The Vegas Voice: Our Rana Appointed to Nevada Supreme Court's Guardianship Commission

The telephone called ID said Nevada Supreme Court but our Vegas Voice political editor had no idea when she answered the telephone that the voice on the other end would be Nevada Chief Justice James. W. Hardesty.

Judge Hardesty invited her to serve and be a member of the newly created  "Commission to Study the Administration of Guardianship in Nevada's Court."  The Commission will review the process for creating guardianships, the court documentation and tracking and any resources available or needed to assist Nevada's courts on administering guardianships.

Commissioner members will assist in hearing testimony, writing proposed rules and developing a new model for Nevada guardianships.  AS always, we'll keep our readers updated!

Congratulations, Rana!


Source:
The Vegas Voice - July issue

Press Release: [Nevada] Supreme Court Names Guardianship Commission Members

Nevada Appellate Courts/Administrative Office of the Courts

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Michael S. Sommermeyer
msommermeyer@nvcourts.nv.gov | (702) 486-3232

Supreme Court Names Guardianship Commission Members

Carson City, June 26, 2015 – Chief Justice James W. Hardesty has appointed 25 members of a Commission created by the Nevada Supreme Court in May to study guardianships in the state.

Between now and the end of December, the Commission to Study the Administration of Guardianships in Nevada's Courts will review the processes for creating guardianships and conservatorships in Nevada, stakeholder accountability, judicial training, court documentation and tracking, and any resources available or needed to assist Nevada's courts in administrating guardianships.

Chief Justice Hardesty will serve as chairperson and was authorized by the Supreme Court to appoint up to 30 Commission members who speak for the guardianship system. The Commission membership is as follows:

Members
James W. Hardesty, Chief Justice Nevada Supreme Court Frances Doherty, Judge Second Judicial District Court Department 12 Cynthia Dianne Steel, Judge Eighth Judicial District Court Department G Egan Walker, Judge Second Judicial District Court Department 2 Michael C. Sprinkle, Assemblyman Nevada Legislature Trudy Andrews Pacifica Senior Living Deborah Bookout Legal Aid of Southern Nevada Rana Goodman The Vegas Voice Jay P. Raman Clark County District Attorney’s Office Terri Russell KOLO Channel 8 Kim Spoon Guardianship Services of Nevada, Inc. Susan Sweikert Victim’s Advocate	Michael Gibbons, Chief Judge Nevada Court of Appeals Nancy Porter, Judge Fourth Judicial District Court Department 1 William Voy, Judge Eighth Judicial District Department A Becky Harris, Senator Nevada Legislature Glenn E. Trowbridge, Assemblyman Nevada Legislature Julie Arnold Southern Nevada Senior Law Program Kathleen Buchanan Clark County Public Guardian Susan Hoy National Guardian Services, LLC Kim Rowe Maupin, Cox, and Legoy David Spitzer Washoe Legal Services Timothy Sutton Nye County District Attorney’s Office Elyse Tyrell Private Attorney
Ex Officio Member
Christine Smith University of Nevada, Las Vegas William S. Boyd School of Law

The first meeting of the Commission is expected to be held in mid-July. Commission members will listen to public testimony, write proposed rules, and develop a new model for Nevada guardianships within Nevada Revised Statutes Chapter (NRS) 159 and court rules, policies, and procedures.

The Commission is expected to make its recommendations to the Supreme Court by December 31, 2015.

###

Michael S. Sommermeyer
Office of Public Information
Administrative Office of the Courts
Supreme Court of Nevada
200 Lewis Avenue, 17th Floor
Las Vegas, NV, 89101-6204

Phone: 702/486-3232

Mobile: 702/727-6731

Fax: 702/486-3877

msommermeyer@nvcourts.nv.gov

Clark County Nevada Hearing Master Jon Horheim Continues to Rule on Cases

A nearly year-long Contact 13 Investigation has led to many changes in a system that was supposed to protect our most vulnerable citizens.

Chief Investigator Darcy Spears exposed how the guardianship system in Clark County's Family Court allowed private guardians to double-bill clients and drain their estates.

For years that activity was approved by one county employee who wasn't even a judge. Hearing Master Jon Norheim was responsible for nearly 9000 adult guardianship cases.

But after we exposed how he was making questionable decisions on the bench and failing to hold guardians accountable, all of those cases were taken away from him.

The adult guardianship caseload was assigned to Judge Cynthia Dianne Steel earlier this month. But Norheim is still on the bench. He continues to oversee guardianship cases for minors.There are nearly 7000 of those cases. And he's still deciding on just over a thousand "civil commitment" cases--where a court must determine if a person is mentally ill and needs to be placed in a facility.

The court says guardianship cases involving children have not come under fire the way adult cases have.

The entire system remains under review by a newly created state guardianship commission.

Source:
Guardianship Hearing Master Continues to Rule on Cases

Steve Miller: Breaking News From Nevada: Changes Within Clark County Probate Court!

Incompetent "Guardianship Commissioner" Jon Norheim, Along With "Juiced" Judges Charles Hoskin And Art Ritchie Dumped From Guardianship Court! To be replaced by longest serving District Court Judge Dianne Steel!

PRESS RELEASE
from Eighth Judicial District Court: The Eighth Judicial District Court Issued an Administrative Order today, to transfer the adult guardianship caseload to the longest-serving District Court Judge Dianne Steel, in department G of the Family Division.

The Order coincides with a Petition issued today, by Nevada Supreme Court Chief Justice James Hardesty, with the concurrence of Eighth District Chief Judge David Baker and Second District Chief Judge David Hardy, to consider the establishment of a commission to study the creation and administration of guardianships in Nevada courts.

The proposed Guardianship Commission will examine policies and procedures currently used and provide recommendations, based on national best-practices, on how they can be improved.

 “I am committed to the court’s goal to protect those impacted by intellectual disabilities and diseases associated with aging.“ said Judge Steel. “Through experience, I know how difficult these cases are for families, and I will work hard to ensure that the court is handling these cases in a manner in accordance with the laws established to protect families dealing with guardianship.”

 Judge Steel’s career history includes more than 18 years on the bench, handling a variety of case types including guardianship. She has notable service on numerous committees and professional organizations and a long list of professional accomplishments including: a Juvenile Dependency Model Court, work on the One Family - One Judge initiative, the Donna's House Visitation Exchange Program, the Judicial Studies Program, the Family Self-Help Center Project, the Coroner Visitation Program, the Youth Eagle Leadership Project, the Adults in Juvenile Delinquency Court handbook, the restructure of NRS Chapter 62 on Juvenile Delinquency and the promotion of the Jury Services-CASA Recruitment Program.

"Judge Steel’s depth of experience and knowledge of the guardianship process will be a tremendous asset as we build citizen trust and confidence in the guardianship process.” said Judge Barker. “We are moving quickly, in coordination with the Nevada Supreme Court, to take strategic action within fiscal realities, to get guardianship cases in line with national best-practices.”

The court examined the assignment of the guardianship caseload using a hearing master/judge model and communicated with state and nationally respected judicial experts and determined that such cases should be assigned to a single District Court judge. Department G’s existing caseload will be reassigned to and equitably distributed among all the remaining judicial departments that are assigned civil domestic cases in the Family Division.

The transfers and assignments will take effect on June 1, 2015.

 The Eighth Judicial District Court is taking action to implement best practices for guardianship cases as established by the National Association for Court Management. A guardianship hotline is available to take concerns and questions tel:702-671-4614 and an email link is also available at "mailto:guardianshipcompliance@clarkcountycourts.us" for those who have concerns.

Nevada Eighth Judicial District Court is the busiest court in the state. Fifty-two judges preside over nearly 100,000 criminal, civil and family cases that are filed each year in District Court. The Nevada Eighth Judicial District Court judges and staff continuously work to develop new ideas, maximize efficiencies and improve access to justice.

BACKGROUND ON DAMAGE DONE BY NORHEIM: http://www.stevemiller4lasvegas.com/ShaferFinancialRecords2.html

Prior to being appointed Hearing Master by Family Court Judge Charles Hoskin, Jon Norheim was a mob attorney.

 In a photo (left) taken by the late Buffalo Jim Barrier, Norheim is shown with his clients (right), and Ralph Rizzolo (left). At the time of the photo, Norheim was being paid to harass Barrier in a failed attempt to make him move his auto repair shop so Rizzolo could expand his topless bar the Crazy Horse Too.

It is not presently known whether Norheim will return to his previous profession.

~Steve Miller

Clark County (Nevada) Leaders Hear More About Potential Abuse in Guardianship System

Contact 13 continues to investigate allegations of potential abuse in the county's guardianship court after we heard from several families claiming the system can do more harm than good.

Clark County Commissioners are listening.

Today [May 5] they followed up with a promise to find out what can be done to better protect people who are deemed incompetent and become wards of the state.

District Court Chief Judge David Barker told commissioners he's also taking immediate action establishing a guardianship hotline to hear people's concerns.

The number for the guardianship hotline is (702) 671-4614.

And the Nevada Supreme Court is forming a high-level Guardianship Commission to look into problems.

Commissioner Steve Sisolak says the message for families who say they've been impacted by the system is clear. "We understand what their issues have been, issues that they raised, we're concerned about those. They've got our attention. It's been elevated to the highest level we can in the state of Nevada which is the Nevada Supreme Court to address those issues."

Source:
County Leaders Hear More About Potential Abuse in Guardianship System

Clark County Nevada Now Has a Guardianship Hotline

By COLTON LOCHHEAD
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
Clark County now has a hotline to help manage calls about problems with the guardianship system.  That number is 702-671-4614.

Another option is sending an email to guardianshipcompliance@clarkcountycourts.us.

Chief Judge David Barker

The county’s chief judge said so many concerns have been raised that the hotline will help streamline the complaint process.

“Our fundamental responsibility is to promote citizens’ trust and confidence in the guardianship process,” Chief Judge David Barker said Tuesday at a Clark County Commission meeting.

Long-running problems with the system that handles about 8,500 cases each year were laid out in a series of Review-Journal articles published in April.

A guardian is appointed after someone is deemed mentally incompetent and declared a ward of the county. In most cases, that guardian is a family member, friend or county social worker. In many cases, especially where the person has substantial wealth, a private professional guardian can be appointed.

Cases highlighted in the Review-Journal showed a lack of oversight by the courts that allowed people who were wards of the county to lose hundreds of thousands of dollars to their private professional guardians. In those cases, the court failed to enforce state laws, such as the requirement to file a yearly accounting of money spent on behalf of wards, and ignored the wishes of wards and their families.

Barker requested funding for both a compliance officer position and an investigator that he hopes will add better monitoring to individual guardianship cases.

County Commission Chair Steve Sisolak said after the meeting the county will have to determine if they can afford to fund both positions.“I think the county staff was supportive of the compliance officer,” Sisolak said. “But I have no idea about the investigator.”

Barker said during the meeting he has reached out to national experts as well as Washoe County Chief Judge David Hardy, a proponent for guardianship reform, for insight and ideas for a panel aimed at addressing guardianship problems statewide.

Clark County in April called for a Blue Ribbon Panel to analyze guardianship problems locally. Nevada Supreme Court Chief Justice James Hardesty said Friday he will push for a statewide committee.

Barker also reiterated his desire to improve the process by further formalizing the complaint process, standardizing forms and procedures, and implementing a guardianship monitoring system.“In cooperation with this commission, the judicial branch is actively addressing the guardianship issues raised and will pursue the best avenues and resources to develop solutions and improve the handling of guardianship cases.”

Sisolak said the county will look to see if they have the ability to fund the positions Hardy was requesting.

Source:
There's Now a Hotline to Call With Guardianship Complaints

See Also:
Nevada Supreme Court Chief Justice Wants Statewide Review of Guardianships

Nevada Supreme Court chief justice wants statewide review of guardianship



Nevada Supreme Court Justice James W. Hardesty

By COLTON LOCHHEAD

LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL

Nevada’s top judge wants to dig into problems plaguing the guardianship system far beyond the Las Vegas Valley.

The Clark County Commission recommended April 21 that a local blue ribbon panel examine issues that have left some of its most vulnerable constituents destitute. But Nevada Supreme Court Chief Justice James Hardesty said the issue is affecting more than just the state’s most populous county.

“I think this is an issue that would be of statewide concern,” Hardesty told the Las Vegas Review-Journal on Friday.

Instead of a local panel, Hardesty wants to convene a committee that will include people from across the state to examine the program.

Clark County Manager Don Burnette said Friday in an email to county commissioners that he recommends going with Hardesty’s proposal rather than convening a local blue ribbon panel. He did not respond to requests for comment.

Long-running problems with the program that handles about 8,500 cases each year were laid out in a series of Review-Journal articles published in April.

A guardian is appointed after someone is deemed mentally incompetent and declared a ward of the county. In most cases, that guardian is a family member, friend or county social worker. In many cases, especially where the person has substantial wealth, a private professional guardian can be appointed.

Cases highlighted in the Review-Journal showed a lack of oversight by the courts that allowed people who were wards of the county to lose hundreds of thousands of dollars to their private professional guardians. In those cases, the court failed to enforce state laws, such as the requirement to file a yearly accounting of money spent on behalf of wards, and ignored the wishes of wards and their families.

Hardesty said after several recent talks with the chief judges in Nevada’s two urban counties, Clark and Washoe, he decided to push for the statewide committee to solve the inherent issues surrounding it.

The proposed statewide panel would need to look at the entire guardianship process, Hardesty said. Some of the main concerns, he said, include ensuring the courts properly monitor guardians to ensure better supervision and enforcement of annual accountings, and providing proper court representation for wards during the process.

“That is our responsibility to implement those statutes and provide for those processes that assure accountability to the parties involved in those proceedings,” Hardesty said.

Hardesty said the statewide panel would include guardians, county personnel, elder and ward rights advocates, among others. It would dig into the problem and make recommendations for reforms of the system.

Clark County Commission Chairman Steve Sisolak, who initially pushed for the local panel two weeks ago, said the Supreme Court’s involvement will make it easier to fix problems. Commissioners were assured they’ll be included in discussions.

“They’ll be able to access resources that we couldn’t otherwise,” Sisolak said. “I look forward to getting to work.”

Hardesty said he will file the administrative docket required to start his panel next week. The Supreme Court then would begin discussions about the panel around the first week of June, Hardesty said.

Commissioners will discuss the development Tuesday at their regular meeting at 9 a.m. at the Clark County Government Center, 500 S. Grand Central Parkway.

Full Article & Source:
Nevada Supreme Court chief justice wants statewide review of guardianship

See Also:
County Commission Probing "Frightening" Abuses in Guardianship System

Steve Miller: There are No Criminal Penalties for Guardians Who Steal From Wards of the Court

The Lieutenant on Tuesday, April 21, told the Board of Commissioners that there are NO criminal penalties for the for-hire guardians who exploit their elderly or disabled wards.

The NRS Chapter 159 Guardianship statutes he cited detail only what and how guardians are to operate. What these statutes purposefully do not include, as most NRS statutes do, is any description of penalties, fines, or reference to how the guardians can be prosecuted or made accountable criminally for not following the statutes.

That's the catch. NRS 159 does say the "court" can have the guardian "cited," but that's it.

As the Lieutenant said to the commissioners, it's all in the "courts jurisdiction," and he is correct. However, the Family Court is obviously controlled by several crooked guardians, and people like Judges Charles Hostin, William Voy, Art Ritchie, and Commissioner Jon Norhiem have proven to ALWAYS side with the guardians and their attorneys, and won't punish them under ANY circumstances.

Also, to discourage family members from taking their court appointed guardian to court, NRS 159 allows the judges or Norheim to force the family to pay the guardian's exorbitant attorney fees if the judge or commissioner rules that the family's complaint had no merit.

How was NRS 159 enacted without penalties?

Jared Shafer owns hundreds of A-frame political advertising signs placed on vacant lots during elections. As an ex-politician, I can personally attest that you MUST have these signs in order to be elected to the assembly or state senate in Nevada. Without them, you'll likely lose the election. 

Nevada state assemblyman and senators need these signs to stay in office, and for this reason many have voted to weaken laws that could have put people like Jared Shafer behind bars many times over.

It's as though Shafer and his cronies have found a way to commit the perfect crime.

~Steve Miller

See Also:
Police Lt. Explains How Family Court Steals From Wards

Police Lt. Explains How Family Court Steals From Wards

LVMPD Lt. James Weiskopf tells Clark County Commission on April 21, 2015, how appointed "Guardianship Commissioner" Jon Norheim, Family Court Judge Charles Hoskin, and certain for-hire guardians rob the estates of wards of the court.

Source:
Police Lt. Explains How Family Court Steals From Wards

See Also:
Watch the hearing in its entirety - scroll to 00:38:31 to 02:10:21 and then public statements again at 02:52.03

County Commission Probing "Frightening" Abuses in Guardianship System

Many questions but few concrete answers emerged today as Clark County commissioners probed what they called "frightening" and "appalling" abuses in the private guardian system intended to protect the elderly and infirm.

More than 8,000 people in Clark County are designated wards of court-appointed guardians, who oversee the care and finances of those who aren't mentally or physically fit to care for themselves. In the majority of those cases, the guardian is a family member or friend, District Court Chief Judge David Barker said today, but many are placed under the supervision of for-profit private guardians who charge fees for their services.

It's those private guardians who have come under increasing scrutiny in recent weeks following a story in the Las Vegas Review-Journal that detailed the case of one guardian accused of draining her ward’s estate of nearly half a million dollars.

Commission Chairman
Steve Sisolak

Commission Chairman Steve Sisolak said he's received dozens of calls from residents concerning "unbelievable" stories of private guardians "manipulating the system to drain their (wards') assets."

Commissioners attempted to dig into the system during their meeting today, hearing reports from Barker and other staff about the lax licensing requirements for private guardians and the lack of oversight on the fees they charge to wards.

The guardianship system is run out of Family Court, with the entirety of the caseload being handled by a single hearing master and one Family Court judge.

A person is entered into the guardianship system following a petition by a family member, doctor or someone else in a position of responsibility for that person.

Sisolak said that once a person is deemed in need of a guardian, "it's virtually impossible to get out."

Elizabeth Indig

During public testimony, Las Vegas resident Elizabeth Indig shared the story of her 93-year-old mother who was put under the care of a private guardian in 2012. Indig said her mother was entered into the system without Indig's knowledge or consent and that she's been unable to reclaim legal responsibility for her mother since. During that time, Indig said the guardian charged excessive fees to her mother's estate while failing to pay bills like her homeowners association dues, leading to her mother's house being foreclosed upon and forcing her to move to a nursing home.

These concerns were echoed by Metro Police Lt. James Weiskopf, who said he's heard similar complaints during his time at the department's abuse and neglect detail.

Metro Police Lt. James Weiskopf

"The complaints we're hearing from our agency, the family members aren't even aware that this Family Court is occurring or that a private guardian has been appointed for the estate," Weiskopf said.

He said that when family members petition to take control back from the private guardian, they feel like their testimony is ignored by the court's hearing master.

"The next thing the family knows, the private guardian has total access to the finances of these wards. What the private guardians are doing is charging these fees for all the different services, that gets charged against the ward's estate," he said.

As the ward's estate is depleted, the private guardian goes to Family Court for permission to sell assets like cars, homes or other valuables to continue funding their services, according to complaints Weiskopf received.

"The goal is to create liquid assets so that way these private guardians can continue to charge their fees," he said. "That's the overall gist of the complaints we're getting ... that there's no oversight of these private guardians who are charging these ridiculous fees."

Weiskopf said Metro is limited in its ability to investigate these types of complaints because the court is responsible for oversight and there are limited regulations on what types of fees can be charged by private guardians.

Commissioners weren't presented any immediate solutions for solving the perceived problem in the private guardianship system, but they promised to continue looking into the issue in search of abuses and potential fixes.

Sisolak requested that a task force be formed to investigate the system and said the county's audit committee would look to review financial records submitted by guardians to the court.

Barker said one potential fix could be to take the guardianship system out of the hands of a single hearing master and judge and instead spread them around to multiple judges.

Another potential fix could be to add staff to the county's Public Guardian Office. That government office provides similar services as private guardians, but currently only has six employees handling about 300 cases, a fraction of the total number of guardianships in the county.

"If there is private guardian abuse out there, we should go after a couple right away. We don't have to wait for the overall analysis," Commissioner Larry Brown said. "If we can start going after some of the most flagrant abuses, I think we can start to build back the public trust as we ... improve the system."

Source:
County Commission Probing "Frightening" Abuses in Guardianship System

See Also:
Watch the video of the hearing.  Scroll to:  00:38:31 to 02:10:21 and then to 02:52.03

Clark County Nevada Commissioners Want Reform of "Appalling" Guardianship Program

By COLTON LOCHHEAD
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
Calling Clark County’s court-appointed guardianship operation “appalling” and “frightening,” county commissioners on Tuesday called for a sweeping overhaul of the system.

While no formal decisions were made, commissioners called for a blue ribbon panel to examine the shortcomings and gaps in the system that leave elder and mentally incapacitated residents vulnerable to Private Professional Guardians looking to profit off their infirmity.

Long-running problems with the program that oversees about 8,500 cases each year were laid bare in a series of Las Vegas Review-Journal articles published April 12 and 13.

Cases highlighted by the Review-Journal showed a lack of oversight by the courts that allowed vulnerable people to lose hundreds of thousands of dollars to their Private Professional Guardians while wards of the county. In those cases, the court failed to enforce current state laws, such as the requirement file a yearly accounting of money spent on behalf of wards, and ignored the wishes of wards and their families.

Two commissioners called for immediately ousting Guardianship Commissioner Jon Norheim, the county employee who oversees the troubled operation for the District Court.

“Maybe we need to remove Norheim,” Commissioner Tom Collins said during the meeting. Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani echoed those comments minutes later, saying “I would get rid of him now, and put into effect some individuals who will work with the families.”

“There appears to be no oversight,” Commission Chair Steve Sisolak added.

Sisolak said each commissioner received dozens of phone calls in the wake of the Review-Journal reports from people claiming to be victims of guardianship abuse.

“These families are in the middle of nightmares,” he said. “If there’s truth to some of these allegations being made, someone deserves to be in prison.”

In a written statement to the Review-Journal, Norheim said he is “fully and completely committed to transparency with respect to responding to these concerns. I welcome a full and complete review of the record and welcome any suggestions to improve the system and my performance.”


District Court Chief Judge
David Barker

For over an hour Tuesday District Court Chief Judge David Barker answered dozens of pointed questions from commissioners about the guardianship process. Barker said that getting a compliance officer for the court who could investigate abuse complaints would go a long way toward fixing problems.

Sisolak said the entire system needs an immediate overhaul, and asked the county manager to recommend by May 5 the membership of the blue ribbon panel.

“You’re talking about people who are the most vulnerable, and they’re being made victims,” Sisolak said. “Something needs to have happened yesterday, as far as I’m concerned.”

The issue made Collins recall a personal experience in dealing with guardianship.
Collins said he helped a friend whose grandmother was trapped in the system. He made several phone calls to the court trying to figure out why she was in guardianship and why the grandson couldn’t be guardian. It took seven months to finally get her out of the guardian’s hands, Collins said.

But had he not been an elected official, Collins said, things likely would have gone differently.

“It was because my title of County Commissioner,” he said. “If I was just Joe Blow out there at sea, I would not have gotten the time of day.”

Commissioner Lawrence Weekly said the inquiry needs to determine why widespread complaints from the families to court officials have fallen for so long on deaf ears at the court.

“Why has this been a best-kept secret?” Weekly asked.

In addition to the County Commission’s action, state lawmakers on Tuesday approved two guardian reform bills.

Senate Bill 262, which would make it easier for people who live in other states to become guardians of family members in Nevada, passed the Senate Tuesday without debate or an opposing vote, and now goes to the Assembly for consideration.

Assembly Bill 325, which sponsor Assemblyman Mike Sprinkle, D-Sparks, said would move Nevada toward professional licensing for those engaged in the business of serving as a private professional guardian, won approval in the Assembly on Tuesday and now goes to the Senate. Guardians now only have to pass a written certification test to be approved by the court.

The vote was 30 to 12 in favor, with all the no votes coming from Republicans.

Source:
Clark County Commissioners Want Reform of Appalling Guardianship Program

See Also:
Watch the video of the hearing.  Scroll to:  00:38:31 to 02:10:21 and then to 02:52.03

Courts, Lawmakers Working on Protection for its Weakest Citizens

Guardianship Problems are Widely Reported but Seldom Fixed

Escape Was Only Option for Old Soldier Trapped in Guardian System

Clark County's Private Guardians May Protect - or Just Steal and Abuse

Steve Miller: Hoskin and Norheim - No Shows at County Commission Hearing

Family Court Chief Judge
Charles Hoskin

At today's Clark County Board of Commissioners meeting to discuss exploitation by Family Court appointed for-hire private guardians, Family Court was not represented after the two most controversial figures in the family court system did not appear as scheduled.



Commissioner Jon Norheim

Family Court Chief Judge Charles Hoskin and his appointed "Guardianship Commissioner" Jon Norheim were conspicuous by their absence at this morning's hearing even though they were officially invited to attend. and their names were mentioned dozens of times by witnesses and others who testified.

Other no-shows included private professional guardian Jared E. Shafer of Professional Fiduciaries of Souther Nevada (PFSN, Inc.) who was often identified during the hearing as the main perpetrator of alleged guardianship fraud in Southern Nevada; his protege April Parks who witnesses described as another exploiter of the elderly and infirm, and former PFSN, Inc. guardian Patience Bristol who is currently serving a 5 - 8 sentence in Nevada State Prison for elder exploitation.

Watch the video of the hearing. Scroll to: 00:38:31 to 02:10:21 and then to 02:52.03

Jared E. Shafer

Clark County Nevada Commissioners Demand Answers From Guardianship Court

Appalling, frightening and plagued by problems. That's how county commissioners described our Family Court Guardianship system in a first-of-its kind hearing Tuesday morning.

It comes in the wake of a Contact 13 Investigation into alleged guardianship abuses.

"Ghandi once said, 'The measure of a society is how it treats the vulnerable.' You are failing the elderly in Clark County," Julie Belshe told commissioners during the public comment period of the meeting.

Family members, concerned citizens and representatives from Las Vegas police and District Court painted what commissioners called a frightening picture of the system that's supposed to protect the most vulnerable.

Comm. Susan Brager

"I'm a little concerned," said Commissioner Susan Brager. "I have a 96-year-old dad that seems very healthy to me, but I wouldn't want a guardian to get a hold of him."

When someone is deemed unable to take care of themselves, Family Court can make them a ward and appoint a private, for-profit guardian instead of allowing family members to care for their loved ones.


Rana Goodman

"Once a guardian has been appointed, they literally become that person," explained senior citizen advocate Rana Goodman. "They take over everything they own. Their bank account, their trust account, their stock portfolio, everything they have."

Elizabeth Indig said that's what happened to her mother.

"And she should be at home," Indig addressed the County Commissioners fighting back tears. "She had a home. She had her things. Every time I visit her she says either, bring her home or kill her."

In 2012, Indig said her mother fell in her driveway, went to the hospital and then to a rehab facility before she was supposed to come home.

"With no notification or discussion, a woman named April Parks was granted guardianship of my mother by Commissioner Jon Norheim with nobody in attendance because I, the only daughter, was never served and had no idea of the hearing," Indig explained.

There are 8,650 guardianship cases in Clark County. Between 2,500-3,000 of them are active. All are being heard by one man, Hearing Master Jon Norheim. Police have been getting complaints about how Norheim deals with family members.

"He ignores their testimony or doesn't allow them to speak. He won't hold evidentiary hearings," Lt. James Weiskopf told the county leaders. "And then he makes a ruling and it goes to a private guardian."

Homes can be sold for pennies on the dollar. Private guardians can drain wards' bank accounts. And there's no oversight aside from Family Court Chief Judge Charles Hoskin.

"And the complaints we get from the citizens is that Judge Hoskin will rubber stamp it and say Norheim made appropriate decisions or Judge Hoskin doesn't hear the family's complaint," Lt. Weiskopf said to commissioners.

Neither Norheim nor Hoskin attended the County Commission meeting. Commissioner Susan Brager called them, "Little gods making decisions they shouldn't."

District Court Chief Judge David Barker acknowledged long-standing problems with the guardianship system.

"We need to make sure we can identify those who are most vulnerable, protect them and hold those who might be taking advantage of them to account," said Judger Barker before the commissioners.

Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani said abusive private guardians need to be prosecuted and family members and finances returned to their loved ones.

County leaders also said based on what they've heard, Guardianship Commissioner Norheim needs to go.

"A lot of them didn't realize this was going on and yeah, I think something's finally going to be done," said senior advocate Goodman.

Commissioner Chairman Steve Sisolak will create a blue ribbon panel to audit guardianship cases. And Chief Judge Barker is working to get a Guardianship Compliance Officer to independently review cases and help frustrated family members.

District Court provided this statement in response to the issues raised in Tuesday's meeting:

The Eighth Judicial District Court takes the concerns raised today regarding the handling of guardianship cases very seriously. The court will take a judicious approach to look at all the facts of the issues raised and then respond accordingly. We look forward to participation with the blue ribbon panel to bring the handling of these cases in line with the National Association for Court Management's best practices.
 

Guardianship cases can be highly contentious, emotional and difficult when attempting to reach amicable terms for all parties. The court follows the law to give preference to rely on family members to serve as guardians; but, each case has to be considered in light of what is in the best interest of the ward. A family has the recourse of appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court if they disagree with decisions made in guardianship cases.

We look forward to the swift approval of the requested guardian compliance administrator who will implement the best practices as outlined by the National Association for Court Management.

 

Judge David Barker attended the open hearing today. As the chief judge, he is entrusted with the responsibility to handle matters of concern with the court. Judge Barker is committed to ensuring clarity and instilling public trust in the process of handling guardianship cases.

The court respects the input the METRO lieutenant provided today and we look forward to further dialogue with METRO on insight that they can provide.
 

Protecting those impacted by intellectual disabilities and diseases associated with aging is essential to the well-being of our families and community in Clark County. The court will continue to pursue avenues and resources to develop solutions and improve the handling of guardianship cases.
 

Source:
Clark County Commissioners Demand Answers from Guardianship Court