The Supreme Court of Ohio has ruled that a person seeking to appeal the decision of a probate court in a guardianship proceeding must have been a party to those proceedings to have standing to appeal the court’s decision.
This case involved a dispute between two sisters, Victoria Wellington of Granville, Ohio, and Jennie Hull of Arizona over which of them should serve as guardian of their 97-year-old mother, Bessie Santrucek. In April 2006 Wellington arranged for Santrucek to move to Ohio from her longtime residence in Michigan. A few weeks later, Wellington filed an action in the Licking County Probate Court to have herself appointed guardian over her mother’s affairs. Hull hired an attorney to oppose the guardianship proceedings, alleging among other claims that her mother had been moved from Michigan to Ohio against her wishes, and that an Ohio probate court therefore did not have jurisdiction to appoint a guardian.
The trial court heard but denied Hull’s motions, accepted jurisdiction in the case and issued an order appointing Wellington as guardian. Hull attempted to appeal the probate court’s order. On review, the Fifth District Court of Appeals dismissed Hull’s appeal for lack of legal standing, holding that under Ohio case law, a relative of a ward who did not file a competing request to be named guardian of the ward does not have standing to appeal a probate court order appointing another relative as guardian.
Full Article and Source:
Ohio Supremes Refuse Guardianship Appeal
See also:
Out-of-State Relative Who Opposed Ohio Guardianship Order Had No Standing to Appeal
Court of Appeals - In re Guardianship of Santrucek, 2007-Ohio-3427 (pdf)
This case involved a dispute between two sisters, Victoria Wellington of Granville, Ohio, and Jennie Hull of Arizona over which of them should serve as guardian of their 97-year-old mother, Bessie Santrucek. In April 2006 Wellington arranged for Santrucek to move to Ohio from her longtime residence in Michigan. A few weeks later, Wellington filed an action in the Licking County Probate Court to have herself appointed guardian over her mother’s affairs. Hull hired an attorney to oppose the guardianship proceedings, alleging among other claims that her mother had been moved from Michigan to Ohio against her wishes, and that an Ohio probate court therefore did not have jurisdiction to appoint a guardian.
The trial court heard but denied Hull’s motions, accepted jurisdiction in the case and issued an order appointing Wellington as guardian. Hull attempted to appeal the probate court’s order. On review, the Fifth District Court of Appeals dismissed Hull’s appeal for lack of legal standing, holding that under Ohio case law, a relative of a ward who did not file a competing request to be named guardian of the ward does not have standing to appeal a probate court order appointing another relative as guardian.
Full Article and Source:
Ohio Supremes Refuse Guardianship Appeal
See also:
Out-of-State Relative Who Opposed Ohio Guardianship Order Had No Standing to Appeal
Court of Appeals - In re Guardianship of Santrucek, 2007-Ohio-3427 (pdf)
This is a bad decision, on several counts:
ReplyDelete1. Re Grannynaps: There is an old legal doctrine regarding "court of first jurisdiction," which is ignored by the Ohio court.
Q - What is the quid pro quo which motivates the second court to fight for control? $$$???
2. How can a party intervene when there is a grannynap and that party may not have sufficiently early notice?
3. The decision is in conflict with a FLorida decision where the FL Supreme Court addressed the issue of standing and said that a person, including an heir of a ward, has standing to participate in a guardianship proceeding if the applicable provisions of either the Florida Guardianship Law or the Florida Probate Rules entitle the person to notice of the proceeding or authorize the person to file an objection in the proceeding - they do! Then they qualify that further by a requirement for "having requested notice," but if you are not served initially, you are not in a position to request notice (service of all papers) at that juncture.
So eventually these problems, if not corrected by legislation, will probably work their way up to the Supremes, if anyone is interested enough.gncgdzor
Forgot to give the Florida case:
ReplyDeleteHayes v. Estate of Thompson,
SC05-675, 11/9/06.
"The Supreme Court of Ohio has ruled that a person seeking to appeal the decision of a probate court in a guardianship proceeding must have been a party to those proceedings to have standing to appeal the court’s decision.
ReplyDeleteQUESTION: How many citizens of Ohio read, heard or know about this important ruling?
We MUST have uniform guardianship laws with no exceptions.
Currently, how lives are forever changed and many times damaged under current guardianship laws, in each state are unknown, a total mystery to the majority of society until it is too late!
Until there is uniformity in guardianship laws, I believe the laws of each state governing probate guardianship and estate issues need to be dug up, exposed, available and promoted by state and county government agencies, the press, senior citizens groups, and the news media on a regular basis in order to give us an opportunity to be an informed society.
This decision once again makes guardians and attorneys all the more powerful over their wards and the family all the more defenseless.
ReplyDeleteI am proud organizations like NASGA exist to take on this injustice and to fight for those with no voice or power.
This is a very, very bad decision.
They will do anything they can to render wards and their families as helpless as possible so they be more successful in their pursuit of the riches.
ReplyDeleteCertainly when they find themselves in a vulnerable state with vultures circling overhead they'll be sorry.
All decisions should be to benefit the wards and protect them - not protect lawyers.
Unfortunately, the supreme court's hands were tied by Ohio law and the issue of the ward's initial state of residence may not have been included in the Appeal for consideration. The courts don't find laws for the attorney's, the attorney's have to do due diligence in their proceedings and we all know what motivates attorneys....$$$$$$$$$$$.
ReplyDeletethe abuses and outright theft that goes on in the probate courts is well known and documented in books, blogs and numerous publications. Infamous for neglect and careless accounting. the last place on this earth to find your self is a ward at the mercy of this group of individuals.
ReplyDeleteNext, these 'criminal' Judges,attorneys court appointed Guardians (Agents of the Court)and the Legislature will pass new bills Eliminating the jurisdiction issue between states.
ReplyDeleteElderly citizens all across the cournty are having their rights and estates STOLEN by unscrupulous 'AGENTS of THe COURT' placed in substandard nursing homes while their bank accounts are taken over and their homes are sold to be 'bilked' away by the Probate Court SCAM on the Elderly.
How many Attorney's DO YOU KNOW are HONES and have INTEGRITY especially when there's a PILE of money at their 'disposal' under the guise of Guradianship protecting the WARDS. Family members providing care for their loved ones are not given due process in Probate Courts to submit their evidence as Probate Courts WANT granny/grampy's money to fund themsleves! Once the money is bilked away by their burgeoning fees, granny/grampa is 'dumped' on the Taxpayer to pay for their care. This is outright fraud on every taxpayer in america and its PURPOSE is to keep those $2000 suits and jaguars coming every year for these 'fat cats'. Some states are requiring Guardians for minor children in ALL divorce cases. If the divorcing couple has money, these Guardians will Lodge a Contemptuous Custody Battle EVEN when they don't exist between the divorcing parties and their children (like my case). The Guardian takes control of your children's college funds and/or inheritances and bilks it with their exhorbitant fees........WHY? My 17yr old has no problem keeping his property/inheritance as a co-signer to a trusted parent or family member WHO CHARGES NOTHING not like his GAL at $225/hr doing paperwork? that any $13/hr clerk could do or family could do for FEE. Over $10,000 in GAL fees to date for sittiing her fat ass in the court room doing NOTHING. She had three meetings w/my son and AUBSED him.....and I have to pay her.......I'll like to have her thrown in JAIL but the dear sweet Judge disregards TAPES, VIDEO, DOCUMENTS and sits back in his big old chair and black robe telling me how much credibility the GAL has an agent with the court.....he couldn't even keep a straight face when he said it. Probate and Family Courts ARE nothing but CRIMINALS who STEAL, STEAL, STEAL, from families and then go home with the FAT wallets padded yet again. OINK!
I think its time for another REVOLUTION against the crooks who claim they are agents of the courts when, in fact, they are Agents of the Devil.
Bessie died in August 2009, never seeing her friends and family in her beloved Michigan. Her DEATH CERTIFICATE state that she is a resident of ...... Michigan.
ReplyDeleteMichigan law states that you cannot move an incompetant person from that state. If you are moved to a lockdown assisted living care facility from Michigan and have a doctor declare you have "mild dementia" 2 weeks after you are locked in there (because she didn't know what County in Ohio she was in) wasn't this all planned for "guardianship" by the Ohio sister?