian_disbarred_for_helping_ward_will_5m_estate_to_his_/
Editor's note: Do believe the gall of this pompous hypocrite Aversa? "distribute his ward's assets to charity, as she wished, via his wife." This reminds me of the IL Tyler case, where a bunch of vultures drugged a healthy Aunt Lyda, pulled her teeth and had her sign a new will. Aunt Lyda died soon after. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Good cop - Bad cop
View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Is a plea from one of our members whose mother has been taken by the guardian and hidden from her.
Please stop by and leave your comments of support for her and also your suggestions. And those of you with Facebook or Twitter, please post this plea on your pages.
http://nasga-stopguardianabuse.blogspot.com./
On a related note, I spoke at length yesterday with a retired police officer on this very issue. This member (featured today on the blog) had been to the sheriff and the sheriff said he couldn’t help because the mother was under guardianship.
The police officer I spoke to gave me two good clues to pass along:
First, when one goes to the police station to report this kind of thing, take documentation. The first thing the police will (or should) ask for is the guardianship papers. They will be looking to determine if it’s a full guardianship or a limited guardianship.
And second, it’s important to convey not only a sense of urgency, but a sense of worry and imminent danger for your loved one. In other words, it’s more important that the police see you scared and worried about Mom being in danger rather than see you upset about the fact that the guardian is withholding information. You want to convey that the guardian did this act in total secrecy and Mom was taken against her will and possibly is being retained or held against her will, that she’s scared, etc.
I will add to the suggestions that when you take your documentation, I think it’s a good idea to take a copy of the complete court docket, so the police can see right there and then that there is no restraining order against you -- or no order preventing your visitation in the records.
Also, I think it’s important to read your state statutes before you go to the police to determine if the guardian has the power to move your loved one without court approval. The general rule from state to state (and it could be different in your specific state) is the court must be alerted if the ward is being moved out of its jurisdiction. So, the court records may reveal where Mom was moved to. You want to check that out before going to the police, so that when you go, you’re going to them after you’ve done everything else in your power. Also, some state statutes may require that next of kin be notified. If that’s the case, then you can also go to the police with a copy of that statute as well.
Of course, we all realize there are good cops and bad cops. And you can do everything right and be unfortunate enough that you happen to go to the police station and get a hold of a bad cop. But maybe not. And if you get one of the good guys, it will help even more if you’re better prepared.
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Is a plea from one of our members whose mother has been taken by the guardian and hidden from her.
Please stop by and leave your comments of support for her and also your suggestions. And those of you with Facebook or Twitter, please post this plea on your pages.
http://nasga-stopguardianabuse.blogspot.com./
On a related note, I spoke at length yesterday with a retired police officer on this very issue. This member (featured today on the blog) had been to the sheriff and the sheriff said he couldn’t help because the mother was under guardianship.
The police officer I spoke to gave me two good clues to pass along:
First, when one goes to the police station to report this kind of thing, take documentation. The first thing the police will (or should) ask for is the guardianship papers. They will be looking to determine if it’s a full guardianship or a limited guardianship.
And second, it’s important to convey not only a sense of urgency, but a sense of worry and imminent danger for your loved one. In other words, it’s more important that the police see you scared and worried about Mom being in danger rather than see you upset about the fact that the guardian is withholding information. You want to convey that the guardian did this act in total secrecy and Mom was taken against her will and possibly is being retained or held against her will, that she’s scared, etc.
I will add to the suggestions that when you take your documentation, I think it’s a good idea to take a copy of the complete court docket, so the police can see right there and then that there is no restraining order against you -- or no order preventing your visitation in the records.
Also, I think it’s important to read your state statutes before you go to the police to determine if the guardian has the power to move your loved one without court approval. The general rule from state to state (and it could be different in your specific state) is the court must be alerted if the ward is being moved out of its jurisdiction. So, the court records may reveal where Mom was moved to. You want to check that out before going to the police, so that when you go, you’re going to them after you’ve done everything else in your power. Also, some state statutes may require that next of kin be notified. If that’s the case, then you can also go to the police with a copy of that statute as well.
Of course, we all realize there are good cops and bad cops. And you can do everything right and be unfortunate enough that you happen to go to the police station and get a hold of a bad cop. But maybe not. And if you get one of the good guys, it will help even more if you’re better prepared.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Operation Golden Gavel - Bennett
View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Operation Golden Gavel
Operation Golden Gavel is the joint effort between the Guardianship Justice Coalition and hundreds of local, state, and federal law enforcement officers, investigators, and prosecutors. Guardianship and conservatorship cases commenced in America since January 1, 2000 are being scrutinized for violations of due process and for evidence substantiating crimes committed by corrupt public officials and other members of the Guardianship Mafia. Operation Golden Gavel is the largest judicial public corruption probe in US history. Thousands of dishonest public officials are being held accountable for their criminal acts.
Color of Law Abuses ARE Crimes.
U.S. law enforcement officers and other officials like judges, prosecutors, and security guards have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies—authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country. These powers include the authority to detain and arrest suspects, to search and seize property, to bring criminal charges, to make rulings in court, and to use deadly force in certain situations.
Preventing abuse of this authority, however, is equally necessary to the health of our nation’s democracy. That’s why it’s a federal crime for anyone acting under “color of law” willfully to deprive or conspire to deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution or U.S. law. “Color of law” simply means that the person is using authority given to him or her by a local, state, or federal government agency.
The FBI is the lead federal agency for investigating color of law abuses, which include acts carried out by government officials operating both within and beyond the limits of their lawful authority. Off-duty conduct may be covered if the perpetrator asserted his or her official status in some way.
Most of these crimes fall into five broad areas:
■Excessive force;
■Sexual assaults;
■False arrest and fabrication of evidence;
■Deprivation of property; and
■Failure to keep from harm.
Excessive force: In making arrests, maintaining order, and defending life, law enforcement officers are allowed to use whatever force is “reasonably” necessary. The breadth and scope of the use of force is vast—from just the physical presence of the officer…to the use of deadly force. Violations of federal law occur when it can be shown that the force used was willfully “unreasonable” or “excessive.”
Sexual assaults by officials acting under color of law can happen in jails, during traffic stops, or in other settings where officials might use their position of authority to coerce an individual into sexual compliance. The compliance is generally gained because of a threat of an official action against the person if he or she doesn’t comply.
False arrest and fabrication of evidence: The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right against unreasonable searches or seizures. A law enforcement official using authority provided under the color of law is allowed to stop individuals and, under certain circumstances, to search them and retain their property. It is in the abuse of that discretionary power—such as an unlawful detention or illegal confiscation of property—that a violation of a person’s civil rights may occur.
Fabricating evidence against or falsely arresting an individual also violates the color of law statute, taking away the person’s rights of due process and unreasonable seizure. In the case of deprivation of property, the color of law statute would be violated by unlawfully obtaining or maintaining a person’s property, which oversteps or misapplies the official’s authority.
The Fourteenth Amendment secures the right to due process; the Eighth Amendment prohibits the use of cruel and unusual punishment. During an arrest or detention, these rights can be violated by the use of force amounting to punishment (summary judgment). The person accused of a crime must be allowed the opportunity to have a trial and should not be subjected to punishment without having been afforded the opportunity of the legal process.
Failure to keep from harm: The public counts on its law enforcement officials to protect local communities. If it’s shown that an official willfully failed to keep an individual from harm, that official could be in violation of the color of law statute.
Please read the complete article at link below:
http://guardianshipjustice.com/operation-golden-gavel-3/
Editor's note: The Bennett case should awaken the Chicago area public awareness to the danger their disabled or challenged loved ones face. The fertile atmosphere of corruption in the Probate Court of Cook County with its full complement of crooked judges is ripe for similar abuses. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Operation Golden Gavel
Operation Golden Gavel is the joint effort between the Guardianship Justice Coalition and hundreds of local, state, and federal law enforcement officers, investigators, and prosecutors. Guardianship and conservatorship cases commenced in America since January 1, 2000 are being scrutinized for violations of due process and for evidence substantiating crimes committed by corrupt public officials and other members of the Guardianship Mafia. Operation Golden Gavel is the largest judicial public corruption probe in US history. Thousands of dishonest public officials are being held accountable for their criminal acts.
Color of Law Abuses ARE Crimes.
U.S. law enforcement officers and other officials like judges, prosecutors, and security guards have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies—authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country. These powers include the authority to detain and arrest suspects, to search and seize property, to bring criminal charges, to make rulings in court, and to use deadly force in certain situations.
Preventing abuse of this authority, however, is equally necessary to the health of our nation’s democracy. That’s why it’s a federal crime for anyone acting under “color of law” willfully to deprive or conspire to deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution or U.S. law. “Color of law” simply means that the person is using authority given to him or her by a local, state, or federal government agency.
The FBI is the lead federal agency for investigating color of law abuses, which include acts carried out by government officials operating both within and beyond the limits of their lawful authority. Off-duty conduct may be covered if the perpetrator asserted his or her official status in some way.
Most of these crimes fall into five broad areas:
■Excessive force;
■Sexual assaults;
■False arrest and fabrication of evidence;
■Deprivation of property; and
■Failure to keep from harm.
Excessive force: In making arrests, maintaining order, and defending life, law enforcement officers are allowed to use whatever force is “reasonably” necessary. The breadth and scope of the use of force is vast—from just the physical presence of the officer…to the use of deadly force. Violations of federal law occur when it can be shown that the force used was willfully “unreasonable” or “excessive.”
Sexual assaults by officials acting under color of law can happen in jails, during traffic stops, or in other settings where officials might use their position of authority to coerce an individual into sexual compliance. The compliance is generally gained because of a threat of an official action against the person if he or she doesn’t comply.
False arrest and fabrication of evidence: The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right against unreasonable searches or seizures. A law enforcement official using authority provided under the color of law is allowed to stop individuals and, under certain circumstances, to search them and retain their property. It is in the abuse of that discretionary power—such as an unlawful detention or illegal confiscation of property—that a violation of a person’s civil rights may occur.
Fabricating evidence against or falsely arresting an individual also violates the color of law statute, taking away the person’s rights of due process and unreasonable seizure. In the case of deprivation of property, the color of law statute would be violated by unlawfully obtaining or maintaining a person’s property, which oversteps or misapplies the official’s authority.
The Fourteenth Amendment secures the right to due process; the Eighth Amendment prohibits the use of cruel and unusual punishment. During an arrest or detention, these rights can be violated by the use of force amounting to punishment (summary judgment). The person accused of a crime must be allowed the opportunity to have a trial and should not be subjected to punishment without having been afforded the opportunity of the legal process.
Failure to keep from harm: The public counts on its law enforcement officials to protect local communities. If it’s shown that an official willfully failed to keep an individual from harm, that official could be in violation of the color of law statute.
Please read the complete article at link below:
http://guardianshipjustice.com/operation-golden-gavel-3/
Editor's note: The Bennett case should awaken the Chicago area public awareness to the danger their disabled or challenged loved ones face. The fertile atmosphere of corruption in the Probate Court of Cook County with its full complement of crooked judges is ripe for similar abuses. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
State may end reliance on nursing homes for disabled adults
View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
State may end reliance on nursing homes for disabled adults
WGN news reported the following story: http://www.wgntv.com/news/local/breaking/chi-state-may-end-reliance-on-nursing-homes-for-young-disabled-adults-20110829,0,6186374.story
By David Jackson Tribune reporter
6:39 p.m. CDT, August 29, 2011
State officials on Monday moved a step closer to ending Illinois' long-standing reliance on large nursing facilities to house adults who have physical and mental disabilities.
A proposed settlement to a class-action lawsuit was filed in federal court Monday evening. It would require state agencies to offer subsidized apartments to thousands of Cook County nursing home residents who can function independently and want to move out of the institutions.
Before it becomes state policy, Monday's settlement still requires court approval and a "fairness hearing" to consider the comments and objections of interested parties. But the agreement was hailed as a civil rights victory by advocates for low-income people with disabilities who say the new settlement would bolster other recent court agreements and legislative reforms aimed at reshaping Illinois' troubled long-term care system.
"Institutions foster dependency. It is actually harmful to people to live in nursing homes when they could be better served in the community," said Patricia Werner, an attorney for the nonprofit Access Living, which filed a 2007 federal lawsuit that paved the way for the settlement agreement.
Officials for the administration of Gov. Pat Quinn say the new agreement would not burden Illinois taxpayers because the debt-ravaged state would recoup Medicaid dollars as it offers apartments and community housing to the former nursing home residents. In other states, they say, such subsidized dwellings have proved less costly to taxpayers than nursing facilities. Under the court agreement, the new housing plan must be implemented in a way that costs the state no more than its current use of nursing homes.
The agreement would require state agencies to offer so-called supportive housing to as many as 20,000 Medicaid recipients who currently reside in Cook County nursing facilities. The plan would be rolled out cautiously, with some 1,100 nursing home residents moved into apartments and group homes during an initial 30-month period.
Quinn and state officials worked to settle three linked disability-rights lawsuits and reform Illinois nursing homes following a 2009 Chicago Tribune investigation that detailed numerous reports of sexual assault, violence and drug abuse in the state's most troubled facilities.
While some Cook County nursing home residents receive excellent treatment, others find themselves trapped in a subset of grim, profit-making institutions that provide little therapy or discharge planning, the Tribune investigation of court records and interviews found.
Cook County nursing homes often take direct control of residents' disability checks, which typically total about $700 a month, and allot each resident just $30 per month in spending money — far too little to amass an apartment security deposit or build a life beyond the institution.
Advocates for the elderly and disabled in 2005 filed the first of three linked lawsuits demanding that Illinois abide by a 1999 Supreme Court decision known as Olmstead, which requires government agencies to place people with disabilities in the least restrictive setting appropriate to their needs.
Newspaper investigations around the country have shown that supportive living arrangements are not an automatic cure for the abuse and neglect found in nursing facilities.
"We have to be vigilant in making sure the people who move are prepared and the places are safe. We're dealing with the most vulnerable people in society, which gives us a special obligation to make sure wherever they live is as safe as it can be," said state Department on Aging acting Director Michael Gelder.
Under Monday's court settlement, Cook County nursing home residents can be evaluated by state-supervised professionals to determine whether they are eligible to be moved into a less restrictive setting and what is needed to thrive there. The evaluation is voluntary, and residents can decline to take part and remain where they are.
Those who opt to move would be offered rental assistance that in many cases would total roughly $700 per month, as well up to $4,000 in transitional funds to equip and furnish their apartments. This money will not be handed to the clients but will be distributed to their landlords using a method akin to Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers.
Community-based organizations would provide on-site or off-site services, including mental health treatment, life-skills training, personal attendant services and case management that includes linking clients with medical providers.
Editor's note: Unfortunately, while this is a step in the right direction, it does nothing to help the elderly disabled wards in the Cook County Probate Court. Wards in Cook County are being victimized by their guardians through the use of OBRA Special Needs Pooled Trusts. These trusts are created, with the approval of certain judges, for the sole purpose of allowing the ward to qualify for Medicaid. Once a ward qualifies for Medicaid, they can no longer stay in private pay housing. These wards are then moved from their high quality private pay nursing homes and are immediately moved to public aid facilities at the cost of the taxpayer; this is done as soon as their funds are placed into the OBRA trust by the guardian. This is done because of a legal loophole in the OBRA laws. While the wards' OBRA funds (their entire estates) cannot be used on housing or food per OBRA laws, the wards' estate funds CAN be used on administrative fees (legal fees and guardian's fees). Thus, the wards are placed into public aid facilities, and their estates are depleted by the attorneys and guardians. A review of the wards of the Public Guardian shows that over 50% of the wards estates are placed into these trusts, the wards are moved to public aid facilities, and the estates are depleted with legal and guardian fees. There is a shortage of public aid nursing home beds for those truly in need. The abuse of the Medicaid system by the guardians in the Cook County Probate Courts needs to come to an end
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
State may end reliance on nursing homes for disabled adults
WGN news reported the following story: http://www.wgntv.com/news/local/breaking/chi-state-may-end-reliance-on-nursing-homes-for-young-disabled-adults-20110829,0,6186374.story
By David Jackson Tribune reporter
6:39 p.m. CDT, August 29, 2011
State officials on Monday moved a step closer to ending Illinois' long-standing reliance on large nursing facilities to house adults who have physical and mental disabilities.
A proposed settlement to a class-action lawsuit was filed in federal court Monday evening. It would require state agencies to offer subsidized apartments to thousands of Cook County nursing home residents who can function independently and want to move out of the institutions.
Before it becomes state policy, Monday's settlement still requires court approval and a "fairness hearing" to consider the comments and objections of interested parties. But the agreement was hailed as a civil rights victory by advocates for low-income people with disabilities who say the new settlement would bolster other recent court agreements and legislative reforms aimed at reshaping Illinois' troubled long-term care system.
"Institutions foster dependency. It is actually harmful to people to live in nursing homes when they could be better served in the community," said Patricia Werner, an attorney for the nonprofit Access Living, which filed a 2007 federal lawsuit that paved the way for the settlement agreement.
Officials for the administration of Gov. Pat Quinn say the new agreement would not burden Illinois taxpayers because the debt-ravaged state would recoup Medicaid dollars as it offers apartments and community housing to the former nursing home residents. In other states, they say, such subsidized dwellings have proved less costly to taxpayers than nursing facilities. Under the court agreement, the new housing plan must be implemented in a way that costs the state no more than its current use of nursing homes.
The agreement would require state agencies to offer so-called supportive housing to as many as 20,000 Medicaid recipients who currently reside in Cook County nursing facilities. The plan would be rolled out cautiously, with some 1,100 nursing home residents moved into apartments and group homes during an initial 30-month period.
Quinn and state officials worked to settle three linked disability-rights lawsuits and reform Illinois nursing homes following a 2009 Chicago Tribune investigation that detailed numerous reports of sexual assault, violence and drug abuse in the state's most troubled facilities.
While some Cook County nursing home residents receive excellent treatment, others find themselves trapped in a subset of grim, profit-making institutions that provide little therapy or discharge planning, the Tribune investigation of court records and interviews found.
Cook County nursing homes often take direct control of residents' disability checks, which typically total about $700 a month, and allot each resident just $30 per month in spending money — far too little to amass an apartment security deposit or build a life beyond the institution.
Advocates for the elderly and disabled in 2005 filed the first of three linked lawsuits demanding that Illinois abide by a 1999 Supreme Court decision known as Olmstead, which requires government agencies to place people with disabilities in the least restrictive setting appropriate to their needs.
Newspaper investigations around the country have shown that supportive living arrangements are not an automatic cure for the abuse and neglect found in nursing facilities.
"We have to be vigilant in making sure the people who move are prepared and the places are safe. We're dealing with the most vulnerable people in society, which gives us a special obligation to make sure wherever they live is as safe as it can be," said state Department on Aging acting Director Michael Gelder.
Under Monday's court settlement, Cook County nursing home residents can be evaluated by state-supervised professionals to determine whether they are eligible to be moved into a less restrictive setting and what is needed to thrive there. The evaluation is voluntary, and residents can decline to take part and remain where they are.
Those who opt to move would be offered rental assistance that in many cases would total roughly $700 per month, as well up to $4,000 in transitional funds to equip and furnish their apartments. This money will not be handed to the clients but will be distributed to their landlords using a method akin to Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers.
Community-based organizations would provide on-site or off-site services, including mental health treatment, life-skills training, personal attendant services and case management that includes linking clients with medical providers.
Editor's note: Unfortunately, while this is a step in the right direction, it does nothing to help the elderly disabled wards in the Cook County Probate Court. Wards in Cook County are being victimized by their guardians through the use of OBRA Special Needs Pooled Trusts. These trusts are created, with the approval of certain judges, for the sole purpose of allowing the ward to qualify for Medicaid. Once a ward qualifies for Medicaid, they can no longer stay in private pay housing. These wards are then moved from their high quality private pay nursing homes and are immediately moved to public aid facilities at the cost of the taxpayer; this is done as soon as their funds are placed into the OBRA trust by the guardian. This is done because of a legal loophole in the OBRA laws. While the wards' OBRA funds (their entire estates) cannot be used on housing or food per OBRA laws, the wards' estate funds CAN be used on administrative fees (legal fees and guardian's fees). Thus, the wards are placed into public aid facilities, and their estates are depleted by the attorneys and guardians. A review of the wards of the Public Guardian shows that over 50% of the wards estates are placed into these trusts, the wards are moved to public aid facilities, and the estates are depleted with legal and guardian fees. There is a shortage of public aid nursing home beds for those truly in need. The abuse of the Medicaid system by the guardians in the Cook County Probate Courts needs to come to an end
Sunday, August 28, 2011
Ex-Sylvania lawyer guilty of attempted records tampering
View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Ex-Sylvania (OH) lawyer guilty of attempted records tampering
BY ERICA BLAKE
BLADE STAFF WRITER
More than four years after originally being charged with crimes associated with her dealings with an elderly client, a former Sylvania lawyer entered a plea in Lucas County Common Pleas Court Wednesday.
Linda S. Cook, 60, pleaded guilty to one count of attempted tampering with records. She faces up to 1 1/2 years in prison when sentenced Sept. 29 by Judge Gary Cook, who is not related to the defendant.
Wednesday, Cook admitted in court that she falsified a document that she later filed with the county recorder's office. Specifically, she filed a deed that should have been dated in 2001 but instead was dated 1998 to avoid federal review of the transaction.
"On July 12, 2001, I attempted to falsify a deed with the knowledge that it would facilitate a fraud," Cook said.
The resolution comes years after she was charged and after the case was reviewed by several higher courts.
Cook was indicted July 18, 2007, by a grand jury on one count each of tampering with records and theft from an elderly person or disabled adult. But the case was put on hold after county prosecutors appealed a decision by Judge Cook that dismissed the tampering charge because of statute of limitations.
The decision was reversed in September, 2009, by the 6th District Court of Appeals and in December, the Ohio Supreme Court agreed the original charge should be reinstated.
The lawyer had been disbarred just prior to being criminally charged for allegedly falsifying the deed to an elderly client's farm. Additionally, she was charged with transferring the property to herself before giving the farm to her client's church as she was instructed to do. The transfer allowed her to take charitable deductions for the gift.
As part of the plea agreement, the theft charge will be dismissed at her sentencing.
Assistant County Prosecutor Michael Narges said the victim has since died. He said the plea was approved by representatives of her estate.
Please read complete article at link below:
http://www.toledoblade.com/Courts/2011/08/25/Ex-Sylvania-lawyer-guilty-of-attempted-records-tampering.html
Editor's note: The scum sucking bottom feeders in the Tyler case are doing the same thing as this OH ex-attorney. Will the Cook County Court System punish them? Of course not! They allow the corruption to continue on and on and on! Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Ex-Sylvania (OH) lawyer guilty of attempted records tampering
BY ERICA BLAKE
BLADE STAFF WRITER
More than four years after originally being charged with crimes associated with her dealings with an elderly client, a former Sylvania lawyer entered a plea in Lucas County Common Pleas Court Wednesday.
Linda S. Cook, 60, pleaded guilty to one count of attempted tampering with records. She faces up to 1 1/2 years in prison when sentenced Sept. 29 by Judge Gary Cook, who is not related to the defendant.
Wednesday, Cook admitted in court that she falsified a document that she later filed with the county recorder's office. Specifically, she filed a deed that should have been dated in 2001 but instead was dated 1998 to avoid federal review of the transaction.
"On July 12, 2001, I attempted to falsify a deed with the knowledge that it would facilitate a fraud," Cook said.
The resolution comes years after she was charged and after the case was reviewed by several higher courts.
Cook was indicted July 18, 2007, by a grand jury on one count each of tampering with records and theft from an elderly person or disabled adult. But the case was put on hold after county prosecutors appealed a decision by Judge Cook that dismissed the tampering charge because of statute of limitations.
The decision was reversed in September, 2009, by the 6th District Court of Appeals and in December, the Ohio Supreme Court agreed the original charge should be reinstated.
The lawyer had been disbarred just prior to being criminally charged for allegedly falsifying the deed to an elderly client's farm. Additionally, she was charged with transferring the property to herself before giving the farm to her client's church as she was instructed to do. The transfer allowed her to take charitable deductions for the gift.
As part of the plea agreement, the theft charge will be dismissed at her sentencing.
Assistant County Prosecutor Michael Narges said the victim has since died. He said the plea was approved by representatives of her estate.
Please read complete article at link below:
http://www.toledoblade.com/Courts/2011/08/25/Ex-Sylvania-lawyer-guilty-of-attempted-records-tampering.html
Editor's note: The scum sucking bottom feeders in the Tyler case are doing the same thing as this OH ex-attorney. Will the Cook County Court System punish them? Of course not! They allow the corruption to continue on and on and on! Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
5 charged after FBI sting to catch manipulators of penny stocks
View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
5 charged after FBI sting to catch manipulators of penny stocks
By David S. Hilzenrath, Published: June 30
The FBI has used stings to nab corrupt politicians, suspected terrorists and military suppliers willing to pay bribes. On Thursday, the government said it had mounted another in a series of undercover operations to catch manipulators of penny stocks.
Five men were charged in criminal indictments and named in SEC enforcement actions, the government said.
The case highlighted the risks of penny stocks, which are easily manipulated because they trade so thinly and for extremely low prices -- sometimes fractions of a cent. Often, the companies behind the stocks give investors little if any solid information about their financial performance.
In one of the cases the government announced Thursday, Douglas Newton, the chief executive of a California company called Real American Brands, allegedly paid kickbacks so that a pension fund trustee would buy more than 6 million shares of the company’s stock. The trustee was actually a creation of the FBI, and a purported associate of the trustee who helped arrange the deal was an undercover agent, the SEC said.
It appears that shares of the company’s stock last traded earlier this month for four hundredths of a cent, according OTC Markets, which runs a quotation system for penny stocks.
Newton could not be reached for comment, and a lawyer who previously represented him declined to comment.
In a separate case, a federal judge in Florida ordered two penny stock promoters to pay more than $20 million in fines and disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, the SEC said Thursday.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/5-charged-after-fbi-sting-to-catch-manipulators-of-penny-stocks/2011/06/30/AGAK5fsH_story.html
Editor's note: Dear FBI Special Agent in Charge of Chicago FBI Office, We victims of the Probate Court of Cook County are feeling shortchanged. The FBI in CA, FL, GA and PA appear to be getting the all the action and convictions. We have a list available of all the corrupt judges on the 18th floor of the Daley Courthouse along with their crimes and yet it appears they continue with their criminal activity. Perhaps, if you indicted a couple of these crooks, the remainder may mend their ways. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
5 charged after FBI sting to catch manipulators of penny stocks
By David S. Hilzenrath, Published: June 30
The FBI has used stings to nab corrupt politicians, suspected terrorists and military suppliers willing to pay bribes. On Thursday, the government said it had mounted another in a series of undercover operations to catch manipulators of penny stocks.
Five men were charged in criminal indictments and named in SEC enforcement actions, the government said.
The case highlighted the risks of penny stocks, which are easily manipulated because they trade so thinly and for extremely low prices -- sometimes fractions of a cent. Often, the companies behind the stocks give investors little if any solid information about their financial performance.
In one of the cases the government announced Thursday, Douglas Newton, the chief executive of a California company called Real American Brands, allegedly paid kickbacks so that a pension fund trustee would buy more than 6 million shares of the company’s stock. The trustee was actually a creation of the FBI, and a purported associate of the trustee who helped arrange the deal was an undercover agent, the SEC said.
It appears that shares of the company’s stock last traded earlier this month for four hundredths of a cent, according OTC Markets, which runs a quotation system for penny stocks.
Newton could not be reached for comment, and a lawyer who previously represented him declined to comment.
In a separate case, a federal judge in Florida ordered two penny stock promoters to pay more than $20 million in fines and disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, the SEC said Thursday.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/5-charged-after-fbi-sting-to-catch-manipulators-of-penny-stocks/2011/06/30/AGAK5fsH_story.html
Editor's note: Dear FBI Special Agent in Charge of Chicago FBI Office, We victims of the Probate Court of Cook County are feeling shortchanged. The FBI in CA, FL, GA and PA appear to be getting the all the action and convictions. We have a list available of all the corrupt judges on the 18th floor of the Daley Courthouse along with their crimes and yet it appears they continue with their criminal activity. Perhaps, if you indicted a couple of these crooks, the remainder may mend their ways. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Saturday, August 27, 2011
KIDS FOR CASH JUDGE SENTENCED TO 28 YEARS
Editor's note: Chicago FEDS; This same selling of human beings goes on daily in the Probate Court of Cook County. Your ProbateShark has yet to find an honest judge, GAL, or lawyer practicing on the 18th floor of the Daley Courthouse. Follow the example of your PA and GA colleagues and go after the bottom feeders and slime suckers. Please watch these heart rending videos that are magnified a thousand times by our own Cook County crooks. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
KIDS FOR CASH JUDGE SENTENCED TO 28 YEARS
Sandy Fonzo comments on sentencing of crooked judge
Please watch video below:
http://www.cnn.com/video/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_freevideo+%28RSS%3A+Video%29#/video/crime/2011/08/15/nr.kids.for.cash.cnn
Sandy Fonzo berates Luzerne County Judge Mark Ciavarella for killing her son via Payola
Please watch video below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLqjZq9uh5E
KIDS FOR CASH JUDGE SENTENCED TO 28 YEARS
Sandy Fonzo comments on sentencing of crooked judge
Please watch video below:
http://www.cnn.com/video/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_freevideo+%28RSS%3A+Video%29#/video/crime/2011/08/15/nr.kids.for.cash.cnn
Sandy Fonzo berates Luzerne County Judge Mark Ciavarella for killing her son via Payola
Please watch video below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLqjZq9uh5E
Rockford Woman Who Fought Hospital Loses Battle to Cancer
View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Rockford Woman Who Fought Hospital Loses Battle to Cancer
A sad update to a story we first brought you in December regarding an elderly Rockford woman who fought for her right to remain in the hospital.
Posted: 8:21 PM Aug 23, 2011
Dolores Bedin Passes Away
Please read complete article at link below:
http://www.wifr.com/news/headlines/Rockford_Woman_Who_Fought_Hospital_Loses_Battle_to_Cancer_128289718.html?storySection=comments
Editor's note: The hospital used a shortcut ploy being implemented by many institutions. Guardianize the disabled individual, thus bypassing the legal hassle of a law suit. By guardianizing the subject, the conflict is thrown into the Public Guardian's Office or the corrupt Probate Court of Cook County, guaranteeing a win, win solution for the institution. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Rockford Woman Who Fought Hospital Loses Battle to Cancer
A sad update to a story we first brought you in December regarding an elderly Rockford woman who fought for her right to remain in the hospital.
Posted: 8:21 PM Aug 23, 2011
Dolores Bedin Passes Away
Please read complete article at link below:
http://www.wifr.com/news/headlines/Rockford_Woman_Who_Fought_Hospital_Loses_Battle_to_Cancer_128289718.html?storySection=comments
Editor's note: The hospital used a shortcut ploy being implemented by many institutions. Guardianize the disabled individual, thus bypassing the legal hassle of a law suit. By guardianizing the subject, the conflict is thrown into the Public Guardian's Office or the corrupt Probate Court of Cook County, guaranteeing a win, win solution for the institution. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Friday, August 26, 2011
HOW TO VIEW ONLINE COURT DOCKETS
View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
HOW TO VIEW ONLINE COURT DOCKETS
A helpful guide for victims and investigators
We get many requests from victims of the Cook County Probate Court for instructions on how to view their court dockets online. The link is below. You will want to use high speed internet, though, as the cases take several minutes to load.
http://www.cookcountyclerkofcourt.org/?section=CASEINFOPage&CASEINFOPage=4210
If you want to look at a case, type in the case number at the top of the page, or the ward's name under the box marked "estate". You will see lawyers' names, judges' names', guardians' names, and a chronological report of all of the types of documents submitted into court on your case (petitions, orders, sale of property, orders to approve legal and guardian's fees, OBRA Special Needs Trusts, property sales, etc). While the types of documents submitted are seen online, to view the actual documents, you will need to go to the 12th floor of the Daley Center.
This online court docket will also come in handy if you want to order specific transcripts. See our index to the right for information on how to obtain court records and transcripts. A photo ID is required to view the public records. To copy records, you can either bring a scanner of your own, or bring quarters for the copy machine.
If you want to look at other cases in which your court players are involved, click the box on the right which says "claimant, minor, or representative" and enter the name of the guardian, etc. that concerns you. For instance, if you would like to see the cases of the Public Guardian, type in Public Guardian in the claimant box or the name Harris.
When viewing court dockets, you can also see things such as whether or not an OBRA Special Needs Pooled Trust has been created with the ward's funds. Also evident is the turn-around time for sales of property. The date when the court was petitioned to list the property is evident, as well as the date in which the court was petitioned to sell the property. If you would like to know if the property was sold quickly for a profit after it was sold through the probate court, check out www.blockshopper.com, and enter the property address or name of seller (ward).
Some of the attorneys, nurses, and guardians in Cook County are also involved in guardianship cases in neighboring counties.
Dupage online records can be found at http://www.dupagecase.com/.
To access online court records in Kane County: http://www.cic.co.kane.il.us/OnlineCourtInformation.php Kane has a free online docket, though you have to learn to work around its quirks. Sometimes the pages don't update properly and you have to click around to get them to work. Also, if you don't already have it, you have to download a free (and safe) program called Java. Be sure to try clicking around a lot, because there are viewable pages in places you wouldn't necessarily expect them.
Here are some codes that may be helpful to you in viewing the online dockets:
Civil
SC - Small Claims
CH - Chancery
AR - Arbitration
L - Law
LM - Law Medium
MC - Municipal Court
ED - Eminent Domain
MH - Mental Health
WI - Wills
TX - Tax
MR - Misc. Remedy
P- Probate
Family Court
D - Divorce
J - Juvenile
AD - Adoptions
JA - Juvenile Adoptions
JD - Juvenile Delinquent
F - Family, Child Support
OP - Order of Protection
Criminal
TR - Traffic
DT - DUI
OV - Ordinance Violations
CV - Conservation Violations
CC - Contempt of Court
CM - Misdemeanor
CF - Felony
Signed,
Your ProbateSharks Court Record Specialists
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
HOW TO VIEW ONLINE COURT DOCKETS
A helpful guide for victims and investigators
We get many requests from victims of the Cook County Probate Court for instructions on how to view their court dockets online. The link is below. You will want to use high speed internet, though, as the cases take several minutes to load.
http://www.cookcountyclerkofcourt.org/?section=CASEINFOPage&CASEINFOPage=4210
If you want to look at a case, type in the case number at the top of the page, or the ward's name under the box marked "estate". You will see lawyers' names, judges' names', guardians' names, and a chronological report of all of the types of documents submitted into court on your case (petitions, orders, sale of property, orders to approve legal and guardian's fees, OBRA Special Needs Trusts, property sales, etc). While the types of documents submitted are seen online, to view the actual documents, you will need to go to the 12th floor of the Daley Center.
This online court docket will also come in handy if you want to order specific transcripts. See our index to the right for information on how to obtain court records and transcripts. A photo ID is required to view the public records. To copy records, you can either bring a scanner of your own, or bring quarters for the copy machine.
If you want to look at other cases in which your court players are involved, click the box on the right which says "claimant, minor, or representative" and enter the name of the guardian, etc. that concerns you. For instance, if you would like to see the cases of the Public Guardian, type in Public Guardian in the claimant box or the name Harris.
When viewing court dockets, you can also see things such as whether or not an OBRA Special Needs Pooled Trust has been created with the ward's funds. Also evident is the turn-around time for sales of property. The date when the court was petitioned to list the property is evident, as well as the date in which the court was petitioned to sell the property. If you would like to know if the property was sold quickly for a profit after it was sold through the probate court, check out www.blockshopper.com, and enter the property address or name of seller (ward).
Some of the attorneys, nurses, and guardians in Cook County are also involved in guardianship cases in neighboring counties.
Dupage online records can be found at http://www.dupagecase.com/.
To access online court records in Kane County: http://www.cic.co.kane.il.us/OnlineCourtInformation.php Kane has a free online docket, though you have to learn to work around its quirks. Sometimes the pages don't update properly and you have to click around to get them to work. Also, if you don't already have it, you have to download a free (and safe) program called Java. Be sure to try clicking around a lot, because there are viewable pages in places you wouldn't necessarily expect them.
Here are some codes that may be helpful to you in viewing the online dockets:
Civil
SC - Small Claims
CH - Chancery
AR - Arbitration
L - Law
LM - Law Medium
MC - Municipal Court
ED - Eminent Domain
MH - Mental Health
WI - Wills
TX - Tax
MR - Misc. Remedy
P- Probate
Family Court
D - Divorce
J - Juvenile
AD - Adoptions
JA - Juvenile Adoptions
JD - Juvenile Delinquent
F - Family, Child Support
OP - Order of Protection
Criminal
TR - Traffic
DT - DUI
OV - Ordinance Violations
CV - Conservation Violations
CC - Contempt of Court
CM - Misdemeanor
CF - Felony
Signed,
Your ProbateSharks Court Record Specialists
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
FBI team takes aim at government corruption
View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
FBI team takes aim at government corruption
GREG BLUESTEIN, Associated Press
Updated 08:59 a.m., Sunday, August 21, 2011
Page 1 of 1
ATLANTA (AP) — The FBI has assembled a new squad to investigate corruption among judges and legislators in Georgia, though the top federal agent in the state is being tightlipped about what cases are developing.
Brian Lamkin, who heads the FBI office in Georgia, told The Associated Press he decided to form the team after months of reviews and a look at the bureau's long-term priorities.
Georgia's FBI office has long used a single squad that handled the brunt of corruption cases, from law enforcement officials to government officials. But Lamkin set up a special team to look into wrongdoing by police and other law enforcement officers and landed string of recent corruption charges. That team will still check out officers while the second new corruption squad will have a different goal, he said.
"It impacts the everyday system. It's not just a dirty law enforcement officer that might be shaking you down," he said. "You're talking about people that you elect to an office to represent you who try to line their pockets."
Lamkin will personally sign off on the investigations before they go forward, and high-profile cases will be approved by FBI officials in Washington, he said.
"The reason is a corruption investigation can ruin reputations," he said. "These are not quick hits. We will use sophisticated techniques and undercover operations to really go after these. That's why the individuals that work these have to be patient."
Lamkin wouldn't say how large the team is, but he said he's assigned about 40 percent of the staff in the bureau's white-collar crimes unit to the mission.
The move was welcomed by government officials, who believed state and local funding cuts over the last few years have eroded other investigations.
"I just appreciate it. One of the frustrations you hear is that with the state budget cuts, you don't have the resources to hire more investigators," said state Rep. Joe Wilkinson, who chairs the House Ethics Committee. "This brings another much-needed level of scrutiny to the system."
Fulton County Sheriff Ted Jackson, who has asked the FBI to investigate deputies at the Fulton County Jail for wrongdoing, applauded the new oversight. That probe led to charges in June against four guards accused of smuggling drugs and cell phones into the jail.
"The FBI has been working with us to rid this agency of corruption and investigate other crimes involving civil rights," said Jackson, a former FBI agent himself. "This effort is beneficial to the public by rooting out corrupt activity which costs taxpayers."
The new squad was formed as rounds of budget cuts have depleted key state investigative agencies.
The Judicial Qualifications Commission nearly ran out of money in December to investigate judicial misconduct, but state lawmakers gave it a financial boost this year.
The agency has forced several judges to resign, and recently recommended that a north Georgia judge be ousted from the bench after concluding that he pointed a gun at himself in the courtroom and berated his boss in a bizarre televised rant.
And the Georgia Ethics Commission, which investigates finance complaints and registers lobbyists, has been rocked by deep funding cuts even as it takes on more duties. The commission's director resigned after a dispute over the agency's budget and the status of several cases involving Gov. Nathan Deal. And it went from fielding three investigators in 2008 to none now, said William Perry, the director of Common Cause Georgia.
"Our state is cutting back on monitoring elected officials and their ethical behavior, so we welcome the fact that the federal government is stepping up," he said.
Lamkin still remembers the first corruption case as a field agent. It involved a food inspector who took $1,000 to look the other way at a Virginia naval base. It may not seem like a lot of money, he said, but don't try to tell that to a sailor who ate the tainted food.
"We don't take this lightly," he said. "These are truly the types of investigations that are being done in the back room. And the circle of friends is very small. In order to penetrate that inner circle, you've got to have a strong and tenacious group to develop the intelligence."
Bluestein can be reached at http://www.twitter.com/bluestein
Please read complete article at link below:
http://www.chron.com/news/article/FBI-team-takes-aim-at-government-corruption-2134563.php
Editor's note: Reporter Gregg Bluestein, Your ProbateShark believes firmly that the PA and GA FBI agents are drinking the same brand of whiskey and wish our Chicago FBI agents would change to that brand. Probate Sharks and Sharkettes are peaceful people who do not wish attempted self inflicted gunshot wounds on Cook County Probate Court judges, as was the case with the GA judge. We only wish these many criminal judges be removed and jailed, not parties to attemped mass suicide. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
FBI team takes aim at government corruption
GREG BLUESTEIN, Associated Press
Updated 08:59 a.m., Sunday, August 21, 2011
Page 1 of 1
ATLANTA (AP) — The FBI has assembled a new squad to investigate corruption among judges and legislators in Georgia, though the top federal agent in the state is being tightlipped about what cases are developing.
Brian Lamkin, who heads the FBI office in Georgia, told The Associated Press he decided to form the team after months of reviews and a look at the bureau's long-term priorities.
Georgia's FBI office has long used a single squad that handled the brunt of corruption cases, from law enforcement officials to government officials. But Lamkin set up a special team to look into wrongdoing by police and other law enforcement officers and landed string of recent corruption charges. That team will still check out officers while the second new corruption squad will have a different goal, he said.
"It impacts the everyday system. It's not just a dirty law enforcement officer that might be shaking you down," he said. "You're talking about people that you elect to an office to represent you who try to line their pockets."
Lamkin will personally sign off on the investigations before they go forward, and high-profile cases will be approved by FBI officials in Washington, he said.
"The reason is a corruption investigation can ruin reputations," he said. "These are not quick hits. We will use sophisticated techniques and undercover operations to really go after these. That's why the individuals that work these have to be patient."
Lamkin wouldn't say how large the team is, but he said he's assigned about 40 percent of the staff in the bureau's white-collar crimes unit to the mission.
The move was welcomed by government officials, who believed state and local funding cuts over the last few years have eroded other investigations.
"I just appreciate it. One of the frustrations you hear is that with the state budget cuts, you don't have the resources to hire more investigators," said state Rep. Joe Wilkinson, who chairs the House Ethics Committee. "This brings another much-needed level of scrutiny to the system."
Fulton County Sheriff Ted Jackson, who has asked the FBI to investigate deputies at the Fulton County Jail for wrongdoing, applauded the new oversight. That probe led to charges in June against four guards accused of smuggling drugs and cell phones into the jail.
"The FBI has been working with us to rid this agency of corruption and investigate other crimes involving civil rights," said Jackson, a former FBI agent himself. "This effort is beneficial to the public by rooting out corrupt activity which costs taxpayers."
The new squad was formed as rounds of budget cuts have depleted key state investigative agencies.
The Judicial Qualifications Commission nearly ran out of money in December to investigate judicial misconduct, but state lawmakers gave it a financial boost this year.
The agency has forced several judges to resign, and recently recommended that a north Georgia judge be ousted from the bench after concluding that he pointed a gun at himself in the courtroom and berated his boss in a bizarre televised rant.
And the Georgia Ethics Commission, which investigates finance complaints and registers lobbyists, has been rocked by deep funding cuts even as it takes on more duties. The commission's director resigned after a dispute over the agency's budget and the status of several cases involving Gov. Nathan Deal. And it went from fielding three investigators in 2008 to none now, said William Perry, the director of Common Cause Georgia.
"Our state is cutting back on monitoring elected officials and their ethical behavior, so we welcome the fact that the federal government is stepping up," he said.
Lamkin still remembers the first corruption case as a field agent. It involved a food inspector who took $1,000 to look the other way at a Virginia naval base. It may not seem like a lot of money, he said, but don't try to tell that to a sailor who ate the tainted food.
"We don't take this lightly," he said. "These are truly the types of investigations that are being done in the back room. And the circle of friends is very small. In order to penetrate that inner circle, you've got to have a strong and tenacious group to develop the intelligence."
Bluestein can be reached at http://www.twitter.com/bluestein
Please read complete article at link below:
http://www.chron.com/news/article/FBI-team-takes-aim-at-government-corruption-2134563.php
Editor's note: Reporter Gregg Bluestein, Your ProbateShark believes firmly that the PA and GA FBI agents are drinking the same brand of whiskey and wish our Chicago FBI agents would change to that brand. Probate Sharks and Sharkettes are peaceful people who do not wish attempted self inflicted gunshot wounds on Cook County Probate Court judges, as was the case with the GA judge. We only wish these many criminal judges be removed and jailed, not parties to attemped mass suicide. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Thursday, August 18, 2011
Elderly Couple Refuse Food, Water to Die; Get Evicted from Facility
View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Cefalu Part 3 is here! NSL blogspot: Cefalu Part 3 - Discussion on events in Judge Kawamoto's courtroom concerning the brutal beating of Anna Mae Cefalu.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/marti-oakley
To all: Probate Sharks will be guests for 3 hours on Marti Oakley's "Truth Squad" Sunday, Aug. 21, 2011 at 5:15 P.M. CST Live. Please click on the link above to connect with the Truth Squad program. You may still listen to replays. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Elderly Couple Refuse Food, Water to Die; Get Evicted from Facility
Aug. 18, 2011
At 92 and 90, Armond and Dorothy Rudolph's
bodies were failing them. He suffered severe pain
from spinal stenosis, a narrowing of the spinal
column. She was almost entirely immobile. Both
suffered from early dementia, according to their son
Neil Rudolph. They wanted to die.
The Rudolphs, married for 69 years, decided to
refuse food and water to end their lives. Although
they lived in the Village at Alameda, an assisted living
facility in Albuquerque, N.M., they maintained they
had a right to die on their own accord.
Three days into their fast, the couple told their plan
to staff at the facility. Administrators immediately
called 911, citing an attempted suicide.
Please read complete very sad article at link below:
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/couple-stops-eating-drinking-end-life-son-launches/story?id=14327416
Editor's note: Sad, but very true... The Probate Court of Cook County starves and dehydrates its wards in the rat-hole nursing homes that its case managers promote. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Cefalu Part 3 is here! NSL blogspot: Cefalu Part 3 - Discussion on events in Judge Kawamoto's courtroom concerning the brutal beating of Anna Mae Cefalu.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/marti-oakley
To all: Probate Sharks will be guests for 3 hours on Marti Oakley's "Truth Squad" Sunday, Aug. 21, 2011 at 5:15 P.M. CST Live. Please click on the link above to connect with the Truth Squad program. You may still listen to replays. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Elderly Couple Refuse Food, Water to Die; Get Evicted from Facility
Aug. 18, 2011
At 92 and 90, Armond and Dorothy Rudolph's
bodies were failing them. He suffered severe pain
from spinal stenosis, a narrowing of the spinal
column. She was almost entirely immobile. Both
suffered from early dementia, according to their son
Neil Rudolph. They wanted to die.
The Rudolphs, married for 69 years, decided to
refuse food and water to end their lives. Although
they lived in the Village at Alameda, an assisted living
facility in Albuquerque, N.M., they maintained they
had a right to die on their own accord.
Three days into their fast, the couple told their plan
to staff at the facility. Administrators immediately
called 911, citing an attempted suicide.
Please read complete very sad article at link below:
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/
Editor's note: Sad, but very true... The Probate Court of Cook County starves and dehydrates its wards in the rat-hole nursing homes that its case managers promote. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
OBRA SUPPLEMENTAL NEEDS POOLED TRUSTS DO NOT BENEFIT THE WARDS IN COOK COUNTY
OBRA SUPPLEMENTAL NEEDS POOLED TRUSTS DO NOT BENEFIT THE WARDS IN COOK COUNTY
Medicaid Fraud and Abuse Rampant in Cook County Probate Court
Many of our readers have requested additional information about OBRA Special Needs Pooled Trusts.
In Cook County, many wards' estates, valued in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, are placed into OBRA Supplemental Needs Pooled Trusts. Supposedly, this is being done for the benefit of the ward as it allows the ward to qualify for Medicaid, thus saving the funds for the special needs of the ward. However, in reality, the ones benefitting from these trusts are the attorneys and guardians. Once a ward's estate is placed into the trust, they can no longer (by law) reside in private pay nursing homes, and are thus moved into public aid facilities. And, instead of using the funds placed into the OBRA for the special needs of the wards that aren't being met in the public aid nursing homes, the funds are being used primarily to pay attorneys and legal fees until the estate is depleted.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supplemental_Needs_Trust
A Supplemental Needs Trust is a U.S.-specific term for a type of special needs trust (an internationally recognised term). Supplemental needs trusts are compliant with provisions of U.S. state and federal law and are designed to provide benefits to, and protect the assets of, physically disabled or mentally disabled persons and still allow such persons to be qualified for and receive governmental health care benefits, especially long-term nursing care benefits, under the Medicaid welfare program. Supplemental or Special Needs Trusts are frequently used to receive an inheritance or personal injury litigation proceeds on behalf of a disabled person in order to allow the person to qualify for Medicaid benefits.
Background of Medicaid law
Medicaid is the Federal program administered by the states which provides health care for those who can't afford it. See 42 U.S.C. § 1396 et seq. Federal law establishes certain mandatory requirements which each state must adopt in its local Medicaid program, and the states are also given options to elect certain other components in the health care plan which they may decide to provide. Accordingly, Medicaid does vary from state to state in certain aspects, but there are also mandatory Federal law provisions.
One significant governmental benefit which is available only through Medicaid is long-term nursing care which includes care for the physically disabled and the mentally disabled. Long-term nursing care can be extremely expensive. To qualify for Medicaid and its long-term nursing care benefits, the applicant must be “poor” and there is a limit to the countable assets which he or she can own. To qualify for Medicaid, the applicant must meet the asset guidelines for Supplemental Security Income (SSI). SSI allows a single applicant to own no more than $2,000 in countable assets and a married applicant to own no more than $3,000 in countable assets. Certain assets are specifically exempted and are not countable.
Trusts as Medicaid countable assets
A trust is a legal arrangement in which legal title to assets is held by a trustee under certain defined restrictions of a governing instrument (usually a will or a written trust agreement) for the benefit of another party known as the beneficiary. Trusts can be used as a vehicle to make assets available to a beneficiary but still significantly restrict them. Recognizing the gray area which trusts can provide concerning the ownership of assets, Federal Medicaid law places significant restrictions on the types of trusts which can be used to preserve assets of a beneficiary and still qualify the beneficiary for governmental benefits.
Prior to the enactment of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (O.B.R.A), P.L. 103-66, it was possible to create a self-settled, discretionary trust for the benefit of the settlor and still allow the settlor to qualify for Medicaid’s long-term nursing care benefits. These trusts were called “special needs trusts” or “supplemental needs trusts” because restrictive language in the trust agreement allowed the trustee to pay only for the support needs of the settlor-beneficiary which the government did not pay. The trust was not for the unrestricted, general support of the beneficiary which is typical in normal estate plans. Special needs trusts were perceived by the United States Congress to be abusive and were effectively abolished by O.B.R.A.
In general, with limited exceptions, regardless of the purposes, provisions, or discretion contained in the trust, a self-settled trust which is created after August 11, 1993 will be treated as an available asset which can disqualify the settlor-beneficiary from Medicaid. 42 U.S.C. § 1396p(d)(2)(C). This means that generally a person cannot create his or her own trust, transfer his or her own assets into the trust, and still be qualified for Medicaid. However, spouses can leave property in a supplemental special needs trust at their death to care for their surviving spouses and not have the trust property considered as assets available for Medicaid. 42 U.S.C. § 1396p(d)(2)(A)(ii).
Medicaid exempt trusts
Since the effective date of O.B.R.A., only limited types of trusts can now be used and still preserve an applicant’s Medicaid eligibility. One major distinction should be made when analyzing Medicaid trusts. Trusts created by the disabled beneficiary (or a third party with legal authority over the disabled beneficiary) with the disabled person’s own assets for the disabled person’s own benefit are classified as first-party, self-settled trusts. These types of trusts must be distinguished from trusts created by a third party for the benefit of a disabled individual with the third party’s own assets (such as a grandparent creating a trust for a grandchild). Legal restrictions generally exist for first-party, self-settled trusts which do not exist for third-party trusts. These trusts are a good thing to have if someone is expecting a windfall, such as an inheritance.
First-party, self-settled trusts
Most self-settled trusts holding the disabled beneficiary’s own assets created after August 11, 1993 are countable resources for Medicaid. The Medicaid statute, however, provides for three specific types of trusts which can be funded with the applicant’s own assets and which will not disqualify the applicant from Medicaid. These trusts are called “D-4A Trusts” after the subsection of the law which authorizes them. They are also called “Federalized Special Needs Trusts” because the Federal Medicaid statute makes them available in every state.
Because of the requirement that the State be reimbursed for medical assistance, D-4A Special Needs Trusts may have limited utility when the goal is to pass assets of the disabled individual to family members. The main benefit of the D-4A Trusts is to provide a quality of life for the Medicaid beneficiary. Assets can be held in the trust and used to pay for the beneficiary’s special or supplemental needs which the government does not provide, while Medicaid pays the significant medical bills. If the medical assistance provided during life does not turn out to be costly, then upon the death of the beneficiary, there is a chance that assets may be preserved in the trust and pass to loved ones.
Disabled Individual’s Special Needs Trust
Under the provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 1396p(d)(4)(A), a Disabled Individual’s Trust will not be counted as a Medicaid asset even when it is funded with the applicant’s own assets. The requirements for the trust are that the individual must be under age 65 at the time the trust is created (and funded), and disabled under the Social Security definition. Further, the trust must be for the "sole benefit" of the disabled individual. The trust must be created by a parent, grandparent, guardian, or court. Upon the death of the individual, the State Medicaid agency must be reimbursed for the costs of the medical assistance which was provided by Medicaid during the disabled individual's lifetime. This is often called the “payback” provision.
It is important to note that the Disabled Individual’s Trust must be created by a parent, grandparent, guardian, or court. The statute does not allow the disabled individual to create his or her own trust, even if he or she is otherwise legally competent. Action by a third party is required in creating the trust. In this regard, these types of special needs trusts are often established by a court on behalf of a disabled person as a part of or ancillary to a serious personal injury lawsuit.
"Miller" Trust
A "Miller" Trust can be used to qualify a Medicaid applicant with income in excess of the eligibility limit (not imposed in all states) for long-term care assistance from Medicaid. Such a trust is not really a "special needs" trust at all; it is not funded with the beneficiary's assets. The Miller trust can be named as recipient of the individual's income, from a pension plan, Social Security, or other source. The Miller trust takes its name from the Colorado case of Miller v. Ibarra, 746 F. Supp. 19 (D. Colo. 1990), and is specifically sanctioned by 42 U.S.C. § 1396p(d)(4)(B). As with a self-settled special needs trust (referred to above as a "Disabled Individual’s Trust"), upon the death of the beneficiary, the State Medicaid agency must be paid back for its medical assistance from any remaining assets in the Miller trust. An older name for the Miller trust, still occasionally used, is “Utah Gap" trusts, reportedly coined by a Colorado advocate describing the gap between the income cap for eligibility and the actual cost of nursing home care as similar to the yawning chasm between mesas dotting the Southern Utah landscape. The Miller trust is significant only in those states which impose an income cap on Medicaid long-term care eligibility; ironically, Utah is not one of those states. Income caps are in place in about half of the states.
Also referred to as a qualified income trust.
Nonprofit Pooled Income Special Needs Trust
A Nonprofit Pooled Income Special Needs Trust is authorized by 42 U.S.C. § 1396p(d)(4)(C). Again, the individual must be disabled under the Social Security definition. Unlike the other exempt trusts which can be administered by a private trustee who is an individual (such as a family member), the Pooled Income Trust is run by a nonprofit association, and a separate account is maintained for each individual beneficiary. All accounts are pooled for investment and management purposes. The trust (or more accurately, an account in the pooled trust) may be created by a parent, grandparent, guardian, or court, and it can also be created by the disabled individual himself. Upon the death of the disabled individual, the balance is either retained in the trust for the nonprofit association or paid back to the State Medicaid agency for its medical assistance.
In some states, a disabled individual over age 65 is entitled to transfer assets to a pooled trust and then be immediately eligible for Medicaid. In other states, the transfer must be made before the disabled individual attains the age of 66.
Reference
http://www.elderlawanswers.com/elder_info/elder_article.asp?id=2742#6
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supplemental_Needs_Trust"
Editor's note: The inappropriate use of OBRA Special Needs Pooled Trusts in the Cook County Court system appears to be fraudulent, as the special needs of the wards are not being met with their estate funds. Rather, the attorneys, guardians, and public aid nursing home owners are benefitting. A review of the Office of the Public Guardian's cases reveals that over 50% of the wards' estates are placed into these trusts. There is often a misconception by the public that wards of the Public Guardian are destitute. The truth is, the Public Guardian does not typically accept destitute wards; destitute wards go to the State Guardian.
Wards of the Public Guardian and private guardians have enough funds to support them in private pay facilities for many years, but instead their funds are placed into OBRA trusts, and the wards are placed into public aid nursing homes while the estates are being churned by attorneys and guardians. We urge a federal and state investigation into the inappropriate use of OBRA Special Needs Pooled Trusts by the Cook County Probate courts.
The wards are NOT benefitting from these trusts! Rich wards of the Public and private guardians are living in less desirable public aid facilities, when they could have afforded private pay facilities which would better meet their needs and enhance the quality of their lives. Public aid beds are being used inappropriately to the expense of the tax payers, and there is a shortage of public aid beds for those truly in financial need.
Medicaid Fraud and Abuse Rampant in Cook County Probate Court
Many of our readers have requested additional information about OBRA Special Needs Pooled Trusts.
In Cook County, many wards' estates, valued in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, are placed into OBRA Supplemental Needs Pooled Trusts. Supposedly, this is being done for the benefit of the ward as it allows the ward to qualify for Medicaid, thus saving the funds for the special needs of the ward. However, in reality, the ones benefitting from these trusts are the attorneys and guardians. Once a ward's estate is placed into the trust, they can no longer (by law) reside in private pay nursing homes, and are thus moved into public aid facilities. And, instead of using the funds placed into the OBRA for the special needs of the wards that aren't being met in the public aid nursing homes, the funds are being used primarily to pay attorneys and legal fees until the estate is depleted.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supplemental_Needs_Trust
A Supplemental Needs Trust is a U.S.-specific term for a type of special needs trust (an internationally recognised term). Supplemental needs trusts are compliant with provisions of U.S. state and federal law and are designed to provide benefits to, and protect the assets of, physically disabled or mentally disabled persons and still allow such persons to be qualified for and receive governmental health care benefits, especially long-term nursing care benefits, under the Medicaid welfare program. Supplemental or Special Needs Trusts are frequently used to receive an inheritance or personal injury litigation proceeds on behalf of a disabled person in order to allow the person to qualify for Medicaid benefits.
Background of Medicaid law
Medicaid is the Federal program administered by the states which provides health care for those who can't afford it. See 42 U.S.C. § 1396 et seq. Federal law establishes certain mandatory requirements which each state must adopt in its local Medicaid program, and the states are also given options to elect certain other components in the health care plan which they may decide to provide. Accordingly, Medicaid does vary from state to state in certain aspects, but there are also mandatory Federal law provisions.
One significant governmental benefit which is available only through Medicaid is long-term nursing care which includes care for the physically disabled and the mentally disabled. Long-term nursing care can be extremely expensive. To qualify for Medicaid and its long-term nursing care benefits, the applicant must be “poor” and there is a limit to the countable assets which he or she can own. To qualify for Medicaid, the applicant must meet the asset guidelines for Supplemental Security Income (SSI). SSI allows a single applicant to own no more than $2,000 in countable assets and a married applicant to own no more than $3,000 in countable assets. Certain assets are specifically exempted and are not countable.
Trusts as Medicaid countable assets
A trust is a legal arrangement in which legal title to assets is held by a trustee under certain defined restrictions of a governing instrument (usually a will or a written trust agreement) for the benefit of another party known as the beneficiary. Trusts can be used as a vehicle to make assets available to a beneficiary but still significantly restrict them. Recognizing the gray area which trusts can provide concerning the ownership of assets, Federal Medicaid law places significant restrictions on the types of trusts which can be used to preserve assets of a beneficiary and still qualify the beneficiary for governmental benefits.
Prior to the enactment of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (O.B.R.A), P.L. 103-66, it was possible to create a self-settled, discretionary trust for the benefit of the settlor and still allow the settlor to qualify for Medicaid’s long-term nursing care benefits. These trusts were called “special needs trusts” or “supplemental needs trusts” because restrictive language in the trust agreement allowed the trustee to pay only for the support needs of the settlor-beneficiary which the government did not pay. The trust was not for the unrestricted, general support of the beneficiary which is typical in normal estate plans. Special needs trusts were perceived by the United States Congress to be abusive and were effectively abolished by O.B.R.A.
In general, with limited exceptions, regardless of the purposes, provisions, or discretion contained in the trust, a self-settled trust which is created after August 11, 1993 will be treated as an available asset which can disqualify the settlor-beneficiary from Medicaid. 42 U.S.C. § 1396p(d)(2)(C). This means that generally a person cannot create his or her own trust, transfer his or her own assets into the trust, and still be qualified for Medicaid. However, spouses can leave property in a supplemental special needs trust at their death to care for their surviving spouses and not have the trust property considered as assets available for Medicaid. 42 U.S.C. § 1396p(d)(2)(A)(ii).
Medicaid exempt trusts
Since the effective date of O.B.R.A., only limited types of trusts can now be used and still preserve an applicant’s Medicaid eligibility. One major distinction should be made when analyzing Medicaid trusts. Trusts created by the disabled beneficiary (or a third party with legal authority over the disabled beneficiary) with the disabled person’s own assets for the disabled person’s own benefit are classified as first-party, self-settled trusts. These types of trusts must be distinguished from trusts created by a third party for the benefit of a disabled individual with the third party’s own assets (such as a grandparent creating a trust for a grandchild). Legal restrictions generally exist for first-party, self-settled trusts which do not exist for third-party trusts. These trusts are a good thing to have if someone is expecting a windfall, such as an inheritance.
First-party, self-settled trusts
Most self-settled trusts holding the disabled beneficiary’s own assets created after August 11, 1993 are countable resources for Medicaid. The Medicaid statute, however, provides for three specific types of trusts which can be funded with the applicant’s own assets and which will not disqualify the applicant from Medicaid. These trusts are called “D-4A Trusts” after the subsection of the law which authorizes them. They are also called “Federalized Special Needs Trusts” because the Federal Medicaid statute makes them available in every state.
Because of the requirement that the State be reimbursed for medical assistance, D-4A Special Needs Trusts may have limited utility when the goal is to pass assets of the disabled individual to family members. The main benefit of the D-4A Trusts is to provide a quality of life for the Medicaid beneficiary. Assets can be held in the trust and used to pay for the beneficiary’s special or supplemental needs which the government does not provide, while Medicaid pays the significant medical bills. If the medical assistance provided during life does not turn out to be costly, then upon the death of the beneficiary, there is a chance that assets may be preserved in the trust and pass to loved ones.
Disabled Individual’s Special Needs Trust
Under the provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 1396p(d)(4)(A), a Disabled Individual’s Trust will not be counted as a Medicaid asset even when it is funded with the applicant’s own assets. The requirements for the trust are that the individual must be under age 65 at the time the trust is created (and funded), and disabled under the Social Security definition. Further, the trust must be for the "sole benefit" of the disabled individual. The trust must be created by a parent, grandparent, guardian, or court. Upon the death of the individual, the State Medicaid agency must be reimbursed for the costs of the medical assistance which was provided by Medicaid during the disabled individual's lifetime. This is often called the “payback” provision.
It is important to note that the Disabled Individual’s Trust must be created by a parent, grandparent, guardian, or court. The statute does not allow the disabled individual to create his or her own trust, even if he or she is otherwise legally competent. Action by a third party is required in creating the trust. In this regard, these types of special needs trusts are often established by a court on behalf of a disabled person as a part of or ancillary to a serious personal injury lawsuit.
"Miller" Trust
A "Miller" Trust can be used to qualify a Medicaid applicant with income in excess of the eligibility limit (not imposed in all states) for long-term care assistance from Medicaid. Such a trust is not really a "special needs" trust at all; it is not funded with the beneficiary's assets. The Miller trust can be named as recipient of the individual's income, from a pension plan, Social Security, or other source. The Miller trust takes its name from the Colorado case of Miller v. Ibarra, 746 F. Supp. 19 (D. Colo. 1990), and is specifically sanctioned by 42 U.S.C. § 1396p(d)(4)(B). As with a self-settled special needs trust (referred to above as a "Disabled Individual’s Trust"), upon the death of the beneficiary, the State Medicaid agency must be paid back for its medical assistance from any remaining assets in the Miller trust. An older name for the Miller trust, still occasionally used, is “Utah Gap" trusts, reportedly coined by a Colorado advocate describing the gap between the income cap for eligibility and the actual cost of nursing home care as similar to the yawning chasm between mesas dotting the Southern Utah landscape. The Miller trust is significant only in those states which impose an income cap on Medicaid long-term care eligibility; ironically, Utah is not one of those states. Income caps are in place in about half of the states.
Also referred to as a qualified income trust.
Nonprofit Pooled Income Special Needs Trust
A Nonprofit Pooled Income Special Needs Trust is authorized by 42 U.S.C. § 1396p(d)(4)(C). Again, the individual must be disabled under the Social Security definition. Unlike the other exempt trusts which can be administered by a private trustee who is an individual (such as a family member), the Pooled Income Trust is run by a nonprofit association, and a separate account is maintained for each individual beneficiary. All accounts are pooled for investment and management purposes. The trust (or more accurately, an account in the pooled trust) may be created by a parent, grandparent, guardian, or court, and it can also be created by the disabled individual himself. Upon the death of the disabled individual, the balance is either retained in the trust for the nonprofit association or paid back to the State Medicaid agency for its medical assistance.
In some states, a disabled individual over age 65 is entitled to transfer assets to a pooled trust and then be immediately eligible for Medicaid. In other states, the transfer must be made before the disabled individual attains the age of 66.
Reference
http://www.elderlawanswers.com/elder_info/elder_article.asp?id=2742#6
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supplemental_Needs_Trust"
Editor's note: The inappropriate use of OBRA Special Needs Pooled Trusts in the Cook County Court system appears to be fraudulent, as the special needs of the wards are not being met with their estate funds. Rather, the attorneys, guardians, and public aid nursing home owners are benefitting. A review of the Office of the Public Guardian's cases reveals that over 50% of the wards' estates are placed into these trusts. There is often a misconception by the public that wards of the Public Guardian are destitute. The truth is, the Public Guardian does not typically accept destitute wards; destitute wards go to the State Guardian.
Wards of the Public Guardian and private guardians have enough funds to support them in private pay facilities for many years, but instead their funds are placed into OBRA trusts, and the wards are placed into public aid nursing homes while the estates are being churned by attorneys and guardians. We urge a federal and state investigation into the inappropriate use of OBRA Special Needs Pooled Trusts by the Cook County Probate courts.
The wards are NOT benefitting from these trusts! Rich wards of the Public and private guardians are living in less desirable public aid facilities, when they could have afforded private pay facilities which would better meet their needs and enhance the quality of their lives. Public aid beds are being used inappropriately to the expense of the tax payers, and there is a shortage of public aid beds for those truly in financial need.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Boy Killed Great-Grandma With Sword: Police
View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Coming this week on above NSL blogspot: Cefalu Part 3 - Discussion on courtroom decorum, Judge allows GAL eating snacks during court session and Pagan Shrine inside of courtroom.
Boy Killed Great-Grandma With Sword: Police
A Georgia teen killed his great-grandmother and wounded his grandmother with a sword before cops took him down with a stun gun, officials said.
Cops in Douglasville arrived at the home Monday afternoon to find the dead woman lying in the front yard and the 15-year-old boy standing in the doorway with a sword and a pellet gun, which he used to shoot out the windows of their squad car, Douglas County Sheriff Phil Miller told The Associated Press.
Inside, they found the grandmother, who is in her 50s, barricaded inside a room. She was taken to the hospital and treated for non-life-threatening injuries, Miller said.
Authorities had been to the home before on reports of the teen being violent.
"We've arrested him on two different occasions. Once in June where he had another sword, which is in evidence. This is not the same sword. He cut his grandmother on the foot with it that time," Miller said, according to CBS Atlanta.
Please read complete article at link below:
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/weird/Boy-Kills-Great-Grandma-With-Sword-127883343.html
Editor's note: Another failing of the elder protection network!
An interesting facet to the Alice Gore saga. The insurance agent who bonds the estate has missed three court dates and is incommunicado after being court ordered to produce a check payable to the estate. The insurance check reimburses "mysterious" missing annuity checks, several of which are forged. Perhaps he fears committing insurance fraud by writing a check he knows may potentially cover up a crime. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Coming this week on above NSL blogspot: Cefalu Part 3 - Discussion on courtroom decorum, Judge allows GAL eating snacks during court session and Pagan Shrine inside of courtroom.
Boy Killed Great-Grandma With Sword: Police
A Georgia teen killed his great-grandmother and wounded his grandmother with a sword before cops took him down with a stun gun, officials said.
Cops in Douglasville arrived at the home Monday afternoon to find the dead woman lying in the front yard and the 15-year-old boy standing in the doorway with a sword and a pellet gun, which he used to shoot out the windows of their squad car, Douglas County Sheriff Phil Miller told The Associated Press.
Inside, they found the grandmother, who is in her 50s, barricaded inside a room. She was taken to the hospital and treated for non-life-threatening injuries, Miller said.
Authorities had been to the home before on reports of the teen being violent.
"We've arrested him on two different occasions. Once in June where he had another sword, which is in evidence. This is not the same sword. He cut his grandmother on the foot with it that time," Miller said, according to CBS Atlanta.
Please read complete article at link below:
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/weird/Boy-Kills-Great-Grandma-With-Sword-127883343.html
Editor's note: Another failing of the elder protection network!
An interesting facet to the Alice Gore saga. The insurance agent who bonds the estate has missed three court dates and is incommunicado after being court ordered to produce a check payable to the estate. The insurance check reimburses "mysterious" missing annuity checks, several of which are forged. Perhaps he fears committing insurance fraud by writing a check he knows may potentially cover up a crime. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Monday, August 15, 2011
Women's rights in Saudi Arabia
View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Coming attractions on above NSL blogspot: Cefalu Part 3 - Discussion on courtroom decorum, Judge allows GAL eating snacks during court session and Pagan Shrine inside of courtroom.
Everywoman
Women's rights in Saudi Arabia
A new Human Rights Watch reports says women in Saudi are treated like children.
Last Modified: 20 May 2008 08:54 GMT
The Human Rights Watch report says women in Saudi
are treated like children
Saudi women and their male guardians
In Saudi Arabia, every woman has to have a male guardian, usually a husband or father, who makes critical decisions on her behalf.
She cannot get married, divorced, travel, get a job or an education without a man's permission.
In many cases she cannot even get routine medical procedures without express consent from her guardian.
A new report from Human Rights Watch says women in Saudi are treated like children, and that government policy towards them results in daily abuses of their basic human rights.
Shiulie talks to Farida Deiff, the author of this report, and to Wajeha Al-Huwaider, one of Saudi Arabia's best known womens rights activists.
Do email us with your views, our address is everywoman@aljazeera.net or you can contact us by clicking on 'Send your feedback' at the top of the page
Watch Al Jazeera English programmes on YouTube
Join our debates on the Your Views page
Please read complete article at link below:
http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/everywoman/2008/05/2008615165711906854.html
Editor's note: Compare the mistreatment of women in Saudi Arabia to the mistreatment of those guardianized by the Probate Court of Cook County. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Coming attractions on above NSL blogspot: Cefalu Part 3 - Discussion on courtroom decorum, Judge allows GAL eating snacks during court session and Pagan Shrine inside of courtroom.
Everywoman
Women's rights in Saudi Arabia
A new Human Rights Watch reports says women in Saudi are treated like children.
Last Modified: 20 May 2008 08:54 GMT
The Human Rights Watch report says women in Saudi
are treated like children
Saudi women and their male guardians
In Saudi Arabia, every woman has to have a male guardian, usually a husband or father, who makes critical decisions on her behalf.
She cannot get married, divorced, travel, get a job or an education without a man's permission.
In many cases she cannot even get routine medical procedures without express consent from her guardian.
A new report from Human Rights Watch says women in Saudi are treated like children, and that government policy towards them results in daily abuses of their basic human rights.
Shiulie talks to Farida Deiff, the author of this report, and to Wajeha Al-Huwaider, one of Saudi Arabia's best known womens rights activists.
Do email us with your views, our address is everywoman@aljazeera.net or you can contact us by clicking on 'Send your feedback' at the top of the page
Watch Al Jazeera English programmes on YouTube
Join our debates on the Your Views page
Please read complete article at link below:
http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/everywoman/2008/05/2008615165711906854.html
Editor's note: Compare the mistreatment of women in Saudi Arabia to the mistreatment of those guardianized by the Probate Court of Cook County. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Seattle Feds freeze assets in elder abuse case
View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Coming attractions on above NSL blogspot: Cefalu Part 3 - Discussion on courtroom decorum, Judge allows GAL eating snacks during court session and Pagan Shrine inside of courtroom.
8/11/2011 1:55:00 PM
Feds freeze assets in elder abuse case
A federal court has frozen the bank accounts and assets of the brother and sister-in-law of Coupeville resident Shea Saenger, who last month pled guilty to bilking an elderly Alzheimer’s victim out of $2.2 million.
A restraining order and injunction to preserve the personal properties of Mark and Rosemary Lumpkin of Arkansas was filed July 28 in U.S. District Court in Seattle.
In the filing, the federal government states that Saenger, 60, admits that she fraudulently obtained about $2 million from 80-year-old Ellensburg resident Norman Butler and transferred more than $1.1 million of it to her brother and sister-in-law.
Saenger faces up to 20 years in prison when she is sentenced by U.S. District Court Judge Richard A. Jones on Oct. 7.
An affidavit from the federal government traces the fraudulent proceeds from Saenger to bank accounts held by the Lumpkins, and from those accounts, purchases of vehicles and farm equipment.
The restraining order and preliminary injunction freezes the Lumpkins’ savings and checking accounts, and vehicles that include tractors, trucks, trailers and a Harvest Master grain hopper.
The injunctions are designed to freeze the assets to make sure they are available to anyone making a claim for them, such as Butler’s family.
On July 14, Saenger pled guilty to one count of mail fraud in U.S. District Court in Seattle. She admitted that she defrauded Butler – who was suffering from memory loss and potential dementia – out of his money to pay for a mobile home for a sick “Uncle Jimbo” and to pay for breast cancer surgery. Uncle Jimbo did not exist, nor did she need surgery.
The injunction states that Saenger promised to marry Butler, even though she was married to someone else at the time.
Please read complete article at link below:
http://www.whidbeyexaminer.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=6423
Editor's note: Again, Why can't our Illinois Federal Agencies follow the example of other jurisdictions, such the case in article above in Seattle and the previous PA case? Come on Illinois FEDS, go after the Probate Court 18th floor; win one for Gipper... Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Coming attractions on above NSL blogspot: Cefalu Part 3 - Discussion on courtroom decorum, Judge allows GAL eating snacks during court session and Pagan Shrine inside of courtroom.
8/11/2011 1:55:00 PM
Feds freeze assets in elder abuse case
A federal court has frozen the bank accounts and assets of the brother and sister-in-law of Coupeville resident Shea Saenger, who last month pled guilty to bilking an elderly Alzheimer’s victim out of $2.2 million.
A restraining order and injunction to preserve the personal properties of Mark and Rosemary Lumpkin of Arkansas was filed July 28 in U.S. District Court in Seattle.
In the filing, the federal government states that Saenger, 60, admits that she fraudulently obtained about $2 million from 80-year-old Ellensburg resident Norman Butler and transferred more than $1.1 million of it to her brother and sister-in-law.
Saenger faces up to 20 years in prison when she is sentenced by U.S. District Court Judge Richard A. Jones on Oct. 7.
An affidavit from the federal government traces the fraudulent proceeds from Saenger to bank accounts held by the Lumpkins, and from those accounts, purchases of vehicles and farm equipment.
The restraining order and preliminary injunction freezes the Lumpkins’ savings and checking accounts, and vehicles that include tractors, trucks, trailers and a Harvest Master grain hopper.
The injunctions are designed to freeze the assets to make sure they are available to anyone making a claim for them, such as Butler’s family.
On July 14, Saenger pled guilty to one count of mail fraud in U.S. District Court in Seattle. She admitted that she defrauded Butler – who was suffering from memory loss and potential dementia – out of his money to pay for a mobile home for a sick “Uncle Jimbo” and to pay for breast cancer surgery. Uncle Jimbo did not exist, nor did she need surgery.
The injunction states that Saenger promised to marry Butler, even though she was married to someone else at the time.
Please read complete article at link below:
http://www.whidbeyexaminer.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=6423
Editor's note: Again, Why can't our Illinois Federal Agencies follow the example of other jurisdictions, such the case in article above in Seattle and the previous PA case? Come on Illinois FEDS, go after the Probate Court 18th floor; win one for Gipper... Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Friday, August 12, 2011
Judge Ciavarella sentenced to 28 years in prison
View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
This StoryPosted: August 11
Updated: Today at 2:09 AM
Judge Ciavarella sentenced to 28 years in prison
Following is the full, written text of the statement Mark Ciavarella read prior to his sentencing Thursday.
Editor's note: Your ProbateShark does not normally comment prior to an article. However, listening to this hypocrite cry, makes this shark want to vomit. Beware judges in the Probate Court of Cook County...
Even though I have privately apologized to my family, I believe it is important to publicly apologize to my wife, Cindy, children Lauren, Nicole, Marco, and their spouses and fiancé for the hurt and embarrassment I have caused them by my irresponsible acts. I would also thank them for standing by me at a most difficult time in my life.
I would be remiss if I did not also express to my sisters, uncle Joe, my in-laws Gerry and Helyn, my brother-in-law and sister-in-law, John and Debbie, and friends how sorry I am for the pain and hurt my conduct has caused them to endure.
I would like to take this opportunity to apologize to the citizens of Luzerne County for violating the trust they placed in me, and I hope, someday, they can forgive me for misplacing that trust.
I also want to apologize to the Luzerne County bench and bar for casting a cloud of corruption over them. The Luzerne County bench and bar should not have been painted with the brush of my wrongdoings. For having caused this to happen, I am truly sorry.
I want to apologize to all the judges that have been affected by this scandal and my involvement in it. My conduct has made a difficult job even more difficult. Our judicial system can only properly function if the public has faith and trust in it. My actions have clearly strained that trust. I pray that with time, the public will come to understand that one person who makes bad decisions should not reflect poorly on the good men and women who make up our judiciary.
To all the juveniles who appeared before me, I would also apologize to them and ask that they forgive me for being a hypocrite by not practicing what I preached. I would hope that they would learn from my mistakes and realize that everything we do in life has consequences and that there are dire consequences when we make decisions we know are wrong.
Lastly, I want to publicly say how sorry I am for all the criticism and ridicule the juvenile probation department and staff received because of my conduct. The juvenile probation staff were always dedicated to helping the children that came within the system.
For them to be seen as anything other than hard-working individuals who wanted nothing more than what was best for those children is probably one of the biggest tragedies of this scandal. I am humbly sorry for causing such dedicated workers to suffer any unwarranted criticism because of what I did.
Your honor, I think it is important for me to express – and for the public to hear – what I am about to say. In the press, I have been called everything from ignorant, cocky, arrogant, and unrealistic for defending against those crimes that I did not commit. Please do not accept what I am about to say as being ignorant, cocky, arrogant, or unrealistic. It is truly not meant to be. My words are an expression of what I believe happened and how I got to be standing in front of you today to be sentenced to a term of imprisonment.
So it is clear, I blame no one but myself for what has happened. I don’t blame Robert Mericle, Michael Conahan or Robert Powell. I had the opportunity to say “no” to taking money that I believed was legal to receive, but knew that I should not take this money even if it was legal because it was wrong and unethical for me to do so, especially in my capacity as juvenile court judge.
Rob Mericle and Mike Conahan, like me, made wrong choices and bad decisions. And like me, they will face the consequences of those choices and decisions. But so it is clear, Rob and Mike are good people who have reached out and helped more people in our community than everybody in this room put together. On the other hand, Bob Powell is a liar and a self-centered individual who would say and do anything to protect himself.
I first learned of the government’s investigation into my activities in the late summer or early fall of 2007. Sometime in early November of 2007, I approached Attorney (William) Ruzzo and told him the facts of the case as I knew them, I told him of Mericle’s payments to me and how they came about. I told him of Powell’s rent payments and how those payments came about.
Based upon what I told Attorney Ruzzo, he told me I did not have a bribe or kickback issue, but I had an honest service fraud problem because I failed to indicate on my ethics statement the outside source of income from Mericle and Powell. He explained to me that there were three types of honest service fraud. There was an honest service fraud for kickbacks, one for bribes, and one for conflict of interests.
He told me my failure to report my outside sources of income and the fact that I was the juvenile court judge created a conflict of interest and thus an honest service fraud violation. I asked him to provide me with his research on honest service fraud. I reviewed it and based upon what was provided me, I also concluded I had an honest service fraud problem.
I told Attorney Ruzzo there was little doubt in my mind that I had violated the honest service fraud statute conflict of interest provisions, and that we should begin negotiating with the government a plea to bring this matter to a conclusion.
I told him I would plead guilty to any crime I committed and would fight any crime the government said I committed which I believed I did not. I told him I never received a kickback, bribe, or extorted Bob Powell. I told him the money I received was not a quid pro quo and that I would never plead guilty to a kickback, bribe, extortion, or quid pro quo. I told him if those crimes were the basis for a plea to tell the government I would go to trial.
As a result of long and drawn-out plea negotiations, a plea was negotiated where I agreed to plead guilty to an honest service fraud violation based upon a conflict of interest and income tax fraud. My plea to honest service fraud was not based upon a kickback, bribe, extortion, or quid pro quo as reported by the media. It was based upon a conflict of interest, nothing more and nothing less.
In the days leading up to the submission of my guilty plea, your honor held a meeting attended by my lawyers and attorneys from the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Before that meeting, I asked both Attorney Ruzzo and Attorney (Al) Flora to ask if at the time of the plea it would be permissible for them to clearly explain that my plea was not based upon a kickback, bribe, extortion, or quid pro quo.
Your honor indicated to all in attendance that you would prefer no one make any statements until after the plea was accepted and to wait until the time of sentencing if a statement was to be made. My attorneys honored that request. But unfortunately, for me, Attorney (Gordon) Zubrod did not.
After my plea was presented to you for your consideration and acceptance or rejection, Attorney Zubrod made a statement to the press and uttered three words that changed the whole tenor of this case and the public’s perception of the underlying basis of the honest service fraud crime to which I was admitting having committed.
As we all know those words were “kids for cash.” He stated those words knowing full well I would have never entered a guilty plea for receiving cash for kids. He back-doored me and I never saw it coming. I did not even know he had said it until the next morning when I saw the “kids for cash” headlines.
Those three words made me the personification of evil. They made me the anti-Christ and the devil. Those words caused untold hurt and agony for me and my family. They made me toxic and caused a public uproar, the likes of which this community has never seen.
He uttered those three words knowing full well there was little or no evidence of me receiving a dime to send a child into placement. He uttered those three words knowing full well I would never plead guilty to receiving cash for kids, but even worse, he never gave me a chance at the time of my trial to defend against those words because when he had the chance to put up or shut up, he failed to put up. He shut up because once he learned how the juvenile system operated and the real facts of this case, he realized there was no connection between the money I had received and the children I placed at “PA Child Care.”
As your honor knows, every good prosecutor worth his salt wants to present evidence to a jury that would paint the defendant in a bad light. They want to present evidence that would inflame the jury and cause them to despise the defendant. What evidence would be more inflammatory and despicable than evidence that a juvenile court judge received money to send children into placement? I can’t think of any. Knowing that believable, credible “kids for cash” evidence would be beneficial to his case and devastating to mine, he did not present such evidence.
The reason Attorney Zubrod did not present this type of evidence at my trial was because there was no believable, credible evidence that would establish a connection between the money I received and the children I placed. It never happened. But because of those three words, I have been publicly convicted of a crime I never committed. I will live the rest of my life with the stigma of placing children for money. A crime which never occurred and more importantly, for which I never had the opportunity to defend against.
So you and the public don’t think my words are just hollow words, and being said just to be said, I am ready to back up what I have indicated never happened by asking the government to release my entire investigative file and make it available to the media and the public for review. Instead of all the innuendos and half truths, instead of the piecemeal releasing of information by the government to the press, let it all become public and allow everyone to judge based upon the evidence amassed against me, if there is any believable evidence that I received money to place juveniles.
You see your honor, this case has never been a search for the truth. It has always been “let’s get a conviction at any cost and let’s get that conviction even if the credible, believable evidence indicates the crime never occurred.”
How else can you explain the government threatening to indict my daughter, Lauren, on a section of a federal law dealing with interfering or injuring officers or jurors generally, and laundering of monetary instruments? The only reason this threat was made was to get me to plead to the crimes they wanted and not the crimes which I actually committed.
At that time the only reason I did not enter into a plea was because my daughter, Lauren, told me if I did not fight for what I believed in and fight against those crimes which I did not commit she would never speak to me again.
How else can you explain the government in its investigation never speaking to Greg Zappala, the partner of Bob Powell, in “PA Child Care?” Not one question even though he might have information that could have been beneficial to the government’s case. I would hope that the government’s failure to speak to Mr. Zappala had nothing to do with who he was and who his family is or because his partner, Robert Powell, stole $3 million dollars from their company and the Government did not want that fact to be known about their star witness.
How can it be a search for the truth when my first indictment in September of 2009 never indicted me for a kickback or bribe relative to Robert Mericle’s payments to me. The government threw everything they had at me in that indictment but did not indict me on a bribe or kickback theory relative to Robert Mericle’s payments.
You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to know that if they had evidence linking Mericle’s money to me as being a bribe or kickback, they would have included it in the indictment. But in 2010, when a superseding indictment was filed, without the addition of any new evidence, the Mericle money was now alleged to be a kickback. All the evidence given to me by the government clearly indicated no new evidence was uncovered to change the Mericle money from a conflict of interest theory to a kickback theory. It will always be a mystery to me as to how I could be indicted in September, 2010, on an allegation that Mericle’s money was a kickback when the same evidence in September of 2009, in the governments viewpoint, was not a kickback.
Your honor, I stand here today knowing in my heart that the money Robert Mericle paid me was not a kickback. I have always admitted to those crimes which I committed and told anyone who would listen that I would defend against those crimes I did not commit.
The government charged me with illegally receiving money on.16 occasions. The jury found me guilty of one illegal payment and not guilty on the other 15. They found me not guilty on any payments that could have remotely been construed to be a payment to me for sending kids into placement. They found me not guilty on every payment Bob Powell said he paid because he said I was extorting him. They found the garbage he was trying to sell to save himself from going to jail for many, many years to be unbelievable.
Because of the decisions I made and only because of my making those ill-advised decisions, I have lost everything that I have ever worked for or cared about. I lost my reputation and have tarnished the once-proud name of Ciavarella to the point where my son can’t even consider returning to this area to practice law. I lost my job and am financially ruined. I am about to lose the physical presence of my family, a loss which is almost unbearable to shoulder, but I will never lose my will to fight against individuals who say I took cash to put children in placement when I never did.
I was convicted of receiving a kickback for the construction of a building. The money was paid before the “PA Child Care” facility was even opened. This payment had nothing to do with the sending of children to that facility. To reiterate, I was found not guilty on all other payments received by me. But yet today, I stand before you guilty for being the “kids for cash” judge when the allegation was never presented by the government to the jury and for which I was never convicted.
While I respect the jury verdict that the first payment I received from Mericle was a kickback, I disagree that the evidence presented at trial established or warranted such a verdict. But it no longer matters what I believe the verdict should have been. Today, I stand before you about to be sentenced to a term of imprisonment. I would only ask that the sentence be for the crimes I was found guilty of committing and not for a crime or crimes I did not commit. Punish me for what I did, not what the government said I did but never proved or gave me the opportunity to defend against, or for which the jury returned a verdict of not guilty.
Thank you for giving me this opportunity to say what I had to say.
Former Luzerne County Judge Mark Ciavarella was given a sentence that may not be for life, but will keep him in prison until he is 89 years old. U.S. District Judge Edwin Kosik sentenced Ciavarella to 336 months in prison - 28 years for a man who is 61 Ciavarella agreed to voluntarily surrender himself immediately
The sentence came after Ciavarella opened remarks with apologies to family, friends, the public and juveniles,then turned defiant and repeated his claim that he never took money in exchange for sending juveniles to private detention facilities.
U.S. Assistant District Attorney Gordon Zubrod cited that defiance as proof Ciavarella remains unwilling to acknowledge his crimes and actions.
Ciavarella initially apologized to family "for the hurt and embarrassment I caused them by my irresponsible acts." He apologized to the "Citizens of Luzerne County for violating the trust they place in me, and I hope they can some day forgive me. He apologized to the court bench and attorney's bar for shattering public trust. And to the thousands of juveniles who had appeared before him.
"Forgive me for being a hypocrite by not practicing what I preached. I would hope that they would learn from my mistakes and realize that everything we do in life has consequences and that there are dire consequences when we make decisions we know are wrong."
Ciavarella was widely known as a tough judge with a zero tolerance policy who gave juveniles stern advise on staying on the straight and narrow.
But shortly after the apologies, Ciavarella turned to a theme he has struck since first signing a plea agreement in January, 2009 that he later withdrew: He repeated his contention that he never took money in exchange for sending juveniles to private, for profit detention facilities."I Have been called everything - ignorant, cocky, arrogant and unrealistic - for not admitting to crimes I did not commit," he said.
While acknowledging wrongdoing of two others snared in the FBI probe that brought him to this point, Ciavarella also defended former judge Michael Conahan, who has pleaded guilty and is awaiting sentence, and Robert Mericle, who built two juvenile facilities in question and paid Conahan and Ciavarella millions in "finder fees" for helping him get the work.
Ciavarella insisted that, despite their flaws, Conahan and Mericle are not as bad as they've been painted.. "Rob and Mike are good people who have reached out and helped more people in our community than everybody in this room put together," he said. Then he offered a bitter rebuke of Attorney Robert Powell, former co-owner of the juvenile facilities who had testified that Ciavarella had extorted money from him in order to keep the facilities full.
"On the other hand, Bob Powell is a liar and a self-centered individual who would say and do anything to protect himself." Ciavarella said.
Ciavarella also attacked the prosecutors in his case, insisting they had put out the allegation that he took money in exchange for sending juveniles to the facilities, yet never presented evidence in court. This resulted in him being "convicted of a crime I never committed" in public opinion. Ciavarella then urged the government to release all investigative files and let the public decide. The ex-jurist said prosecutors had attempted to indict his daughter twice, including on a money-laundering charge - in an effort to him to plead guilty.
Ciavarella likewise criticized a report from the Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice, a special body formed by the state legislature expressly to investigate the situation and recommend changes to prevent future re-occurrences. The Commission had roundly criticized what it characterized as systemic failures in Luzerne County Juvenile Court under Ciavarella. He said he felt the commission had not done enough investigation.
"I had people ready to testify that my court was no different than any other. I don't do anything different from any other judge in this area or in Luzerne County," Ciavarella said, rigorously rejecting claims that he had denied juveniles their legal rights in his court.
U.S. Assistant Attorney Gordon Zubrod cited Ciavarella's statements as yet more proof that he did not accept responsibility for his actions.
"He says the Interbranch Commission got it wrong. He says this court got it wrong. He says the jury got it wrong," Zubrod said. "I leave it to the court to decide if that reflects on his character."
Zubrod recounted one instance from a court transcript in which Ciavarella ordered a juvenile removed in shackles and said for all to hear "Put cuffs on him take him out of here. We're having a good day.
"This is a man who verbally abused and cruelly mocked children,' Zubrod said.
"Mr. Ciavarella's argument is that he was not selling kids retail," Zubrod said at one point. "I agree with that. He was selling them wholesale."
U.S. District Judge Edwin Kosik handed down the 28 year sentence with scant comment, evoking abrupt applause from several audience members. Ciavarella agreed to voluntarily turn himself over immediately. By 10:08 a.m. the hearing was over. By noon, Ciavarella had been whisked away in a vehicle for immediate incarceration.
Please read complete article at link below:
http://www.timesleader.com/news/Ciavarella-sentencing-long-line-long-wait.html
Editor's note: Again, your ProbateShark asks the question, why can't our Illinois Federal law enforcement go after the crooked judges in the Probate Court of Cook County? Look to the example of the PA Federal Law Enforcement jailing that hypocritical criminal Ciavarella. The entire 18th floor of the Daley Court House is a criminal enterprise that exceeds the Mafia. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
This StoryPosted: August 11
Updated: Today at 2:09 AM
Judge Ciavarella sentenced to 28 years in prison
Following is the full, written text of the statement Mark Ciavarella read prior to his sentencing Thursday.
Editor's note: Your ProbateShark does not normally comment prior to an article. However, listening to this hypocrite cry, makes this shark want to vomit. Beware judges in the Probate Court of Cook County...
Even though I have privately apologized to my family, I believe it is important to publicly apologize to my wife, Cindy, children Lauren, Nicole, Marco, and their spouses and fiancé for the hurt and embarrassment I have caused them by my irresponsible acts. I would also thank them for standing by me at a most difficult time in my life.
I would be remiss if I did not also express to my sisters, uncle Joe, my in-laws Gerry and Helyn, my brother-in-law and sister-in-law, John and Debbie, and friends how sorry I am for the pain and hurt my conduct has caused them to endure.
I would like to take this opportunity to apologize to the citizens of Luzerne County for violating the trust they placed in me, and I hope, someday, they can forgive me for misplacing that trust.
I also want to apologize to the Luzerne County bench and bar for casting a cloud of corruption over them. The Luzerne County bench and bar should not have been painted with the brush of my wrongdoings. For having caused this to happen, I am truly sorry.
I want to apologize to all the judges that have been affected by this scandal and my involvement in it. My conduct has made a difficult job even more difficult. Our judicial system can only properly function if the public has faith and trust in it. My actions have clearly strained that trust. I pray that with time, the public will come to understand that one person who makes bad decisions should not reflect poorly on the good men and women who make up our judiciary.
To all the juveniles who appeared before me, I would also apologize to them and ask that they forgive me for being a hypocrite by not practicing what I preached. I would hope that they would learn from my mistakes and realize that everything we do in life has consequences and that there are dire consequences when we make decisions we know are wrong.
Lastly, I want to publicly say how sorry I am for all the criticism and ridicule the juvenile probation department and staff received because of my conduct. The juvenile probation staff were always dedicated to helping the children that came within the system.
For them to be seen as anything other than hard-working individuals who wanted nothing more than what was best for those children is probably one of the biggest tragedies of this scandal. I am humbly sorry for causing such dedicated workers to suffer any unwarranted criticism because of what I did.
Your honor, I think it is important for me to express – and for the public to hear – what I am about to say. In the press, I have been called everything from ignorant, cocky, arrogant, and unrealistic for defending against those crimes that I did not commit. Please do not accept what I am about to say as being ignorant, cocky, arrogant, or unrealistic. It is truly not meant to be. My words are an expression of what I believe happened and how I got to be standing in front of you today to be sentenced to a term of imprisonment.
So it is clear, I blame no one but myself for what has happened. I don’t blame Robert Mericle, Michael Conahan or Robert Powell. I had the opportunity to say “no” to taking money that I believed was legal to receive, but knew that I should not take this money even if it was legal because it was wrong and unethical for me to do so, especially in my capacity as juvenile court judge.
Rob Mericle and Mike Conahan, like me, made wrong choices and bad decisions. And like me, they will face the consequences of those choices and decisions. But so it is clear, Rob and Mike are good people who have reached out and helped more people in our community than everybody in this room put together. On the other hand, Bob Powell is a liar and a self-centered individual who would say and do anything to protect himself.
I first learned of the government’s investigation into my activities in the late summer or early fall of 2007. Sometime in early November of 2007, I approached Attorney (William) Ruzzo and told him the facts of the case as I knew them, I told him of Mericle’s payments to me and how they came about. I told him of Powell’s rent payments and how those payments came about.
Based upon what I told Attorney Ruzzo, he told me I did not have a bribe or kickback issue, but I had an honest service fraud problem because I failed to indicate on my ethics statement the outside source of income from Mericle and Powell. He explained to me that there were three types of honest service fraud. There was an honest service fraud for kickbacks, one for bribes, and one for conflict of interests.
He told me my failure to report my outside sources of income and the fact that I was the juvenile court judge created a conflict of interest and thus an honest service fraud violation. I asked him to provide me with his research on honest service fraud. I reviewed it and based upon what was provided me, I also concluded I had an honest service fraud problem.
I told Attorney Ruzzo there was little doubt in my mind that I had violated the honest service fraud statute conflict of interest provisions, and that we should begin negotiating with the government a plea to bring this matter to a conclusion.
I told him I would plead guilty to any crime I committed and would fight any crime the government said I committed which I believed I did not. I told him I never received a kickback, bribe, or extorted Bob Powell. I told him the money I received was not a quid pro quo and that I would never plead guilty to a kickback, bribe, extortion, or quid pro quo. I told him if those crimes were the basis for a plea to tell the government I would go to trial.
As a result of long and drawn-out plea negotiations, a plea was negotiated where I agreed to plead guilty to an honest service fraud violation based upon a conflict of interest and income tax fraud. My plea to honest service fraud was not based upon a kickback, bribe, extortion, or quid pro quo as reported by the media. It was based upon a conflict of interest, nothing more and nothing less.
In the days leading up to the submission of my guilty plea, your honor held a meeting attended by my lawyers and attorneys from the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Before that meeting, I asked both Attorney Ruzzo and Attorney (Al) Flora to ask if at the time of the plea it would be permissible for them to clearly explain that my plea was not based upon a kickback, bribe, extortion, or quid pro quo.
Your honor indicated to all in attendance that you would prefer no one make any statements until after the plea was accepted and to wait until the time of sentencing if a statement was to be made. My attorneys honored that request. But unfortunately, for me, Attorney (Gordon) Zubrod did not.
After my plea was presented to you for your consideration and acceptance or rejection, Attorney Zubrod made a statement to the press and uttered three words that changed the whole tenor of this case and the public’s perception of the underlying basis of the honest service fraud crime to which I was admitting having committed.
As we all know those words were “kids for cash.” He stated those words knowing full well I would have never entered a guilty plea for receiving cash for kids. He back-doored me and I never saw it coming. I did not even know he had said it until the next morning when I saw the “kids for cash” headlines.
Those three words made me the personification of evil. They made me the anti-Christ and the devil. Those words caused untold hurt and agony for me and my family. They made me toxic and caused a public uproar, the likes of which this community has never seen.
He uttered those three words knowing full well there was little or no evidence of me receiving a dime to send a child into placement. He uttered those three words knowing full well I would never plead guilty to receiving cash for kids, but even worse, he never gave me a chance at the time of my trial to defend against those words because when he had the chance to put up or shut up, he failed to put up. He shut up because once he learned how the juvenile system operated and the real facts of this case, he realized there was no connection between the money I had received and the children I placed at “PA Child Care.”
As your honor knows, every good prosecutor worth his salt wants to present evidence to a jury that would paint the defendant in a bad light. They want to present evidence that would inflame the jury and cause them to despise the defendant. What evidence would be more inflammatory and despicable than evidence that a juvenile court judge received money to send children into placement? I can’t think of any. Knowing that believable, credible “kids for cash” evidence would be beneficial to his case and devastating to mine, he did not present such evidence.
The reason Attorney Zubrod did not present this type of evidence at my trial was because there was no believable, credible evidence that would establish a connection between the money I received and the children I placed. It never happened. But because of those three words, I have been publicly convicted of a crime I never committed. I will live the rest of my life with the stigma of placing children for money. A crime which never occurred and more importantly, for which I never had the opportunity to defend against.
So you and the public don’t think my words are just hollow words, and being said just to be said, I am ready to back up what I have indicated never happened by asking the government to release my entire investigative file and make it available to the media and the public for review. Instead of all the innuendos and half truths, instead of the piecemeal releasing of information by the government to the press, let it all become public and allow everyone to judge based upon the evidence amassed against me, if there is any believable evidence that I received money to place juveniles.
You see your honor, this case has never been a search for the truth. It has always been “let’s get a conviction at any cost and let’s get that conviction even if the credible, believable evidence indicates the crime never occurred.”
How else can you explain the government threatening to indict my daughter, Lauren, on a section of a federal law dealing with interfering or injuring officers or jurors generally, and laundering of monetary instruments? The only reason this threat was made was to get me to plead to the crimes they wanted and not the crimes which I actually committed.
At that time the only reason I did not enter into a plea was because my daughter, Lauren, told me if I did not fight for what I believed in and fight against those crimes which I did not commit she would never speak to me again.
How else can you explain the government in its investigation never speaking to Greg Zappala, the partner of Bob Powell, in “PA Child Care?” Not one question even though he might have information that could have been beneficial to the government’s case. I would hope that the government’s failure to speak to Mr. Zappala had nothing to do with who he was and who his family is or because his partner, Robert Powell, stole $3 million dollars from their company and the Government did not want that fact to be known about their star witness.
How can it be a search for the truth when my first indictment in September of 2009 never indicted me for a kickback or bribe relative to Robert Mericle’s payments to me. The government threw everything they had at me in that indictment but did not indict me on a bribe or kickback theory relative to Robert Mericle’s payments.
You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to know that if they had evidence linking Mericle’s money to me as being a bribe or kickback, they would have included it in the indictment. But in 2010, when a superseding indictment was filed, without the addition of any new evidence, the Mericle money was now alleged to be a kickback. All the evidence given to me by the government clearly indicated no new evidence was uncovered to change the Mericle money from a conflict of interest theory to a kickback theory. It will always be a mystery to me as to how I could be indicted in September, 2010, on an allegation that Mericle’s money was a kickback when the same evidence in September of 2009, in the governments viewpoint, was not a kickback.
Your honor, I stand here today knowing in my heart that the money Robert Mericle paid me was not a kickback. I have always admitted to those crimes which I committed and told anyone who would listen that I would defend against those crimes I did not commit.
The government charged me with illegally receiving money on.16 occasions. The jury found me guilty of one illegal payment and not guilty on the other 15. They found me not guilty on any payments that could have remotely been construed to be a payment to me for sending kids into placement. They found me not guilty on every payment Bob Powell said he paid because he said I was extorting him. They found the garbage he was trying to sell to save himself from going to jail for many, many years to be unbelievable.
Because of the decisions I made and only because of my making those ill-advised decisions, I have lost everything that I have ever worked for or cared about. I lost my reputation and have tarnished the once-proud name of Ciavarella to the point where my son can’t even consider returning to this area to practice law. I lost my job and am financially ruined. I am about to lose the physical presence of my family, a loss which is almost unbearable to shoulder, but I will never lose my will to fight against individuals who say I took cash to put children in placement when I never did.
I was convicted of receiving a kickback for the construction of a building. The money was paid before the “PA Child Care” facility was even opened. This payment had nothing to do with the sending of children to that facility. To reiterate, I was found not guilty on all other payments received by me. But yet today, I stand before you guilty for being the “kids for cash” judge when the allegation was never presented by the government to the jury and for which I was never convicted.
While I respect the jury verdict that the first payment I received from Mericle was a kickback, I disagree that the evidence presented at trial established or warranted such a verdict. But it no longer matters what I believe the verdict should have been. Today, I stand before you about to be sentenced to a term of imprisonment. I would only ask that the sentence be for the crimes I was found guilty of committing and not for a crime or crimes I did not commit. Punish me for what I did, not what the government said I did but never proved or gave me the opportunity to defend against, or for which the jury returned a verdict of not guilty.
Thank you for giving me this opportunity to say what I had to say.
Former Luzerne County Judge Mark Ciavarella was given a sentence that may not be for life, but will keep him in prison until he is 89 years old. U.S. District Judge Edwin Kosik sentenced Ciavarella to 336 months in prison - 28 years for a man who is 61 Ciavarella agreed to voluntarily surrender himself immediately
The sentence came after Ciavarella opened remarks with apologies to family, friends, the public and juveniles,then turned defiant and repeated his claim that he never took money in exchange for sending juveniles to private detention facilities.
U.S. Assistant District Attorney Gordon Zubrod cited that defiance as proof Ciavarella remains unwilling to acknowledge his crimes and actions.
Ciavarella initially apologized to family "for the hurt and embarrassment I caused them by my irresponsible acts." He apologized to the "Citizens of Luzerne County for violating the trust they place in me, and I hope they can some day forgive me. He apologized to the court bench and attorney's bar for shattering public trust. And to the thousands of juveniles who had appeared before him.
"Forgive me for being a hypocrite by not practicing what I preached. I would hope that they would learn from my mistakes and realize that everything we do in life has consequences and that there are dire consequences when we make decisions we know are wrong."
Ciavarella was widely known as a tough judge with a zero tolerance policy who gave juveniles stern advise on staying on the straight and narrow.
But shortly after the apologies, Ciavarella turned to a theme he has struck since first signing a plea agreement in January, 2009 that he later withdrew: He repeated his contention that he never took money in exchange for sending juveniles to private, for profit detention facilities."I Have been called everything - ignorant, cocky, arrogant and unrealistic - for not admitting to crimes I did not commit," he said.
While acknowledging wrongdoing of two others snared in the FBI probe that brought him to this point, Ciavarella also defended former judge Michael Conahan, who has pleaded guilty and is awaiting sentence, and Robert Mericle, who built two juvenile facilities in question and paid Conahan and Ciavarella millions in "finder fees" for helping him get the work.
Ciavarella insisted that, despite their flaws, Conahan and Mericle are not as bad as they've been painted.. "Rob and Mike are good people who have reached out and helped more people in our community than everybody in this room put together," he said. Then he offered a bitter rebuke of Attorney Robert Powell, former co-owner of the juvenile facilities who had testified that Ciavarella had extorted money from him in order to keep the facilities full.
"On the other hand, Bob Powell is a liar and a self-centered individual who would say and do anything to protect himself." Ciavarella said.
Ciavarella also attacked the prosecutors in his case, insisting they had put out the allegation that he took money in exchange for sending juveniles to the facilities, yet never presented evidence in court. This resulted in him being "convicted of a crime I never committed" in public opinion. Ciavarella then urged the government to release all investigative files and let the public decide. The ex-jurist said prosecutors had attempted to indict his daughter twice, including on a money-laundering charge - in an effort to him to plead guilty.
Ciavarella likewise criticized a report from the Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice, a special body formed by the state legislature expressly to investigate the situation and recommend changes to prevent future re-occurrences. The Commission had roundly criticized what it characterized as systemic failures in Luzerne County Juvenile Court under Ciavarella. He said he felt the commission had not done enough investigation.
"I had people ready to testify that my court was no different than any other. I don't do anything different from any other judge in this area or in Luzerne County," Ciavarella said, rigorously rejecting claims that he had denied juveniles their legal rights in his court.
U.S. Assistant Attorney Gordon Zubrod cited Ciavarella's statements as yet more proof that he did not accept responsibility for his actions.
"He says the Interbranch Commission got it wrong. He says this court got it wrong. He says the jury got it wrong," Zubrod said. "I leave it to the court to decide if that reflects on his character."
Zubrod recounted one instance from a court transcript in which Ciavarella ordered a juvenile removed in shackles and said for all to hear "Put cuffs on him take him out of here. We're having a good day.
"This is a man who verbally abused and cruelly mocked children,' Zubrod said.
"Mr. Ciavarella's argument is that he was not selling kids retail," Zubrod said at one point. "I agree with that. He was selling them wholesale."
U.S. District Judge Edwin Kosik handed down the 28 year sentence with scant comment, evoking abrupt applause from several audience members. Ciavarella agreed to voluntarily turn himself over immediately. By 10:08 a.m. the hearing was over. By noon, Ciavarella had been whisked away in a vehicle for immediate incarceration.
Please read complete article at link below:
http://www.timesleader.com/news/Ciavarella-sentencing-long-line-long-wait.html
Editor's note: Again, your ProbateShark asks the question, why can't our Illinois Federal law enforcement go after the crooked judges in the Probate Court of Cook County? Look to the example of the PA Federal Law Enforcement jailing that hypocritical criminal Ciavarella. The entire 18th floor of the Daley Court House is a criminal enterprise that exceeds the Mafia. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Carlson v. Glueckert Funeral Home, Ltd. and Disposition of Remains
View Latest Cook County Probate Court
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Posted On: August 9, 2011 by Joel A. Schoenmeyer
Carlson v. Glueckert Funeral Home, Ltd. and Disposition of Remains
This month's CBA Record has a nice article by Mary Dory Cascino on the disposition of remains act and how it interacts with a health care power of attorney. I don't want to summarize that article (available here as a PDF), but I do want to address a recent case that Ms. Cascino discusses in her article.
The case in question is Carlson v. Glueckert Funeral Home, Ltd., which is available as a PDF here. The case involved a woman named Eleanor Carlson, and her two children (Scott and Denise). Eleanor was evidently estranged from Denise at the time of her death, but Scott was a fiduciary for his mother in lots of capacities.
After his mother's death, Scott made arrangements for his mother's funeral and burial with the Glueckert Funeral Home. Soon after, Denise also contacted the funeral home, and tried to make other arrangements for the funeral and burial. At this point, the funeral home told Scott that the funeral would have to be delayed because of this dispute, but that Eleanor's body would not deteriorate. Later, the funeral home sent the body to the Lake County coroner's office. When Scott was finally able to have the body sent to another funeral home, it had "extensively decayed." Scott then sued the Glueckert Funeral Home.
The funeral home attempted to defend its actions (inactions?) by invoking Section 50 of Illinois' Disposition of Remains Act (the "Act"). That Section of the Act states as follows:
Any dispute among any of the persons listed in Section 5 concerning their right to control the disposition, including cremation, of a decedent's remains shall be resolved by a court of competent jurisdiction. A cemetery organization or funeral establishment shall not be liable for refusing to accept the decedent's remains, or to inter or otherwise dispose of the decedent's remains, until it receives a court order or other suitable confirmation that the dispute has been resolved or settled.
Section 5 sets forth the priority for controlling the disposition of a decedent's remains -- priority #1 goes to an agent appointed by the decedent. Eleanor had named Scott as her agent under her health care power of attorney, although there was some question as to whether this agency continued after her death. Ms. Cascino takes the position that the funeral home should have relied upon this power of attorney, that the power of attorney meant that there was no dispute over the disposition of Eleanor's remains, and that therefore Section 50 is not applicable. I'm not so sure. I think the funeral home COULD HAVE relied upon the power of attorney, but I also don't think it's fair to expect or require the funeral home to do so. Rather, I agree with the court that "it is not the role of funeral homes and cemeteries to judge the relative legal rights of feuding family members." After all, Section 50 makes reference to "any" dispute.
The bigger issue for me is the fact that the funeral home apparently allowed Eleanor's body to decay, even though neither Scott nor Denise wanted this to happen. Can't a funeral home at least be required to keep the body in question "on ice"?
I'd also like to see Illinois courts adopt some expedited court procedure (similar to a temporary restraining order) for determining who is entitled to dispose of remains.
Posted by Joel A. Schoenmeyer
Please read complete article with related links at link below:
http://www.deathandtaxesblog.com/2011/08/carlson_v_glueckert_funeral_ho.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DeathAndTaxesBlogCom+%28Death+and+Taxes+Blog%29
Editor's note: Thank you Joel for a most informative article. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Corruption and Fraud Videos at this blog site:
http://northshorelive.blogspot.com/
Posted On: August 9, 2011 by Joel A. Schoenmeyer
Carlson v. Glueckert Funeral Home, Ltd. and Disposition of Remains
This month's CBA Record has a nice article by Mary Dory Cascino on the disposition of remains act and how it interacts with a health care power of attorney. I don't want to summarize that article (available here as a PDF), but I do want to address a recent case that Ms. Cascino discusses in her article.
The case in question is Carlson v. Glueckert Funeral Home, Ltd., which is available as a PDF here. The case involved a woman named Eleanor Carlson, and her two children (Scott and Denise). Eleanor was evidently estranged from Denise at the time of her death, but Scott was a fiduciary for his mother in lots of capacities.
After his mother's death, Scott made arrangements for his mother's funeral and burial with the Glueckert Funeral Home. Soon after, Denise also contacted the funeral home, and tried to make other arrangements for the funeral and burial. At this point, the funeral home told Scott that the funeral would have to be delayed because of this dispute, but that Eleanor's body would not deteriorate. Later, the funeral home sent the body to the Lake County coroner's office. When Scott was finally able to have the body sent to another funeral home, it had "extensively decayed." Scott then sued the Glueckert Funeral Home.
The funeral home attempted to defend its actions (inactions?) by invoking Section 50 of Illinois' Disposition of Remains Act (the "Act"). That Section of the Act states as follows:
Any dispute among any of the persons listed in Section 5 concerning their right to control the disposition, including cremation, of a decedent's remains shall be resolved by a court of competent jurisdiction. A cemetery organization or funeral establishment shall not be liable for refusing to accept the decedent's remains, or to inter or otherwise dispose of the decedent's remains, until it receives a court order or other suitable confirmation that the dispute has been resolved or settled.
Section 5 sets forth the priority for controlling the disposition of a decedent's remains -- priority #1 goes to an agent appointed by the decedent. Eleanor had named Scott as her agent under her health care power of attorney, although there was some question as to whether this agency continued after her death. Ms. Cascino takes the position that the funeral home should have relied upon this power of attorney, that the power of attorney meant that there was no dispute over the disposition of Eleanor's remains, and that therefore Section 50 is not applicable. I'm not so sure. I think the funeral home COULD HAVE relied upon the power of attorney, but I also don't think it's fair to expect or require the funeral home to do so. Rather, I agree with the court that "it is not the role of funeral homes and cemeteries to judge the relative legal rights of feuding family members." After all, Section 50 makes reference to "any" dispute.
The bigger issue for me is the fact that the funeral home apparently allowed Eleanor's body to decay, even though neither Scott nor Denise wanted this to happen. Can't a funeral home at least be required to keep the body in question "on ice"?
I'd also like to see Illinois courts adopt some expedited court procedure (similar to a temporary restraining order) for determining who is entitled to dispose of remains.
Posted by Joel A. Schoenmeyer
Please read complete article with related links at link below:
http://www.deathandtaxesblog.com/2011/08/carlson_v_glueckert_funeral_ho.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DeathAndTaxesBlogCom+%28Death+and+Taxes+Blog%29
Editor's note: Thank you Joel for a most informative article. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)