Monday, March 22, 2010

Judge Rules $576K to Probate Attorneys Justified

A Superior Court judge has ruled that a phalanx of probate attorneys were justified in collecting $576,000 from an 88-year-old widow the court was (supposed to be) protecting. The judge rubber stamped half of the fees without even holding a hearing into whether they were reasonable.

Pro-tem Judge Lindsay Ellis also signed off on the Sun Valley Group helping itself to more than $417,000 in guardian and companion care fees.

Meanwhile, Supreme Court Chief Justice Rebecca Berch this week announced a new initiative aimed at improving protections for vulnerable people. Among the issues to be addressed: fees charged by court-appointed guardians and fiduciaries.

She could start with the astounding case of Marie Long, an old lady worth $1.3 million when she came under the protection of Maricopa County's probate court in 2005. Today, she's destitute and depends on taxpayers for support.

Which, we are told, is in no way the fault of those who wound up with all of her money.

In a take-no-prisoners 21-page ruling issued Monday, Ellis described the fees that put Marie Long into the poorhouse as “reasonable, necessary and for the benefit of the ward.” She blamed Marie's court-appointed attorney Jon Kitchel along with Dan Raynak and Pat Gitre, attorneys for Marie's sisters, for driving up costs, saying their “venomous” and “hateful” attacks on the trustee, the guardian and their attorneys forced the other side to defend themselves.

With Marie's money, of course.

The opinion was lauded by Sun Valley Group, which withdrew as Marie's guardian when her money ran out in November. Says Sun Valley's CEO, Peter Frenette: “I am grateful for the court's decision as it finds ‘there is no legitimate dispute about SVG or its performance of its duties as guardian for Long.' The court confirmed that this has been an unfair attack not just on SVG but also the guardianship process.”

Full Article and Source:
Judge: Probate Attorneys Were Justified in Taking $576,000 From Old Lady

See Also:
Read the 21-Page Ruling

Three Racketeering Lawsuits Filed

12 comments:

  1. I am absolutely outraged!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you, Laurie Roberts, for keeping Marie Long's exploitation at the hands of the system in the public forum.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The system is designed to protect those thiefs. Of course they find "no wrong doings" because no one is permitted to see except the perpetrators! The number speak loud and clear for wrong doing!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. The good ole boy's club strikes again.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sounds familiar. No "accounting" when the money is landing in the probate attorneys' hands. We must stop the madness! Thanks, NASGA, for keeping us informed. Maybe Nashville's "disabled" needs to pay a little visit to this jurisdiction, huh?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Every case this judge presides over should be investigated.

    Is guardianship for the sake of enriching the attorneys "in the best interst of the ward"?

    NO!

    ReplyDelete
  7. If Marie Long were Judge Lindsay Ellis' mother, you can bet the fees would not have been approved!

    ReplyDelete
  8. BALONEY, judge. If anybody ran up the costs, you let them.

    Shame on you Judge Lindsay Ellis! Shame on you!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anybody have a clue how much campaign contributions might be involved here? or could there be other "incentives" so everyone who is feeding til they explode keeping everyone involved, except the ward of course, happy and fat?

    Is there anybody out there who thinks guardianship is working in the best interest of the ward?

    Volunteers to become a ward?

    ReplyDelete
  10. How could it be in Marie Longs best interest, starting with an estate over a million dollars just 5 yrs ago? To be financially broke when she needs health care more than ever due to her age... this is an outrage. Attorney's, court appointed guardians, judges all lined their pockets at Marie's expense. Shame on them!

    ReplyDelete
  11. So, what Sun Valley is saying is that Marie Long has some "worth" as long as she has money. And at the point that she's indigent, then she's more trouble than worth.

    I am hopeful that the racketeering suit is successful. These sob's need to be held accountable.

    ReplyDelete
  12. This is horrible! Then the fiends release her when the money runs out! There is absolutely no compassion in this corrupt system. It is all about "Where's the money?"

    ReplyDelete