The estate of a woman whose special needs trust was drained under questionable circumstances prevailed Wednesday before the 7th
Circuit Court of Appeals. The founder of the organization that took the
money is a suspended Indiana attorney facing charges that he stole from
other clients’ trusts. The organization must now repay the estate more
than $200,000.
The court reversed Southern District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt and
ordered the National Foundation for Special Needs Integrity Inc. to pay
the estate of Missouri woman Theresa Givens $234,181.23 plus prejudgment
interest.
“We respectfully disagree with our colleague on the district court,” Circuit Judge David Hamilton wrote for the panel in National
Foundation for Special Needs Integrity, Inc. v. Devon Reese, as
Personal Representative for the Estate of Theresa A. Givens, 17-1817. The 7th
Circuit held that Pratt’s ruling that the estate’s claim against
Special Needs Integrity were barred by the doctrine of laches “was based
on clearly erroneous findings of fact.”
Further, Hamilton wrote, “We must note that the Foundation’s (former) counsel, (Kenneth) Shane Service, testified that he intentionally drafted (a section of Special Needs Integrity’s agreement dealing with distributions upon the death of a beneficiary) to confuse Missouri government officials.”
Givens had set up a special needs trust with about $255,000 in
settlement proceeds from a lawsuit related to injuries she received from
dialysis treatments. She died shortly after the trust was established,
and her children were told by Special Needs Integrity that there would
be no money left in Givens’ account. Hamilton, though, noted in the
opinion that Service also had testified that Givens’ “main concern was
always about her children.”
While the children received none of the roughly $234,000 that
remained in Givens’ trust when she died in 2011, the foundation claimed
the money after initially informing Givens’ children there would be no
money because the proceeds most likely would be consumed by Medicaid
refunds. After the children questioned distributions to the foundation,
Special Needs Integrity filed a declaratory judgment action against the
estate in April 2015, which Pratt awarded.
But the 7th Circuit found the contract Givens signed to be
ambiguous and found no reason to believe Givens intended her money to
go to the foundation rather than to her children. “The Foundation
provided Givens with a service by managing her assets for what turned
out to be just a few weeks before she died — a service for which Givens
paid the Foundation” Hamilton wrote. “There is no plausible reason she
would have intended to give it all the money that might be left upon her
death.
“… We thus conclude that the agreement is best construed as providing
that the remainder funds go to the Estate of Theresa Givens,” the panel
held in reversing and ordering the foundation to pay the estate
$234,181.23 plus prejudgment interest.
During oral arguments
in September, Lewis & Kappes attorney David Gray, who represented
Special Needs Integrity, faced tough questioning from Hamilton.
“You don’t even have records of a decision” by Service or by other
foundation representatives to take the money, Hamilton said. “You just
have money shifted from one account to another in 2013 and then again in
2014.
“… Why should we simply not decide it’s an ambiguous document that
needs to be construed against the drafter and order distribution?” he
asked Gray near the end of his presentation.
“If laches doesn’t work, nothing prevents you from doing it,” Gray responded.
Meanwhile, Service is awaiting trial on theft charges in Lawrence County, where he is accused of stealing
more than $85,000 from two former clients’ special needs trusts.
Authorities believe Service may have other victims in different states.
An Indiana State Police investigator said in September officials were
looking into the possibility of “numerous victims in multiple states.”
Service’s next court date on the Lawrence County charges is set for March 21.
Full Article & Source:
7th Circuit reverses, orders special needs trust group to pay estate
I am sorry the victim didn't live to see this victory.
ReplyDelete