Tuesday, December 8, 2015

A late-in-life friendship and a lost opportunity to say 'you matter'


Elaine Ellbogen
Elaine Ellbogen refused to be confined, even while under a court-appointed guardianship.

At 85, she often signed herself out of her Libertyville nursing home, walked to the Metra station and took the train to Chicago. She'd board a bus, then window-shop along Michigan Avenue or stop in art stores and greet the proprietors, who became friends.

She showed up at the Tribune Tower one frigid February afternoon, after talking to me only once before by telephone.

She wanted her independence, she said. She wanted to punish the people who had forced her out of her Highland Park home, citing her inability to care for herself. "I do not believe I should be under guardianship," she said.

That day earlier this year marked the beginning of a short friendship that ended with tragedy, and proved to me, once again, that people can be amazingly complex.

Elaine dressed fashionably, wearing a scarf and a splash of red lipstick that offset a crown of white hair. Articulate, witty, and dramatic, she quoted literature and discussed current events each time we met.

She spoke about working as an account executive in the 1950s for Daniel Edelman's public relations firm in Chicago. Much like the era was depicted in the "Mad Men" series, it was unusual to find a woman in that role at the time. For Elaine, it clearly remained a source of great pride.

She left her job within a few years to marry and raise two sons in Highland Park, filling the home with artwork and staying active with her children's activities. At one point, she tried to get back into the public relations world, but too much time had slipped by.

By the 1980s, when her sons left for college, Elaine's collections of artwork, newspapers, mail and clothing from frequent shopping sprees became unwieldy.

That was when the hoarding began and her marriage unraveled, said her son Andrew Ellbogen. Elaine stopped allowing family members in the house, which was in dire need of repairs. One side of the roof was caving in and mold was spreading throughout the home.

"Early on, the art covered walls at home," Andrew said. "In later years, the artwork was on the floor when she ran out of wall space."

After a small fire in the home, her family members begged her to move, offering options and financial help. They asked the city of Highland Park to intervene, but Elaine refused to move or clean up the house as needed for its sale. When I asked Elaine later if she considered herself a hoarder, she replied, "That is a matter of interpretation."

Eventually, a phone repairman who was allowed entrance to the house was so disturbed by what he saw that he took photographs and sent them to city officials, who contacted the guardian's office, Andrew said.

And so in 2011, the private guardian removed Elaine from her home by having her declared disabled in court. The guardian took control of her finances and major decisions regarding her life. This was a drastic step, and Elaine did not handle it well, feeling betrayed and lied to by the guardian.

She started to write letters, compelling and coherent in tidy cursive handwriting. She addressed them to a Lake County judge, a former presidential candidate and to news reporters, including myself.

"Awakened at 7:40 a.m. by pounding on my front door, I was informed by (guardian) that she would personally return me to my home in one hour if I would accompany her to the Highland Park hospital to answer a few doctor's questions," she wrote in one four-page letter.

"I never saw my home again," she wrote. "Thus began my surreal Kafka-like agonizing true story. I am a real-life example of the horrifying fate that can befall a low-income, elderly woman."

I was interested in learning more about guardianships, which are often necessary to obtain help for people who are incapacitated, but can also be abused.

But Elaine's case, as I soon learned, was no simple matter. She did not suffer dementia, as some court records stated, though she had received psychiatric care and was not taking her medication as prescribed.

Elaine was moved into a skilled nursing home in Libertyville in 2013, after a year of failed attempts to move her into a less-restrictive setting, such as assisted living, court records state. "She was resistant to the limits placed on her for spending and outings," the guardian wrote, describing her as verbally abusive.

The last time I saw Elaine, at a coffee shop near her nursing home, she spoke about the Oscar Wilde play, "A Woman of No Importance" and her fear, after guardianship "that I was nothing now. That I was absolutely unwanted, destroyed."

Yet she seemed happier than on past occasions. After her funds ran out, the state took over Elaine's guardianship, and authorities were working on moving her to an apartment. She was allowed more freedom, and continued to leave the nursing home for short excursions.

She had begun piling papers and items in the private room she had at the nursing home, and clothes still carrying their tags hung along the wall. She had made some friends and enjoyed a good relationship with her ex-husband, her son Andrew said.

"The goal was always to let her have as much independence as possible," he said.

So, it was shocking to learn that, on June 2, Elaine left for a shopping trip and never returned home.

She had been struck by a train in Deerfield, and was not identified until a day later. Her death was ruled an accident by the Lake County coroner's office.

"She just miscalculated crossing the tracks," said Orlando Portillo, chief deputy coroner.

Her family members remain horrified that she met such a violent end, despite their attempts to keep her safe. She had been looking forward to her granddaughter's upcoming dance recital, Andrew said.

I couldn't stop thinking about her after learning the news. She had astonished me with her eloquence and mobility, and I enjoyed our visits. While I initially questioned why she was under a guardian's care, I began to understand why her family had become frustrated and sought the city's help.

Despite her eccentricities — or maybe because of them — I was touched by her and considered her a "woman of importance."

I wish she had lived long enough for me to tell her that.

Full Article & Source:
A late-in-life friendship and a lost opportunity to say 'you matter'

Woman sues York County probate judge over case delay

She says his allegedly retaliatory schedule change led to her loss of a grandchild's custody.

York County probate judge Robert Nadeau
The York County probate judge accused of creating a backlog of cases in retaliation for not receiving a pay raise is being sued by a New Hampshire woman who blames him for losing custody of her granddaughter.

Renee LeGrand of Effingham, New Hampshire, filed the civil action against York County Judge of Probate Robert Nadeau on Monday in York County Superior Court in Alfred. LeGrand wants the court to undo changes Nadeau made to his hearing schedule this summer, saying the changes resulted in delays that caused her to lose temporary guardianship of her granddaughter. York County, which pays Nadeau’s salary, is named in the suit as a party of interest.

Though LeGrand is the only plaintiff named in the lawsuit, her attorneys, in court documents, indicate that other parties affected by Nadeau’s changes to the hearing schedule could join her in a class-action suit.

“We are seeking an order to have Judge Nadeau restore the schedule to what it was before April 15,” said Portland attorney Robert Mittel, who is representing LeGrand.

Mittel said his client does not want to speak to the media.

The civil suit filed by Mittel and attorney Temma Donahue of Portland, who has been representing LeGrand in the guardianship fight with the girl’s mother, allege that Nadeau harmed LeGrand and other plaintiffs by “revamping his schedule in order to delay critical and non-critical court matters by many months, causing constitutional, financial and emotional injury to LeGrand and the other class members.”

LeGrand’s suit also alleges that Nadeau, who was elected to a four-year term in 2012, changed his schedule “to retaliate” against York County commissioners for refusing to substantially increase his salary.

The lawsuit states that on April 15, 2015, the county commissioners considered Nadeau’s request to increase his court schedule from two days a week to three or five days a week and to raise his salary to $90,000 or $120,000 from his former salary of $48,498.

Commissioners declined to increase court days, but did grant him a raise, upping his salary to $54,206. Nadeau immediately changed his court hearing schedule, which the suit alleges caused case delays of several months.

Nadeau reacted to the lawsuit Wednesday night in a telephone interview and through an email.

He said York County needs to allocate more time for cases to be heard. Nadeau said he adopted a new court hearing schedule which dedicates one entire week per month to trials. That system, he believes, has proven to be more effective.

If he can’t hear a case, he has the ability to appoint a referee – typically a probate judge from another county – to hear a case.

He said that in recent years certain types of probate court cases, especially guardianship disputes involving parents, have become far more complex and time-consuming to preside over.

“When a case is contested I need time on the docket for each side to present their witnesses,” he said. “I’ve done the best I can with limited means.”

Nadeau blames York County and its governing board of commissioners for not allocating more court days to hear cases.

“The number of full-time jurists in York County’s three district courts has doubled from three to six in the past 10 years, with the support of the state Legislature,” Nadeau said in an email. “By contrast, York County’s commissioners … have continued to fund only 64 hours of judicial time in the county’s lone probate court that must serve a population of more than 200,000.” “It’s frankly very shameful and myopic. As a judge and member of the bar, I will not accept that,” he wrote.

Full Article & Source:
Woman sues York County probate judge over case delay

See Also:
York County officials say judge ‘deliberately manipulated’ court schedule to create a backlog

Maine’s highest court to hear case against York County probate judge

Rep. Smith votes to expand foster care assistance and reform State’s guardianship laws


COLUMBUS— State Representative Smith (R-Bidwell) voted for legislation that increases the age for which persons are eligible to receive foster care and adoption assistance, as well as addresses issues associated with caring for the more than 67,000 juvenile and elderly Ohioans subject to guardianship in the state.

After having passed the House Community and Family Advancement Committee and Finance Committee earlier this year, the House voted in favor of the measure. House Bill 50 requires the Director of the Department of Job and Family Services to expand payments for foster care and adoption to qualifying persons up to the age of 21.

According to Ohio Fostering Connections, an organization that advocates for foster youth, more than 1,000 Ohio youth age out of foster care at the age of 18 each year, putting them at increased risk of homelessness, unemployment, insufficient education, dependence on public assistance and human trafficking.

Additionally, HB 50 requires the probate court to furnish appointed guardians with a guardianship guide, which is to be written by either the Attorney General or the Ohio Judicial Conference.

“This legislation provides additional protections to at-risk youths and guardians that will dramatically improve the foster care system,” Smith said.

HB 50 states that the expansion of foster care services must be funded by July 1, 2017. It now awaits consideration in the Ohio Senate.

Full Article & Source: 
Rep. Smith votes to expand foster care assistance and reform State’s guardianship laws

Monday, December 7, 2015

Restitution for wards may be long fight


When news of Paul Kormanik’s death reached Phil Metoyer, there was no watershed moment.

No feeling of relief.

No justice.

On many nights, Metoyer had thought about what he’d say to Kormanik, a lawyer who had been appointed as guardian to Metoyer’s father, Albert.

In his final years, Albert Metoyer lacked proper medical care because Kormanik failed to file the right paperwork to enroll him for Medicaid, according to Franklin County Probate Court records. Kormanik liquidated the man’s assets and even interfered with the family’s plans for funeral arrangements.

It has been six weeks since Kormanik was found dead in his Upper Arlington home — the same morning that the longtime lawyer and guardian was supposed to appear in Probate Court on contempt charges for failure to pay restitution to a ward he had victimized.

Attorneys and friends close to the Kormanik family said he died by suicide. Official autopsy results are pending with the county coroner’s office.

His death brings more heartache and legal battles for families such as Metoyer’s who say that Kormanik victimized their loved ones.

Now, those who want restitution must spend thousands of dollars for attorneys and probably years in court proceedings, said several probate lawyers.

 
“People will usually have to file a claim against someone’s estate in these instances,” said John Mashburn, a probate lawyer.

Guardians such as Kormanik who oversee assets are required to be bonded or insured. Families also have the option to pursue action with those bonding agencies, attorneys said.

Before his death, Kormanik transferred his largest assets, such as his home, to his wife, according to county documents.

Probate Court officials declined to discuss what actions they are taking to ensure that families get their day in court, saying they can’t comment on cases that are before the court or might come before it.

Before Kormanik’s death on Oct. 5, the court had stripped him of his wards, and he surrendered his law license and pleaded guilty to 10 felony counts, including theft from an elderly or disabled person and tampering with records. He was to be sentenced on Oct. 20 for those crimes.

Two years ago, Kormanik had more wards — people deemed by probate courts to be unable to care for themselves — than any other lawyer in Ohio’s history.

Dozens of families came forward after The Dispatch found during a yearlong investigation that Kormanik and other attorneys were not taking proper care of wards and were misspending their money.

Investigations by the Probate Court and Franklin County Prosecutor Ron O’Brien also found that Kormanik was stealing items from wards and, in some cases, giving the items to his staff members.

Hundreds of those things are unaccounted for.

Kormanik’s roster of about 400 wards was a byproduct of probate judges being overburdened by the demand for guardians. Several judges expressed concern to the Ohio Supreme Court about Kormanik’s actions as early as 2007, the Dispatch investigation found, but he kept accumulating wards.

Franklin County Probate Judge Robert Montgomery assigned wards to Kormanik until The Dispatch presented its findings.

Kormanik’s family has said he did nothing wrong. His daughter, in a written response after his death, said the Probate Court and the newspaper made Kormanik a scapegoat for a system in need of fixing.
Kormanik’s wife also has confronted court officials to express those sentiments.

His family members have asked The Dispatch never to contact them again.

Phil Metoyer carries the pain of his father’s final days as only a son can. He wanted control of the funeral for his father, a veteran of World War II, Korea and Vietnam, but Kormanik interfered.

“I pray for his family, but I wish Kormanik would’ve stood up and been a man about this,” Metoyer said.

Some wards’ families, such as the relatives of Richard E. Roberts, have hired attorneys who have been able to extract a few thousand dollars from the bonding company that insured Kormanik.

In the Roberts case, Kormanik stole a couch, lawn mower and rocking chair. Authorities found the lawn mower at the house of a former employee of Kormanik’s.

Roberts died on Oct. 20. With the help of an attorney, his relatives were able to do what Phil Metoyer couldn’t: bury their father and husband the way they wanted.

Julie Crum, Roberts’ daughter, said her father’s death and Kormanik’s suicide brought a blunt end to years of turmoil.

But the bitterness remains.

“All the heartache and tragedy over the last two years, and it all came crashing down in a two-week period,” Crum said. “My father’s case is coming to a close, and I hope that all the other families have found some closure as well.”

Judge Montgomery is still sorting out Kormanik’s wards. Court officials have reached out to relatives of his former wards to see if they are willing to take care of their loved ones.

Montgomery also created what he said is Ohio’s first public guardian in early October. He founded a Guardianship Service Board and appointed Jack R. Kullman Jr., a former magistrate in the state’s 10th District Court of Appeals, as the board’s director.

Kullman was appointed guardian of four wards on Oct. 1.

Other board members include Columbus defense lawyer Larry James. The board meets monthly; the next meeting is scheduled for 2 p.m. Dec. 17 on the 11th floor of 373 S. High St.

Full Article & Source:
Restitution for wards may be long fight 

See Also:
Convicted guardianship lawyer died of suicide, attorney says 

Lawyer charged with stealing from wards, bilking burial fund 

Investigations launched into billing by lawyers appointed as guardians

Wards of indicted guardian are missing items, relatives say

Guardianship bill needed

Lawyer indicted for theft from those he was supposed to protect 

Columbus Lawyer Gives Up All Guardianship Cases

With new guardians, wards gain new hope

Florence woman arrested for stealing from elderly family members


Jennilee Cox
31-year-old Jennilee Cox is facing multiple charges after she allegedly stole from her elderly family members.

Cox is accused of writing checks and cashing them. She took over $500 from elderly family members above the age of 80.

She has been charged with three counts of possession of forged instrument 2nd degree, theft 2nd degree, and financial exploitation of the elderly.

Cox has a $9,500 bond and is currently being held in the Lauderdale County Detention Center.

Full Article & Source:
Florence woman arrested for stealing from elderly family members

Puxico caregiver charged with exploitation of the elderly


Jerri Greenlee
PUXICO, Mo. -- On Nov. 30, 2015, the Stoddard County Sheriff's Office responded to a call in the Puxico, Mo. area in reference to stolen checks. On arrival, Deputy Travis Stafford met with the victim, a 91 year old female.

The victim stated she received a statement from her bank and it showed there had been several checks written on her account that she had not written. The victim stated she checked her box of checks and discovered there were some checks missing. The victim stated she thought it might be one of the females that works for the in home services for the disabled that comes to her home. The daughter of the victim stated that her mother seldom ever writes checks on the account and if her mother needs something from town she does her shopping for her. The daughter also stated that her mother lives on a fixed income and all the money in her mother's account is now gone.

On looking at several returned checks it was noted that some had been written to Dollar General Store in Puxico. After looking at surveillance videos at Dollar General Store and speaking with Genisis Home Care Services it was determined that the person passing the victim's checks was Jerri Greenlee of Puxico who is also an employee of Genesis Home Health Care. Several other fraudulent checks were collected from the bank.

Jerri Greenlee, age 26, was arrested and transported to the Stoddard County Jail where she remains at this time. Greenlee is charged with Class B Felony of financial exploitation of the elderly. Bond set at $7,500.00 cash only.

Full Article & Source:
Puxico caregiver charged with exploitation of the elderly

Sunday, December 6, 2015

Their dad died after not seeing them for too long—this happens when they attend the funeral!


Christmas is just around the corner and many people are getting ready to celebrate with their families. Exchanging gifts and preparing food for the festivities are just two of those things almost everybody looks forward to. But bonding with family members you haven’t seen for a long time is actually the real meaning of Christmas.

Many successful adults work abroad, or really far away from their parents, making them see each other very seldom. Some of us don’t realize that our parents are getting older by the day—and there is not much time to spend with them. These are the times when our parents long for us and wish they were with us all the time—especially on Christmas.



(Continue Reading)

Full Article & Source:
Their dad died after not seeing them for too long—this happens when they attend the funeral!

Judicial Reform News Conference :: November 24, 2015




Source:
Judicial Reform News Conference :: November 24, 2015

Court grants woman right to die after 'losing her sparkle'

Photograph: Linda Nylind for the Guardian

A 50-year-old woman who fears that the passing of her youth and beauty means the end of everything that “sparkles” in life has been granted permission to die by the court of protection.

In a highly unusual judgment published this week, King’s College Hospital NHS Trust has been told that the unnamed woman has the capacity to make up her own mind and is entitled to refuse the life-saving kidney dialysis treatment she requires.

The decision includes a detailed account of the lifestyle of C, as the woman is known, describing her as “impulsive”, “self-centred”, heavy drinking and four times married.

But the judge, Mr Justice MacDonald, explained that the principle was the same for any patient. “The right to refuse treatment extends to declining treatment that would, if administered, save the life of the patient,” he said in his court of protection decision.

“This position reflects the value that society places on personal autonomy in matters of medical treatment and the very long established right of the patient to choose to accept or refuse medical treatment from his or her doctor.

“Where a patient refuses life-saving medical treatment the court is only entitled to intervene in circumstances where the court is satisfied that the patient does not have the mental capacity to decide whether or not to accept or refuse such treatment.” Intervention, he said, was not required in this case.

MacDonald continued: “C is a person to whom the epithet ‘conventional’ will never be applied … C has led a life characterised by impulsive and self-centred decision-making without guilt or regret. [She] has had four marriages and a number of affairs and has, it is said, spent the money of her husbands and lovers recklessly before moving on when things got difficult or the money ran out.

“She has, by their account, been an entirely reluctant and at times completely indifferent mother to her three caring daughters. Her consumption of alcohol has been excessive and, at times, out of control … In particular, it is clear that during her life C has placed a significant premium on youth and beauty and on living a life that, in C’s words, ‘sparkles’.”

Having been diagnosed with breast cancer, she had taken an overdose with alcohol. She did not die but caused herself such extensive kidney damage that she required dialysis – which she now refused to undergo.
The judge added: “My decision that C has capacity to decide whether or not to accept dialysis does not, and should not prevent her treating doctors from continuing to seek to engage with C in an effort to persuade her of the benefits of receiving life-saving treatment in accordance with their duty to C as their patient.

“My decision does no more than confirm that in law C is entitled to refuse the treatment offered to her for her benefit by her dedicated treating team. Nothing I have said prevents them from continuing to offer that treatment.”

MacDonald analysed evidence from psychiatrists and medics, and from one of the woman’s daughters. One daughter told him that her mother’s life had “to all appearances” been fairly glamorous. She said her mother did not want to be “poor”, “ugly” or “old”.

“She has said the most important thing for her is her sparkly lifestyle,” said the daughter. “She kept saying she doesn’t want to live without her sparkle and she thinks she has lost her sparkle.”

The daughter said family members would devastated if her mother died, but added: “We think it is a horrible decision. We don’t like the decision at all. But I cannot get away from the fact that she understands it.”

Full Article & Source:
Court grants woman right to die after 'losing her sparkle'