Judge Grants $3M to Incapacitated Adult Film Actress’ Mom

A judge has approved a $3 million settlement on behalf of a woman and her daughter, who is a former adult film actress but now-incapacitated, against the Malibu rehabilitation center where her offspring allegedly was left in a vegetative state in 2024 because oxygen to her brain was curtailed.

Santa Monica Superior Court Judge Susan Bryant-Deason gave her nod to the accord involving defendant Summit Malibu after attorneys for Yesenia Lara Cooper, mother of Litzy Lara Banuelos, accepted a reduction in their requested fees to be deducted out of the settlement from $1.2 million to $1 million. Banuelos was addicted to ketamine and previously had a failed stint in a drug rehabilitation facility, according to her attorneys’ court papers. Both she and her mother were plaintiffs in the case.

A judge’s approval of the settlement was needed because Banuelos is incapacitated.

In a previous sworn declaration in support of the lawsuit resolution, plaintiffs’ attorney James A. Morris Jr. said hard work was involved in reaching the accord.

“Having lived and breathed this case for nearly two years, I can state with confidence that Ms. Banuelos is significantly injured, but that this case was no slam dunk,” Morris said. “No one knows what exactly happened to Ms. Banuelos or whether defendants could have done anything different to prevent the injuries from happening, given Ms. Banuelos’ fragile state as a ketamine addict when she entered their facility.” 

The lack of oxygen to Banuelos’ brain has caused an anoxic brain injury from which she will never recover, according to Morris, who further says that she cannot move her body and is “effectively frozen.” She sometimes opens her eyes, but does not always track movements, and she occasionally grunts, according to Morris.

At one point specialists offered the theory that a latent infection Willis could have possibly gotten while in the adult film industry may have caused her health issues, Morris says.

Banuelos was known in the industry as Emily Willis. She was a Penthouse Pet of the Month in May 2019 and won multiple Adult Video News awards, including Female Performer of the Year in 2021.

In their previous court papers, Summit Malibu lawyers said Banuelos shared blame for what occurred to her health.

“It is undisputed that during her stay, Litzy had refused to follow medical recommendations and take her medications,” according to the Summit Malibu attorneys’ pleadings. “She refused to go to urgent care or the hospital voluntarily, despite being encouraged to do so by (Summit Malibu).”

While Cooper contended that Summit Malibu should have forced her daughter to go to urgent care or a hospital despite the young woman’s refusal, the facility had no authority to do so, according to the rehab center’s lawyers.

Summit Malibu’s attorneys also said there was no evidence of any negligence on the staff’s part regarding Banuelos’ care given that Cooper’s own lawsuit states her daughter was regularly monitored and seen by the staff.

Nonetheless, Cooper alleged Summit Malibu was lax in her daughter’s care. Willis, now 27, was at the facility for treatment of a ketamine addiction.

“As a direct and proximate result of (Summit Malibu’s) neglect, abandonment, recklessness and negligence in failing to provide care and treatment for Litzy, she suffered irreversible brain damage and permanent physical and mental incapacity, pain, suffering and emotional distress, among other damages,” the suit filed in December 2024 stated. 

Full Article & Source:
Judge Grants $3M to Incapacitated Adult Film Actress’ Mom

 

What does legally incapacitated mean? Wendy Williams berates her caretaker for leaving her mobility scooter unattended on the street

By Jenel Treza Albuquerque

Wendy Williams ripped into her caretakers for leaving her stranded without her mobility scooter after her son's college graduation dinner last week. Per TMZ, the incident was caught on camera by the We In Miami Podcast crew.

In the footage uploaded on Wednesday, a visibly disgruntled Williams can be seen accusing her caretakers of leaving her scooter unattended on the street. The 60-year-old was attending her son's convocation, as Kevin Jr. received his diploma from Florida International University.

Wendy Williams, who was diagnosed with aphasia and frontotemporal dementia in 2023, has been declared legally incapacitated. Per the Ashmore Law Firm's official website,

"An incapacitated person means a person under the age of eighteen (18) years, or an adult individual who is unable to provide food, clothing, or shelter or unable to manage their financial affairs. An individual may be declared medically incapacitated, but that has no legal effect. Until there is a finding of legal incapacity, that individual maintains all of their civil rights and enjoys all of the same privileges of a fully capacitated individual."

---

Wendy Williams berates her caretakers for alleged inadequate care: Here's what we know

In the snippet, Wendy Williams can be seen sitting in her scooter, surrounded by friends and family, as she yells at her team:

"And then both of you walked away leaving my s**t in the middle of the street like this. Just get the car please. Make sure it's the right car."

When the cameraman asked Williams "Wendy what happened? What they do?" she expressed her unhappiness with the crew for seemingly bringing around the wrong car to pick her up:

"They got the wrong car, so I knocked on the door and it was totally the wrong car. They left my scooter as they walked over there. Leaving my most precious, most - this cost a f***ing mint motherf*****. They just left my s**t out there."

A fuming Wendy then decided to take matters into her own hands as she walked out of the restaurant, without her mobility scooter. The footage then cuts to Williams yelling at her crew once again:

"Get the car over here, not over there, so I can go easily into the street to - for the car. They supposed to be ordering the car, that's what you're supposed to be doing. They wanna work for me, that's what they're doing. They're making money from me, get the Godd*** car.''

At the end of the video, the podcast host, Stunt Lifestyle, offers an insight into the situation. He revealed that it was her son who had taken the mobility scooter outside to allow his mom to walk on her own:

"So, I think, according to Wendy's family, she was really upset about the disorganization and the lack of care. She indicated the car was not close to assure she was like, even getting into the right car. It was just really messy, so she was really upset and her family was really upset, too."

Just this week, after Wendy Williams' guardian declared her "permanently incapacitated," 24-year-old Kevin Jr. took to social media to share a quick update on his mom:

"While I'm here quick update on my mom. She's sober and wants to come home. We're fighting to make that happen because Isolation is killing her faster than anything else."

---

In a memo filed by Wendy Williams' lawyers this November, the media personality has become “cognitively impaired and permanently incapacitated." It claims she is now “afflicted by early-onset dementia,” her guardian, Sabrina Morrissey, noted.

Full Article & Source:
What does legally incapacitated mean? Wendy Williams berates her caretaker for leaving her mobility scooter unattended on the street

See Also:
Wendy Williams

Judge Weighs Conservatorship for the Former Supreme Cindy Birdsong

The singer’s family has asked the court to approve a legal arrangement that would govern her medical decisions and finances after relatives objected to the previous care by a longtime friend.

From left: Diana Ross, Mary Wilson and Cindy Birdsong. Birdsong joined the Supremes in 1967, replacing Florence Ballard.Credit...Central Press/Getty Images

By Julia Jacobs and Christopher Petkanas

Aug. 7, 2023, 1:12 p.m. ET

A judge in Los Angeles is set to consider on Tuesday whether to establish a conservatorship for an 83-year-old former member of the Supremes, whose family has argued that her physical and mental frailties have made her vulnerable to undue influence for years.

The singer, Cindy Birdsong, spent nearly a decade with the group after replacing one of its original members, Florence Ballard, in 1967, performing hits such as “Stop! In the Name of Love” and “I Hear a Symphony” as one-third of Motown’s marquee act.

But after Birdsong left the Supremes in 1976, her finances fell apart — a situation she later attributed to a “bad closing deal” with Motown Records — and later on, several strokes left her unable to care for herself or manage her affairs, her family has said.

Birdsong’s siblings have asked that the singer’s brother, Ronald Birdsong, serve as co-conservator alongside an entertainment business manager, Brad Herman. It was Herman, called in by a friend of Birdsong’s, who spearheaded the singer’s removal two years ago from an apartment where she lived with a longtime friend.

The family has said the friend, Rochelle Lander, isolated them from Birdsong and withheld information about her ailing health. They have argued that a conservatorship is needed to ensure that her care and finances are being properly managed. Birdsong, who is not known to have retained significant music royalty rights, is currently in a California nursing facility where she is on a feeding tube, according to court papers.

“Since I live outside of California, and since my sister has been unable to tend to her affairs herself,” Ronald Birdsong said in the conservatorship application, “I depend on Mr. Herman to keep me updated on Cindy’s well-being as well as helping to keep all of her affairs in order.”

Last month, the judge assigned to the case, Lee R. Bogdanoff, referred it to the Office of the Public Guardian, indicating that he will consider whether a third-party conservator should step in to manage Birdsong’s affairs. His rationale for the decision was not made public, but he based it on the findings of a confidential report by a court investigator.

Herman and Terri Birdsong, a sister of Cindy Birdsong’s, said they were working with a newly hired lawyer to fill in some of the information that was lacking in their initial conservatorship application, and that they expected the singer’s court-appointed lawyer to ask for a delay in the case while they did so.

The court-appointed lawyer, John Alan Cohan, did not respond to requests for comment.

It is unclear whether Lander, a former performer with whom Cindy Birdsong started a Christian ministry, is planning to challenge the family’s bid for a conservatorship. She has defended her care of the singer in the past, saying that she had been steadfastly dedicated to helping her over many years, and she has displayed a power of attorney that she said Birdsong signed more than a decade ago.

The tensions between Birdsong’s siblings and Lander mounted a few years ago, during a visit to the singer’s Los Angeles apartment, where the family said it was stunned by how her condition had deteriorated, according to interviews with her three living siblings and a sister-in-law. The family ultimately reached out to the police, who enforced Birdsong’s removal from the apartment in 2021.

In a video taken by Herman that night, Lander argued against the removal, citing her power of attorney papers.

“She needs to have due process before you come in forcefully and think you’re going to take over her life,” Lander said in the video, as several police officers stood in the hallway of the apartment building.

Lander has not agreed to an interview and did not respond to requests for comment about the court proceedings.

Herman, who holds a power of attorney signed by the three siblings and sister-in-law, said the family wants the legal proceeding to help clarify how the singer’s money has been managed in recent years.

“From the time I became power of attorney, I’ve been trying to get documents that tell me what rights, what royalties, what residuals are coming to Cindy,” Herman said in a recent interview. “Whatever monies have come in, where did they go?”

Though it was well known that Birdsong had stopped performing and largely slipped from public view, the extent of her deterioration prompted an outpouring of concern several weeks ago, around when the family filed its conservatorship application.

“Prayers for a lady who has meant so much to my life,” one fan wrote on a Facebook page dedicated to Birdsong.

Some friends and associates of Birdsong, like Jim Saphin, who befriended the singer in the ’60s and ran a British fan club for Diana Ross and the Supremes, said they had been dismayed to hear of the singer’s condition.

Steve Weaver, a record producer who lives in England and has worked with former Supremes, said he had spoken with close friends of Birdsong’s who had visited her in recent weeks and reported that she had not been able to speak.

“But playing Supremes records really boosts her up,” Weaver said he had been told.

Charlo Crossley-Fortier, a singer and actress who became friends with Birdsong after meeting her at church, and John Whyman, a friend since the ’70s who at one point invited the singer to live with him amid financial struggles, said they had become concerned over the years that Lander had been isolating Birdsong from other friends and family and had actively resisted her pursuit of any role in pop music.

Weaver recalled that about a decade ago, he was set to record a track with Birdsong when Lander intervened and declared that Birdsong was “not recording any secular music now.” Birdsong, who often recalled how Christianity had lifted her out of serious depression after leaving the Supremes, once said in a television interview with “The 700 Club” that she didn’t “have a desire to sing rock ’n’ roll anymore,” preferring to sing religious music instead.

Though Birdsong’s life took a sharp turn after leaving the Supremes, Crossley-Fortier said, “Cindy will forever be part of music history.”

Full Article & Source:
Judge Weighs Conservatorship for the Former Supreme Cindy Birdsong

See Also:
The Family of a Former Supreme Battles for Control of Her Life

 

The Family of a Former Supreme Battles for Control of Her Life

Cindy Birdsong’s relatives have asked a court to place her in a conservatorship after they became concerned that her longtime friend had too much say over her care and finances.

Cindy Birdsong, left, performs in 1968 with the famed Motown group the Supremes. The family of Birdsong, now 83, is seeking to establish a conservatorship over her affairs.Credit...Gary Null/NBCUniversal, via Getty Images

By Julia Jacobs and Christopher Petkanas

For nearly a decade, Cindy Birdsong reigned as a member of the Supremes. Never as well-known as Diana Ross, Mary Wilson or even Florence Ballard — the singer she replaced in 1967 — she was, nonetheless, Motown royalty, whether onstage with the Temptations or at the funeral of Martin Luther King Jr.

But Birdsong’s life changed dramatically after she left the group in 1976. Her finances fell apart and she eventually sold off the trappings of celebrity life, took an office job and largely withdrew from the limelight, resurfacing only occasionally at Motown events.

Much about Birdsong’s situation remained largely hidden from view, close friends and family say, because of her isolated life inside a Los Angeles apartment she shared with Rochelle Lander, a longtime friend with whom she started a Christian ministry.

Now the depths of Birdsong’s financial and medical struggles have become public as her family has gone to court to request a legal conservatorship to govern her affairs. They say the singer, 83, is totally incapacitated after suffering several strokes, and had to be rescued from Lander, a person they say began exerting undue influence over Birdsong’s care and finances, isolating her from friends and family even as her health worsened.

“She was keeping us in the blind,” said Ronald Birdsong, the former Supreme’s brother. He asked a Los Angeles Superior Court judge last month to appoint him as one of two conservators for his sister.

Lander has argued that for many years she was the only person willing to help Birdsong, a contention the family denies.

The dispute escalated in 2021 when the Los Angeles police, at the urging of Birdsong’s family, removed the singer from the apartment, citing her deteriorating condition. She is now in a skilled nursing facility.

The removal was put in motion by Brad Herman, a representative of the family who has been asked to serve as a co-conservator by Birdsong’s relatives. Herman, an entertainment business manager whose high-profile celebrity clients have included Burt Reynolds and Pat Boone, has a power of attorney signed by Birdsong’s three living siblings and a sister-in-law.

“It has been an open secret among the Motown family, the tragedy of Cindy,” Herman said in an interview.

Lander considered but did not agree to an interview, and stopped responding to inquiries. During Birdsong’s removal by the police, Lander defended her treatment of her friend, challenged the family’s right to intervene and displayed her own power of attorney form that Birdsong had signed over a decade earlier, which she said gave her the right to direct the singer’s medical and financial decision making.

“She had a complete mental break; no one would help her,” Lander told the police, according to a video of the encounter that took place in the hallway outside Birdsong’s apartment. “Nobody else would do it.”

Birdsong’s struggles follow a remarkable ascent to stardom for the eldest daughter of a Campbell Soup warehouse worker from Camden, N.J. In her early 20s, after learning to sing in the church choir, Birdsong became a doo-wop girl on the chitlin circuit, the network of venues where Black performers found refuge during segregation. While performing with Patti LaBelle & the Bluebelles, Birdsong often crossed paths with the Supremes, admiring the rising group’s glamour before she eventually was picked to replace Ballard.

The switch in singers, which some later recognized as an inspiration for “Dreamgirls,” the fictional musical and film, came at a critical moment for the Supremes. Their fame and influence had rocketed after No. 1 hits including “You Keep Me Hangin’ On” and “You Can’t Hurry Love,” but a name change — to Diana Ross and the Supremes — reflected the group’s shifting dynamics. Birdsong, a fluty soprano who bore a resemblance to Ballard — the women even had the same shoe and dress size — was professional, poised and well practiced. With her gentle manner and polished skills, she was well suited for a daunting role: keeping one of Motown’s premier acts on track.

“Cindy had a strong voice and charisma,” Gerald Posner, a Motown historian, said in an interview. “She’s the one who had to make the change look seamless — and she did.”

Birdsong’s profile soared as a Supreme, for good and for bad. In 1969 she was kidnapped at knife point from her apartment, and only escaped by jumping from a moving vehicle, an incident that still shook her years later, friends and family said. The following year, Ross departed for a solo career, but Birdsong stayed on before being asked to leave the group herself in 1976. Not long after her departure, the singer said in interviews that she had agreed to a “bad closing deal” with Motown Records that left her financially bereft.

Facing divorce and deeply depressed, Birdsong said in an interview in the 1990s, she was suicidal, with “pills in one hand, television changer in the other,” when she came upon the televangelist Jim Bakker preaching directly through the TV to a celebrity who had seen fame and glory but was ready to take their life. That was when she turned to religion, she said.

“God told me,” Birdsong recalled, “what my whole life was about. He said, ‘I gave you all these things and you got corrupted in them.’ And I was ordained to serve him, even from the womb.”

In the 1980s, Birdsong attempted a comeback as a soloist, but the effort petered out. She came to share an apartment with Lander, who had also been a performer and appeared in several TV shows in the 1970s and ’80s. Both women became increasingly involved with their faith and Birdsong said she chose to sing religious music, not Motown or other pop, often working to bring Christian songs to children and homeless people.

In one incident in 2012, the record producer Steve Weaver recalled in a phone interview, he was preparing to record a duet featuring Birdsong and Scherrie Payne, another former Supreme. He said the project would have provided Birdsong with extra cash, but that Lander intervened in the studio, declaring Birdsong was “not recording any secular music now.”

“Cindy went along with it,” said Payne, who said she witnessed Lander step in. “She was heavily into her evangelism.”

Money remained an issue despite efforts by some Motown alumni to help. Payne said she and Diana Ross gave Birdsong money. Eric Iversen, a manager of former Supremes, said he did too. Berry Gordy, the Motown founder who had hired Birdsong as a Supreme, also provided financial assistance to her over the years, according to a statement from his office.

For many in that circle, Birdsong’s predicament echoed that of Ballard, who had ended up on welfare after being fired from the Supremes. She died at 32 of cardiac arrest.

For years, Birdsong’s siblings did not take issue with Lander taking the lead on caring for their sister, they said. But Melody Birdsong, a sister-in-law, said that after Cindy had a second major stroke about seven years ago, Lander became increasingly secretive about the status of Birdsong’s health, at one point refusing to tell the family the medical facility where she was receiving care.

“We didn’t even know where Cindy was,” Melody Birdsong said.

Birdsong’s only child, David Hewlett, and her brother Ronald said that for years they had difficulty visiting Cindy or reaching her through Lander. Hewlett said that several years ago, he and Payne went to the apartment with police to make certain they could gain entry.

Ronald Birdsong, who lives in New Jersey, said he once took a weeklong trip to California and tried to visit his sister repeatedly without success.

Mary Wilson, an original member of the Supremes who died in 2021, had discussed her own frustrations around not being able to reach Birdsong, said Mark Bego, a close friend who co-wrote a book about the group with her.

Family members initiated the conservatorship proceeding to ensure, they said, that Birdsong’s life and finances could not again become subject to Lander’s control.

The court has scheduled a hearing for August.

Ronald Birdsong said the family hopes the conservatorship process will provide a more complete accounting of his sister’s income and assets, though neither appears to be substantial. Birdsong is not known to have retained significant royalty rights, though she received payments totaling less than “six figures” from one company in 2021, according to Herman, who took over a bank account of hers that year.

The Birdsong family rejected Lander’s assertion that they had never been there to help or offer financial assistance. Ronald Birdsong said he opened a joint bank account in his and his sister’s name. Charles Hewlett, Birdsong’s ex-husband, said he had sent checks. Both said Lander declined their aid.

Herman said he became involved in Birdsong’s affairs seven years ago, after a longtime mutual friend called him, concerned about the singer’s well-being. Family members say he has been instrumental in making new care arrangements for Cindy.

“Without Brad, I don’t know where we’d be,” Melody Birdsong said.

Family members said their concerns grew a few years ago when several relatives were allowed into the apartment and were shocked to find Cindy on a feeding tube. They resolved that day to find her a new living arrangement.

“I was so devastated this last time I went to see my sister because that’s not how she was the last time that I saw her,” Cindy’s sister Terri Birdsong said. “I was able to feed her and cook for her and then I show up and she’s on a feeding tube?”

During the 2021 police intervention, Lander defended her care of Birdsong. She complained that Birdsong never received needed money that had been raised for her in 2013 by a performing arts organization. She explained that she had been the person who arranged for her friend to move into a skilled nursing facility at one point, and she noted that the city’s Adult Protective Services had been to the apartment and had not elected to remove her. (The agency declined to comment on its finding.)

Lander told the officers it was ill advised to take Birdsong to the hospital amid the pandemic, noting that they both had “religious objections” to the Covid vaccine.

“The family has known about this; they can’t come in without giving me due process,” Lander said before the emergency personnel entered and wheeled Birdsong out on a gurney, according to the video of the police response.

Clayton Golliher, a pastor and director of an organization called Hope for Homeless Youth, said that Lander and Birdsong had been involved with his program for years and that he had never seen anything to question Lander’s care and affection for Birdsong.

“I didn’t get anything but 100 percent positive about Rochelle and the way she was sensitive to Cindy,” Golliher said.

In the conservatorship application, Birdsong’s condition is summarized by the nursing facility, which says she is unable to get out of bed or communicate, and that she is on a feeding tube.

As Birdsong lay in bed last year, Herman brought in a figure from her Motown days, hoping that he could help energize her: Eddie Holland, a member of the songwriting team Holland-Dozier-Holland behind many of the Supremes’ hits. In an interview, Holland recalled that he started singing songs like “Baby Love” and “I Hear a Symphony,” and saw a sign of recognition.

“For some reason she starts smiling,” Holland said. “She grabbed my hand and sort of clutched my fingers.”

Susan Beachy contributed research. Lauren Herstik contributed reporting.

Full Article & Source:
The Family of a Former Supreme Battles for Control of Her Life

Billionaire Chace’s Will Was Changed in Final Days of His Life — He Was “Completely Incapacitated”

Liz Chace and Malcolm Chace
prior to the litigation at a Wolf
School dedication.

In the next few months, one of the biggest legal battles in Rhode Island history is expected to head to trial.

The players are in a high-stakes fight over the control of one of the trusts of the late Rhode Island billionaire Malcolm “Kim” Chace, the man whose family had direct involvement with the establishment of the famed investment fund Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway.

Just days before Chace died in 2011, two lawyers from a prominent Rhode Island law firm traveled to Florida and executed a “second” codicil to his will — an amendment — that made significant changes worth tens of millions of dollars including impacting the control of millions of dollars of art and increasing the annual payment to Kim Chace’s second wife Liz from $400,000 to $800,000 a year.

Just one problem, at the time of the lawyers' visit, Kim Chace was hospitalized, and according to family members and attorneys for his son Malcolm Chace, Kim was “completely incapacitated" and non-communicative.

Who exactly were these lawyers representing is one of the lingering questions now playing out in courtrooms in Florida and Rhode Island. And, how did the non-communicative Kim Chace seek these substantial changes to the distribution of his fortune? The "second" codicil substantially benefitted Liz Chace.

This battle over the codicil is just one component of the legal dispute between members of the Chace family. GoLocal was first to report on the different factions and the litigation in April of 2022.

Buff Chace is locked in litigation with Malcolm Chace in RI

Rhode Island Litigation Expected to Go to Trail This Year

On one side are Kim Chace’s children, their spouses, and grandchildren. Leading the effort is Kim Chace's son Malcolm Chace, who heads the investment firm Canton Hathaway in Providence. His business partners include Jim Procaccianti, President and CEO of Procaccianti Companies — “a firm that claims more than $10 Billion of diversified real estate investments in more than 130 cities across 31 states coast to coast.”

The Malcolm Chace faction has sued cousin Arnold “Buff” Chace and William Saltonstall [Kim Chace’s stepson and Malcolm Chace’s step-brother] individually as well the trust managing the money — M2K Trust. Liz Chace is also named in the suit.

The plaintiffs in the mega suit in Providence Superior Court— Malcolm Chace's group — allege that Buff Chace and Saltonstall violated the tenet of the trust by investing funds into Buff Chace’s real estate projects — they claim that this was specifically barred by the terms of the trust. The Rhode Island litigation is expected to start in 2023.

Legal Battle Over "Second" Codicil in Court in Florida

The dispute over the change to the will pits Malcolm Chace’s faction primarily against his stepmother Liz Chace.  She married Kim Chace on February 8 of 1975, according to a wedding announcement in the New York Times.

Lawyers for Malcolm Chase’s group, both in Rhode Island and in Florida, say the will was changed days after he was incapacitated after surgery and was left non-communicative.

A first codicil of the will was executed in 1990, which provided for Liz Chace to receive an annual payment of $400,000 from the trust upon Kim Chace’s death, and provided for an art collection worth tens of millions to remain with Liz Chace during her lifetime and then revert back to Kim Chace’s children — the Malcom Chace group.

But the so-called second codicil changed key provisions. It doubled her annual payments from $400,000 to $800,000 annually and changed the provisions regarding the art collection — to Liz Chace's benefit.

“During my wife's lifetime if she survives me, the trustee shall pay to my wife from the net income of such trust the sum of Eight Hundred Thousand Dollars ($800,000) annually provided, however, that (i) to the extent such income is insufficient to make such payment, the trustee shall use principal for such purpose, and (ii) such amount shall be prorated in the year of my death,” states the second codicil.

The changes made in the final days have raised concerns of Malcolm Chace's attorneys.

"It causes tremendous concern that a codicil appeared last minute changing the wishes of Mr. Chace days before his death.  There is strong evidence Mr. Chace was completely incapacitated at the time of the alleged codicil.  It is impossible for a client to have testamentary capacity to make important choices regarding their estate plan while incapacitated,”  said Florida-based Marianne Moran, Attorney for the beneficiaries of the Malcolm G. Chace Declaration of Trust.

Robert Corrente, who is representing Malcolm Chace in the Rhode Island litigation, told GoLocal in a phone interview, "There is additional and related litigation in Florida…there is a relatedness to the whole thing as the changes they made were significant as to what they did and what they affected as it relates to dollars and cents. And the change to the second codicil was executed every very close to [Kim Chace’s] death. There were substantial questions about his medical condition."

Corrente is the former U.S. Attorney for Rhode Island.

Painting Worth Millions

The paintings in question, according to the "second "codicil, are:

"Bow of a Beam Trawler" by Edward Hopper

"Glass of Water" by Eastman Johnson

"Fulton Fish Market'' by George Luks

"Landscape #1" by Charles Sheeler

"Cosmetic Counter" by Wayne Thiebaud

According to the parties, the paintings are worth millions, with the most valuable by Hopper.

That piece of art may be worth as much as $10 million. The record for a Hopper, according to the New York Times, is in excess of $91 million. "He is America’s most celebrated painter of the solitary realities of 20th century life. But Tuesday night at Christie’s, Edward Hopper joined the unreality of today’s art market when his 1929 painting 'Chop Suey' sold for $91.9 million, with fees, an auction high for the artist."

Signed While Noncommunicative

The two lawyers who executed the second codicil were prominent attorneys at Hinckley Allen & Snyder LLP — Robert Petix, Jr. and Doris Licht.

Licht is a partner with the firm and refused to answer questions about her role in the execution of the second codicil.

She also refused to say who her client was.

“You know I am not going to be able to say anything,” said Licht in an interview with GoLocal. 

Doris Licht, Partner at Hinckley Allen
PHOTO: Firm

Petix, who signed the second codicil on behalf of Kim Chace while he was allegedly incapacitated. is no longer with Hinckley Allen and is no longer a practicing attorney. 

GoLocal reached Petix in his new home Austin, Texas, and he said he was unaware of the lawsuit and the disputes.

Petix, when reached by phone, said that he had to check with legal counsel at his former firm Hinckley Allen before he could comment.

Petix and Licht’s roles are now the subject of legal action in Florida. And according to court documents, Malcolm Chace’s Florida attorney Moran will have the opportunity to depose both Licht and Petix.

A spokesperson for Liz Chace, Bill Fischer, told GoLocal in an email, “The two Hinckley Allen attorneys you reference served as Kim’s estate planning attorneys. The second codicil was made at Kim’s request. I cannot speak to the motivation of this codicil nor do I represent Hinckley Allen in this matter. All I can tell you is this codicil did not originate as a request from Liz.”

When GoLocal informed Fischer that Malcolm Chace's family and attorneys told GoLocal that at the time of the execution of the second codicil, he was reportedly incapacitated and uncommunicative, thus how did he request this change -- Fischer declined to comment.

Full Article & Source:
Billionaire Chace’s Will Was Changed in Final Days of His Life — He Was “Completely Incapacitated”

Judge demands harsh sentence for ex-attorney accused of embezzling millions from Utah clients

Former Salt Lake City attorney Calvin Curtis faced about six years in prison as part of a plea agreement. The judge insisted on more prison time.

 

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) Traffic passes the federal courthouse in Salt Lake City on Friday, March 13, 2020. At a hearing on Tuesday, a federal judge tossed out a sentencing proposal for former Salt Lake City estate attorney Calvin Curtis, demanding that the lawyer accused of defrauding his clients of millions receive a harsher prison sentence.

By Kolbie Peterson

A federal judge in Utah tossed out a sentencing proposal Tuesday for former Salt Lake City estate attorney Calvin Curtis, demanding that the man accused of defrauding his clients out of millions receive a harsher prison sentence.

The proposal of about six years in prison had been agreed upon by federal prosecutors and Curtis’ defense attorney ahead of the hearing. U.S. District Judge David Barlow was expected to take it into consideration before imposing a sentence.

Instead, rejecting the proposal altogether, Barlow said that as Curtis allegedly stole $12.7 million from 26 of his clients — all elderly, disabled or incapacitated — over about 13 years, the suspected fraud was “cold-blooded, premeditated and repeated.”

Curtis “perverted” the law, Barlow continued, and “enriched himself on the backs of those who needed his help.”

‘Lavish lifestyle’

Prosecutors have argued Curtis used that money to fund a “lavish lifestyle,” which included frequent travel, expensive gifts, tickets to basketball and football games, and pricey renovations and mortgage payments on his former mansion home and office on South Temple.

Assistant U.S. attorney Ruth Hackford-Peer said in Tuesday’s hearing that the proposed sentence of 73 months in prison was not a perfect resolution, “but it’s a good one.”

Several of Curtis’ victims attended the hearing, filling the courtroom along with family members and caregivers. One mother pushed in a stroller her disabled 9-year-old daughter, who wore a yellow bow in her hair and braces on both wrists.

They were expecting Barlow to issue a sentence, and many made statements during the hearing. One woman walked up to the podium while holding onto a loved one’s arm to steady herself. A man in a wheelchair gave 62-year-old Curtis a long look as he passed the table where Curtis sat with his attorney.

As the victims shared their stories of how devastating it has been to lose money that they would have used for various needs such as food, clothing, medicine and health care, a common refrain was for Barlow to impose the maximum sentence.

“I don’t think Calvin is human,” one woman said quietly. “I feel that he’s the devil.”

In a statement Tuesday, Curtis said, “A lot of people have talked about me, and most of what they have said is true. I’m very sorry for that.”

‘Heinous’ crimes

When it came time for Barlow to announce a decision, he said the proposed prison sentence — plus a restitution judgment of $12.7 million and supervised release for three years as part of Curtis’ plea agreement — was not harsh enough.

Since Curtis’ crimes were “so heinous,” Barlow said, he should receive a prison sentence at the higher end of the range that is customary in such a case, which is 10 years.

The judge added that he is “not convinced” that Curtis — who is charged with wire fraud and money laundering — takes responsibility for his actions or feels remorse.

Barlow asked the attorneys for both sides to negotiate again and come up with a new sentencing proposal. A new hearing date was not immediately set.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office declined to comment.

Laura Milliken Gray, an attorney for a woman with Alzheimer’s disease from whom Curtis has admitted to embezzling more than $9 million, called Barlow’s decision a “surprise.”

Her client’s daughter-in-law, Sherry McConkey, said she is “excited” at the prospect of Curtis getting more time in prison than expected. But she added that it’s “hard” the case will go on longer, “because I just want it to be over and done with.”

Greg Skordas, Curtis’ attorney, said, “We were not surprised. We’re disappointed.”

“We came a long way and hoped to be able to seal the deal today,” he continued. “It’s not the end. We’re not finished.”

Full Article & Source:

Judge demands harsh sentence for ex-attorney accused of embezzling millions from Utah clients

‘The Power to End a Person’s Life’

by Eleanor J. Bader

A crowd protesting artist Peter Max's forced guardianship.

The Population Reference Bureau estimates that within the next eight years, more than seventy-six million U.S. residents will be over the age of sixty-five. Many will remain healthy, active, and engaged for the duration of their lives. Others, however, will need assistance.

This is also true for the more than sixty-one million Americans who live with a disability, nearly eight million of whom are estimated to need help with personal care. That’s where guardianship—or if real estate is involved, conservatorship—comes into play.

In its most perfect form, a guardian is appointed by a court to help an elderly or disabled person who has been deemed “incapacitated”—defined as being unable to manage self-care or the tasks of daily living. The goal is to protect them from abuse, neglect, and exploitation. But as the well-publicized guardianship cases of Peter Falk, Britney Spears, and Wendy Williams have revealed, guardianship can include gross judicial overreach and lead to overly restrictive control by one person over another.  (Click to continue reading)

Full Article & Source:

‘The Power to End a Person’s Life’

Conservatorship system is slow to change, despite availability of less restrictive options

By Carter Barrett

Ten years ago, Nick Clouse was riding shotgun in his friend’s Camaro when the car jerked and he felt himself flying through the air. Clouse’s head slammed against the passenger side window.

The traumatic brain injury caused severe memory loss, headaches and insomnia. Clouse, who was 18 at the time, didn’t recognize his friends and family.

Shortly after the accident, his mother and step-dad requested to be his legal guardian, which meant they’d be responsible for making all of his financial and health decisions. They said it would be temporary. A judge in Indiana made it official.

Years after recovering, Clouse wanted to make his own choices again — to put gas in his car, buy his daughter diapers and take his wife out for dinner without permission. But he ran into opposition. His parents didn’t want to give up their power, Clouse said, and he had to find a way to fight for his rights.

“They had 100 percent control over my life and I just didn’t have any say in what I did or anything,” Clouse said.

If a judge determines an adult is unable to make responsible choices, the person can be placed under a court-appointed guardianship. The arrangement is known as a conservatorship in some states.

It’s a system that’s come under scrutiny nationwide, after details on pop star Britney Spears’ conservatorship came to light. In September, Clouse testified at a U.S. Senate committee hearing focused on the issue of guardianship reform.

In recent years, there has been a growing shift toward less restrictive options that allow adults with physical or intellectual impairments more independence while providing them support for making decisions. Advocates for people with disabilities say the shift is long overdue, and some argue the system needs a complete overhaul.

“People with significant disabilities have long been discriminated against, because people think that they [lack] the ability to make decisions,” said Derek Nord, director of the Indiana Institute on Disability and Community.

While the disability rights movement in the U.S. has made “huge strides” on many issues, Nord said additional reforms and better oversight are needed to protect people from exploitation.

Guardianship cases most often involve people with disabilities, the elderly, people recovering from an injury or medical condition, and people with severe mental illness.

An official count does not exist, but the AARP estimates about 1.3 million adults in the U.S. are in legal guardianships. In Indiana, where Clouse lives, 11,139 adults are in permanent guardianships, according to state officials.

In Indiana, entering a guardianship starts with filing a petition. The petitioner can submit evidence, like a doctor’s report, and appear in front of a judge, who then decides if the person in question is considered to be incapacitated.

The judge can establish limitations for the guardianship, although they rarely do, according to Indiana Disability Rights attorney Justin Schrock.

“We’re talking about decisions about where to live, whether to get married, where to work, what medical care to receive, what to do with their money,” Schrock said. “They really do lose all of their most fundamental basic rights.”

Some guardianships are necessary, but advocates for reform argue they’re overused, since most of the time people with disabilities can make choices for themselves — sometimes with guidance — and should maintain that right.

“Before I entered this field, I assumed that [entering a] guardianship was a fairly innocuous step,” Schrock said. “I also assumed that there were a lot of protections in place to prevent unnecessary guardianships from being established, which is absolutely not the case.”

Legal guardianships should not be the default for people who need help making decisions, said Kristin Hamre, social work professor at Indiana University Bloomington. It’s in taking risks that people learn and grow as individuals — and restrictive legal arrangements like guardianships rob people of that opportunity.

“The right to risk is so important,” Hamre said. “Risk is where life happens, right? You begin walking, you might fall; you begin driving, you might crash.”

Over time, Clouse’s traumatic brain injury improved. He started working as a welder, met his future wife — and got his parents’ permission to marry her. Clouse wanted out of the guardianship, but he said his parents resisted.

The lawyer representing Clouse’s mother and stepfather did not return Side Effects Public Media’s request for comment.

People under a legal guardianship face a Catch-22. To regain his independence, Clouse needed to speak with a lawyer and get legal advice. But that would have required his parents’ approval since they controlled his finances.

Because of the way some state laws are written, guardianship cases often lack due process, said Robert Dinerstein, head of the disability rights law clinic at American University in Washington, D.C.

Many states’ guardianship laws ensure a right to legal counsel for people at risk of entering a guardianship. But that’s not the case in Indiana. The law allows petitioners — often a parent or family member — the option to present a consent form signed by the person under consideration for a guardianship, which deems them “incapacitated” and effectively waives their right to contest the hearing or even be present at it.

Indiana law also does not require petitioners to submit medical evidence to the court, although some courts have local rules requiring it.

“I’ve seen over and over again, these guardians’ attorneys will have the individual sign this consent form, file it along with a petition, oftentimes with no medical evidence,” Shrock said. “And some of these courts are just looking at that and saying, ‘OK,’ and then granting guardianship without ever having even laid eyes on this individual.”

Since guardianship cases take place in county-level courts, there’s tremendous variety in how these cases are handled. Larger counties with probate-specific courts can dedicate more time and resources to the hearings, while smaller county courts have a much larger breadth of cases, limiting a judge’s expertise in one area.

A task force formed to examine the use of legal guardianships in Indiana reported that no medical evidence of incapacity was presented in one in five guardianship cases in Indiana. The 2012 report also states that in cases where evidence was presented, the reports were often incomplete or illegible.

The burden of proof — to convince the judge the guardianship is unnecessary — tends to fall on the person with a disability, which differs from most other legal proceedings, Dinerstein said.

Since people have a right to a lawyer in criminal cases, Dinerstein argues that people at risk of entering guardianships should have the same right.

“I think the level of loss of liberty [in guardianship cases] makes a really strong case that there ought to be” a right to legal counsel, he said.

It matters because once a person is in a guardianship, it is extremely difficult to get out of it.

“It’s like Hotel California,” Dinerstein said. “Once a guardian is appointed, even if circumstances change where you no longer think you need it, it’s really hard to get courts to restore your capacity.”

Clouse is now 28 and lives in Huntington, Indiana. With the help of Indiana Disability Rights attorney Justin Schrock, Clouse’s guardianship was terminated in August 2021.

Shortly after, he took his wife and daughter out for dinner — a small luxury after life under his parents’ guardianship.

“I didn’t have to worry about my card getting declined … and bought my daughter a big piece of chocolate cake,” Clouse said. “That made me feel good that I could just kind of splurge a little bit.”

In 2019, Indiana joined a handful of other states — including Delaware, Texas, Ohio and Wisconsin — to pass a law requiring judges to consider less restrictive alternatives to guardianships.

Supported decision-making is one of these alternatives. Adults in these arrangements consult a support team, such as friends, family, social workers, case managers or paid support members, about big decisions in their lives. But, unlike in a guardianship, the individual can still make the final decision.

“Many of us … run important decisions by other people in our lives who are important to us — family, friends,” Dinerstein said. “[Then] you get to decide whether to listen to the advice.”

The year before the new law passed, Jamie Beck became the first person in Indiana to transition from a legal guardianship into a supported decision-making arrangement as part of a pilot program exploring less restrictive guardianship alternatives.

Beck has a mild intellectual and developmental disability and was placed in a guardianship at the age of 19 after her parents died. She spent a year in a nursing home, where she said she was bored and spent her time learning American Sign Language. Beck remained in the guardianship for eight years, even after demonstrating she could live independently and support herself financially.

“She was just doing tremendously … and everyone felt she didn’t need a guardianship any longer,” said Judge Greg Horn, who terminated Beck’s guardianship. “It wasn’t like we were going to send her on her way and let her struggle with life’s challenges.”

To ensure she’d be supported once the guardianship was terminated, the court worked with Beck to come up with a group of advisors she trusted to help her make decisions.

Beck said the supported decision-making agreement lets her have more say in her life. She’s now 31 and lives in an apartment in Muncie, Indiana. She works as a housekeeper at a local hospital and spends her free time playing Pokemon Go.

“I get to do more things like a typical normal person would,” Beck said.

She can seek medical care and travel out of town without needing anyone else to sign off on those decisions.

At least 11 states and Washington, D.C. have passed supported decision-making laws.

In Ohio, lawmakers passed reforms to close loopholes in the guardianship system after a 2014 investigation from the Columbus Dispatch revealed lawyers were becoming guardians for people with disabilities and charging attorney’s fees to perform basic duties, like shopping and cleaning. Today, the state requires guardians to undergo training and education and allows people under a guardianship to file complaints to the court.

But Kevin Truitt, legal advocacy director for Disability Rights Ohio, is skeptical those reforms have led to major improvements for people with disabilities.

“Maybe some people have benefited from these reforms,” Truitt said. “But I worry not a lot has changed for many, many people across the state” because people under guardianship may not be aware of the new law’s provisions.

As part of the new law in Indiana, guardians are required to file reports every other year, documenting whether the guardianship remains necessary and if less restrictive options have been considered.

The law also requires judges to document that less restrictive alternatives have been considered before full guardianships are approved.

But Schrock, the attorney with Indiana Disability Rights, said not much has changed on the ground.

“I see … guardianship petitions that are still filed today that don’t even mention whether less restrictive alternatives have been assessed in any way,” Shrock said. “And that has been … a minimum requirement since July 1, 2019.”

Schrock said even when reports are filed by guardians, they are rarely scrutinized by judges.

State officials in Indiana say they’re not tracking how many people are opting for supported decision-making agreements in lieu of legal guardianships. It’s hard to determine because these agreements can take place outside of a courtroom.

Kim Dodson, CEO of the Arc of Indiana, said she has only heard of a few cases where people are looking to revoke a guardianship.

“That’s not enough, right? We should have a lot more than that, especially two years after the implementation of supported decision-making,” Dodson said.

Dodson thinks the COVID-19 pandemic slowed the education campaign around supported decision-making, so judges and backed-up courts are behind on implementing the changes.

But she’s hopeful that over time, more people will understand the importance of ensuring people with disabilities are placed in the least restrictive arrangement possible.

“We really need to educate attorneys and judges, and make sure that they know about this new alternative, and that they get sold on it,” Dodson said. “And that just hasn’t happened to the extent that we’ve needed it to.”

In Indiana’s upcoming legislative session, Dodson said her organization will be advocating for additional guardianship reforms, such as requiring schools to educate parents of children with a disability on supported decision-making.

This story comes from Side Effects Public Media — a public health news initiative based at WFYI.

 

Full Article & Source:

Conservatorship system is slow to change, despite availability of less restrictive options

Know the Law: Mentally Declining Father Refuses Assistance

Written by: Lexi S. Cote

Published in the Union Leader (3/14/2021)

Q:  My father’s mental faculties are declining, and he is making bad decisions and having difficulty caring for himself.  What are my options if he is refuses help?

A:  If your father can’t manage his affairs and has not signed or refuses to sign a power of attorney, guardianship may be the only option.  An appointed guardian would have the duty and legal authority to take care of your father and/or his property.  Conversely, your father would lose certain important rights, such as making healthcare or financial decisions.

Guardianship is appropriate only where the party over whom guardianship is sought (referred to as the proposed ward) is incapacitated.  “Incapacity” is determined based on whether the proposed ward can sufficiently manage his or her affairs — not on a medical diagnosis, though this may be important evidence.  The Court will presume that the proposed ward has capacity, and the petitioning party will need to prove otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt (the same heavy burden the State must meet in criminal cases).  Specifically, the petitioner must prove that the proposed ward has suffered (or is likely to suffer) substantial harm due to an inability to provide for his or her personal needs such as food, clothing, shelter, health care, or safety.  For example, a person may be incapacitated where he or she is easily confused or disoriented, and has been financially exploited. 

There are three types of guardianships.  The first, guardianship “of the person,” tasks the guardian with managing the ward’s personal affairs.  The second, guardianship “of the estate,” requires that the guardian manages the ward’s finances and property.  The third, “plenary” or “total” guardianship, requires management of the ward’s personal affairs, finances, and property.  The most appropriate form of guardianship will vary, depending upon the facts of a given case.  For example, a person may be able to care for his or her personal needs, but not manage his or her finances.  In that circumstance, a guardianship of the estate may be most appropriate.

Guardianship proceedings should not be initiated lightly.  Often, the proposed ward finds the action threatening and reacts badly, or there is damage to the ward’s relationship with the petitioner.  The ward may make reactive decisions, such as disinheriting the petitioner.  Taking action could also push the proposed ward towards an exploiter, resulting in further harm.  Ultimately, each case is different and careful thought should be given to whether guardianship is in the proposed ward’s best interest.  Before seeking guardianship, you should carefully review relevant statutes.  It may also be prudent to consult an attorney for further guidance.

 

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

 

Full Article & Source:

Know the Law: Mentally Declining Father Refuses Assistance

Nightmare before guardianship: Court proceeding can be messy, emotional

Anyone can file a guardianship application, and anyone can contest a guardianship application as well.

 

A guardianship case is initiated when someone files an application for guardianship in the appropriate court, such as a probate court.(Courtesy / Getty Images/iStockphoto)

By Virginia Hammerle

Recipe for a contested guardianship: Take one senior, add a dash of dementia, mix in a dollop of assets, simmer with decades of resentment and hurt feelings, and garnish with one or more disgruntled family members.

Guaranteed to cook up into a gut-wrenching and costly guardianship case.

A guardianship is a court proceeding that is initiated to have a person (the “ward”) declared legally incapacitated, take away one or more of that person’s rights, and have a guardian appointed.

There are two types of guardianships in Texas. A “guardian of the person” handles personal decisions regarding the ward, such as where the ward lives and the medical care a ward receives. A “guardian of the estate” handles the ward’s finances. The detailed scope of a guardian’s duties is determined by a judge on a case-by-case basis.

A guardianship case is initiated when someone files an application for guardianship in the appropriate court, such as a probate court. Ten counties in Texas have designated probate courts. In the other 244 counties, a guardianship would usually be filed in a county court.

Who can file a guardianship application? Anyone. That encompasses the loving adult child, the exploitive neighbor and the local UPS driver. Who can contest a guardianship application? Anyone.

The only restriction is that the person filing or contesting cannot have an interest that is adverse to the proposed ward. The courts are still working out what constitutes an adverse interest. Frankly, guardianship law in Texas has undergone a mini-revolution since 2010 and there remain a few bugs in the system.

(Now may be the time to disclose an endearing quirk. In Texas, a court with guardianship jurisdiction can start a guardianship action on its own initiative. This plays out when the court becomes aware, by fair means or foul, that someone may need a guardianship. The court opens an investigation and then, if it deems it necessary, authorizes someone to file a guardianship action.)

Once a guardianship application is filed, the judge appoints an attorney ad litem to represent the proposed ward. Of course, if the proposed ward has capacity then he or she could hire a private attorney to fight the guardianship. If.

So what determines the need for a guardianship? The Estates Code requires that a guardianship cannot be granted unless the court finds the proposed ward is "an adult who, because of a physical or mental condition is substantially 1) unable to provide food, clothing or shelter for himself or herself; 2) care for the person’s own physical health; or 3) manage the person’s own financial affairs. The court must also find that there are no lesser restrictive alternatives, like a power of attorney or a trust, available to the proposed ward.

Some cases go smoothly with everyone working in the best interest of the ward. Other cases, however, turn into a pitched battle over capacity, adverse interests, guardian qualifications or less restrictive alternatives. These are contested guardianships and may include allegations of theft, exploitation, neglect and abuse of the proposed ward. The judge may remove the ward from the home and appoint independent guardians.

That is the stuff of which nightmares are made.

Full Article & Source:

Nightmare before guardianship: Court proceeding can be messy, emotional