Coronavirus deaths in nursing homes and guardianship scandals prompt new elder law recommendations

Image from Shutterstock.

By Amanda Robert

The ABA House of Delegates approved a pair of resolutions Monday that focus on the needs of older Americans.

Resolution 602, sponsored by the Commission on Law and Aging, the Section of Real Property, Trust and Estate Law and the Senior Lawyers Division, adopts the recommendations of the Fourth National Guardianship Summit and encourages all legislatures and policymakers to incorporate them when improving guardianship laws, policies and practices.

David English, a Section of Real Property, Trust and Estate Law representative to the House of Delegates, introduced the resolution. He said while many people have become more aware of guardianship issues because of Britney Spears’ recent case, it is not an isolated incident.

“We have been working or dealing with issues concerning guardianship going back many decades,” said English, who is also a past chair of the Section of Real Property, Trust and Estate Law and the Commission on Law and Aging. “As part of this process, about every 10 years a national conference will be held with numerous attendees from many ABA entities, among other groups, to talk about guardianship and make recommendations on how to improve the system.”

ABA members and staff were among the 125 advocates and experts who gathered virtually at the Fourth National Guardianship Summit in May 2021. The association has also participated in and adopted recommendations from three previous summits in 1988, 2001 and 2011.

The 22 recommendations from the latest summit fall into six areas: rights-based guardianships; supported decision-making; limited guardianship, protective arrangements and diverting pipelines; guardianship monitoring and addressing abuse; fiduciary responsibilities and tensions; and guardianship court improvement programs.

They include the following:

• States and courts must ensure all judicial proceedings that could impact an adult’s rights include meaningful due process.

• State statutes, rules, policies and processes should require courts to consider supported decision-making as an alternative to guardianship both before and after it is imposed.

• States should create guardianship diversion programs that facilitate alternatives to guardianship, and as a result, reduce the likelihood that unnecessary guardianships will be granted.

• States and courts should increase the safety and well-being of adults subject to guardianship by establishing a post-appointment, person-centered monitoring system.

• States should provide funding for an agency to implement and oversee licensure or certification of court-appointed guardians as well as to vet, train and discipline these guardians.

• Congress should establish a guardianship court improvement program, modeled on the child welfare court improvement program created in 1993.

The House of Delegates adopted a separate resolution in August 2020 that called on Congress to create and fund a guardianship court improvement program to support states’ efforts to strengthen their adult guardianship systems.

Jo Ann Engelhardt, who also serves as a Section of Real Property, Trust and Estate Law representative to the House of Delegates, added that the Racial & Ethnic Diversity Caucus supports the resolution.

“This is important because so often the burdens of an ineffective guardianship system may fall more harshly on our diverse communities,” said Engelhardt, who is a member of the caucus.

As of mid-September, a dozen states has enacted 24 amendments in their laws that relate to these recommendations, according to the report that accompanies Resolution 602. Congress is also considering reforms, including through the Guardianship Accountability Act.

Information about nursing home owners and chains should be more accessible, House says

The House of Delegates approved another resolution Monday that aims to improve transparency and accountability in the ownership and management of nursing homes.

Resolution 601, sponsored by the Commission on Law and Aging, the Health Law Section and the Senior Lawyers Division, urges Congress and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to create a national system that audits nursing home ownership reports to ensure the disclosure of all owners, including parent, management and property companies. It also asks them to increase their focus on nursing home chains by enabling the CMS website that compares nursing homes to include information on facilities owned by the same companies.

Louraine Arkfeld, a Senior Lawyers Division representative to the House of Delegates, spoke in favor of the resolution. She contended that “making the decision to place your loved one, a vulnerable loved one, into a nursing home is a difficult decision in even the best of circumstances.”

Arkfeld, who is also a past chair of the Commission on Law and Aging and the Senior Lawyers Division, continued: “So wouldn’t you want to know who owns the nursing home? Who really manages the nursing home? Who really controls the decisions, the care decisions, that are going to be made?”

According to a Kaiser Family Foundation study, which is cited in the report that accompanies the resolution, 69% of nursing homes were owned by for-profit companies in 2016. In the same year, 24% operated as nonprofit facilities, while 7% were government-owned.

The study additionally shows that more than half of nursing homes were owned or leased by corporate chains with two or more facilities.

“Unfortunately, the pandemic has demonstrated to us, often quite painfully, how tenuous the care and safety of our loved ones can be in nursing homes,” Arkfeld added. “These increasingly complex structures with their disassembly of nursing home ownership and operations has been shown to have a negative effect on a broad array of quality measures.”

In November 2019, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat from Massachusetts, and two other legislators sent letters to the Carlyle Group, Formation Capital, Fillmore Capital Partners and Warburg Pincus, which have holdings in the nursing home industry. They also told the four private equity firms they had concerns about their interests in large for-profit chains and requested more information about their investments.

Resolution 601 additionally urges state and territorial legislatures and regulatory agencies to make proposed changes in the ownership and management of nursing homes more transparent by implementing public comment periods or other processes prior to transactions.

Full Article & Source:

Coronavirus deaths in nursing homes and guardianship scandals prompt new elder law recommendations

Tahlequah lawyer disbarred

By D.E. Smoot

The Oklahoma Supreme Court ordered the disbarment of a Tahlequah lawyer and former prosecutor whose misconduct included client neglect and misuse of client funds. 

Haskell Doak Willis, a former assistant district attorney in Cherokee County who transitioned to private practice, was suspended from practicing law in 2021. He was ordered to contact the Oklahoma Bar Association and resign as part of a plea agreement he struck with federal prosecutors in February 2020, when he was convicted for a federal firearms violation.

An order for disbarment that has yet to be released for publication by the Oklahoma Supreme Court shows Willis failed to follow through with the resignation. Willis, according to the court order, also failed to cooperate with the OBA and the Professional Responsibility Tribunal during the disciplinary proceedings, and "never filed a pleading responsive to the allegations" against him. 

Willis was indicted Nov. 7, 2019, by a federal grand jury, which was shown evidence of a past felony conviction and the evidence collected while law enforcers executed a search warrant. That evidence included an unspecified amount of methamphetamine and 24 firearms — an assortment of handguns, rifles and shotguns — that “had been shipped and transported in interstate commerce.” 

Eight of the nine justices who preside over the state's highest civil court — Justice James Edmondson did not participate — acknowledged "a criminal conviction itself does not establish unfitness to practice law." But conduct that reflects "adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects" may "reflect on fitness to practice law."

The court cited three grievances filed by former clients who said Willis agreed to provide legal services, accepted money from them, but failed to follow through. The court also cited instances when Willis misappropriated or commingled client funds with his.

"Respondent's actions inflicted significant embarrassment upon the legal profession," Justice Noma Gurich states in the order. "Respondent's cumulative misconduct clearly warrants disbarment." 

Willis was ordered to serve 12 months and a day in federal penitentiary and a period of probation following his release. Records show he was released from prison early on April 9, 2021. 

Full Article & Source:

Tahlequah lawyer disbarred

Guardianship Rules Changes Address Disputed Visitations and Abuse

By Csaba Sukosd

Upcoming rule amendments will focus on a number
of matters about the well-being of people under a
court’s legal care.

The Supreme Court of Ohio has revised the Rules of Superintendence for the Courts of Ohio regarding probate matters related to the rights and safety of people under court guardianship.

Amendments to Rules 66—66.09 improve procedures for disputed visitation of wards – people under a court’s legal care who are not able to look after their own affairs. The amendments also are aimed at raising awareness of potential abuse, fraud, and exploitation. The changes go into effect on July 1.

Revisions include:

• Addressing situations where a prospective ward is prevented from receiving a required mental health examination;
• Clarifying the guardian’s role in determining people the ward can contact, and to facilitate visitation if it’s in the ward’s best interest;
• Requiring the training of prospective guardians on abuse, neglect, and exploitation issues;
• Mandating that guardians report abuse, neglect, or exploitation to law enforcement or the long-term care ombudsman when appropriate. An ombudsman is an advocate for people receiving home care, assisted living, and nursing-home care.

The changes were recommended by the Supreme Court’s Commission on the Rules of Superintendence. The initial proposals, which received public comment last year, were suggested by the Ohio Judicial Conference and the Ohio Association of Probate Judges.

Full Article & Source:

Guardianship Rules Changes Address Disputed Visitations and Abuse

Officials look to expand conservatorship law to get homeless into care

The growing homeless population is getting out of hand for providers and city leaders. Now some want to create a new way to help those who can't help themselves. KPBS reporter Tania Thorne says it would mean changing conservatorship laws.

 

By Tania Thorne

When you hear “conservatorship,” you likely think of Britney Spears and the Free Britney movement.

Last November, a judge put an end to her 14-year probate conservatorship, which meant her father was assigned to care for her and manage her assets.

But there’s another type of conservatorship that some lawmakers see as a tool to combat the homelessness crisis.

The Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, or LPS Act, allows a judge to appoint a conservator over a person with a mental health disorder.

“We're not talking about an extremely wealthy, very famous celebrity, ” said San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria. “We're talking about the sickest and most vulnerable people that live on the streets of San Diego and on the streets of cities across the nation.“

Gloria wants to expand the LPS Act to force more mentally ill homeless people to go into treatment.

Currently, the law says people who courts rule as “gravely disabled” can be placed under conservatorships and put in a healthcare facility, even if it’s against their will. Gloria wants to expand that definition.

“A portion of these folks end up in the criminal justice system, which I hear very clearly from the public, they are not comfortable with," he said. "There has to be some choice other than leaving them on the streets or incarcerating them in prison. We have to have a better option."

But some providers say that even changing the law and putting more homeless people under conservatorships doesn't change that there are not enough places for them to go.

“How does anything change the day after that law is signed if we don't have more treatment beds, more housing, more funding for services?” said Michelle Cabrera with the County Behavioral Health Directors Association of California.

Cabrera said people stand a better chance at long-term recovery when they enter into services voluntarily.

“The vast majority of people, including people with serious mental illness and or substance use disorder needs, voluntarily and willingly accept both services as well as housing when it is offered to them," she said. "Our problem in California is that we have a major deficit of housing that meets the needs of very low-income Californians."

Services are scarce right now, said Greg Anglea, the CEO of Interfaith Community Services, which provides supportive services in San Diego.

“Far too often we have to ask somebody where did you sleep last night and is it safe to sleep there again because help is not available today,” he said.

He said addressing conservatorship reform before expanding resources is a backward way of thinking.

“Until we have access to these resources, taking away people's rights who want to access those resources, but who can't, is going too far and it is not something we would advocate for,” he said.

Keri Souza has been homeless since 2016 and knows she has a mental illness.

“I let them know that I have a mental illness and that I need help with my medication and that I need to have an eval, but I don't think a lot of people know to say that,” she said.

She questions what will happen if someone rejects a conservatorship.

“What if you don't want to do what they're asking you to do?“ she said. “Is that going to affect me negatively? Am I now not going to get the services that I need? That would be pretty pertinent.”

Every Wednesday, Souza goes to a Humanity Showers event for a shower, food and clothes.

Jordan Verdin, who runs the program, is worried that conservatorships could violate people’s trust.

“Coming out here and speaking to people, you’ll see a lot of the underlying issues are really deep-rooted in trauma and displacement," he said. "These policies will actually perpetuate the trauma deeper by displacing them and removing them from their communities.”

But Gloria said the problem can’t continue as it has and something has to be done.

“San Diegans see this every single day, people who are clearly not capable of caring for themselves being left on the streets where they're vulnerable, sick, in some cases dying,“ he said. “It's absolutely unacceptable, we have to do something different and that's why we need to change our state's conservatorship laws.”

He will spend the next year working to change the law.

Full Article & Source:

Officials look to expand conservatorship law to get homeless into care

Panel recommends DA Manlove be disbarred

Screenshot from a YouTube video uploaded to her campaign website, July 21, 2021.

By Hannah Black

CHEYENNE – A hearing panel convened by the Wyoming State Bar will recommend disbarment of Laramie County District Attorney Leigh Anne Manlove to the Wyoming Supreme Court.

The decision was read early Friday afternoon by hearing panel Chairman Christopher Hawks about two hours after he and the panel broke to deliberate.

Hawks, an attorney based in Jackson, was one of three panel members chosen from the Bar’s full Board of Professional Responsibility, the hearing body for attorney discipline in Wyoming.

“This panel finds the injury caused by (Manlove’s) conduct is serious,” Hawks said.

Following a seven-day hearing, the panel on Thursday found Manlove in violation of multiple rules of professional conduct that govern attorneys in the state. The violations included exaggerating the impact of budget restraints, failing to take prompt action to fill vacancies in her office, directing staff not to report overtime and filing improper motions to dismiss after judges warned her to stop.

Failure to file documents in a timely fashion in the Andrew Weaver case, which led to his release, and a “misleading” news release following the incident contributed to the panel’s findings. Within a few days of him leaving jail, Weaver had shot and killed two people, injuring two others.

Also noted was a repeated failure to access crime lab data in the case of an alleged child sex abuse victim, which was referred to the Wyoming Attorney General’s Office in January, and a failure to provide evidence in a 2019 case, resulting in the dismissal of a case against a man charged with multiple violent felonies.

The state Supreme Court will have the final say in any discipline.

Formal charges filed by the Office of Bar Counsel last year with the State Bar allege that Manlove mishandled the prosecution of cases in Laramie County and inappropriately dismissed certain cases, and that she created a hostile work environment for employees of the district attorney’s office.

“Until the Wyoming Supreme Court acts, Leigh Anne Manlove will continue to serve as the Laramie County district attorney, and she’s committed to serving the citizens of Laramie County as long as she remains in office,” said Stephen Melchior, Manlove’s attorney, following the announcement of the disbarment recommendation. “We live in a nation, fortunately, that is governed by the rule of law. She respects and honors that very foundational important principle and trusts the process.”

Manlove’s term will be up in January 2023, unless she is re-elected in November.

Special Bar Counsel Weston W. Reeves, who represented the Bar in the hearing, declined to comment.

Process could take months

If the Supreme Court decides to disbar or suspend Manlove from practicing law while she still holds the office of district attorney, “she would not be able to appear in court, argue cases, do anything that a lawyer does,” Bar Counsel Mark Gifford said in a Friday interview with the Wyoming Tribune Eagle.

The panel will now be responsible for writing a report and recommendation with its specific findings. This will likely be filed with the state Supreme Court within a couple of weeks, Gifford explained.

Manlove will have 30 days to respond with an objection. Reeves will then have 30 days from that filing to enter his response. The court may grant extensions to either party.

A decision by the state Supreme Court may take several months. The court could decide to set the case for oral arguments, Gifford said, which likely wouldn’t happen until fall.

The court took close to nine months to decide on a punishment for Becket Hinckley, a former Teton County prosecutor who was suspended from practicing law in Wyoming for three years. A State Bar hearing panel had recommended Hinckley be disbarred after it found he violated seven rules of professional conduct in a 2015 aggravated assault trial, according to reporting by the Casper Star-Tribune.

The Manlove hearing was just the second of its kind, following a rule change in September 2019 that required documents and information related to Bar disciplinary proceedings be available to the public. Hinckley’s May 2021 disciplinary hearing was the first conducted in public.

Gifford declined to comment on the outcome of the hearing or the hearing itself.

‘My remorse and my regret’

Manlove made a statement to the panel Friday before it broke to deliberate sanction recommendations. She thanked the panel for giving her the opportunity “to express my contrition and my remorse and my regret.”

When she was sworn into the Bar, she said, she took an oath that included the promise to “demean myself uprightly.”

“I think I’ve fallen short of that,” Manlove said.

She said she was “profoundly sorry” for words she used that were hurtful to others, and said she plans to apologize in person to the appropriate people.

Manlove said she appreciated that the panel “deliberated thoughtfully,” and expressed that she does not take her job or the cases she handles lightly.

Friday morning, Reeves and Melchior each had an hour to argue aggravated and mitigating factors before the panel broke to deliberate.

Before he announced the panel’s disbarment recommendation, Hawks listed the aggravating factors it found in the case, or things that increased the severity of the violations. These included Manlove having a “dishonest motive,” a pattern of misconduct, refusing to acknowledge the wrongfulness of her actions, having substantial experience in the practice of law, and the vulnerability of the victim, which Hawks said are the people of Laramie County.

Mitigating factors found by the panel included personal or emotional problems, the COVID-19 pandemic and the state budget crisis.

Full Article & Source:

Panel recommends DA Manlove be disbarred

Conservatorship

By John Donegan

The colorful antics of dysfunctional Hollywood celebrities are always a great source of voyeuristic entertainment and occasionally shadenfreude, but they can possibly lead to real problems for the rest of us. The Britney Spears melodrama may be one such case, as our craven, vote-hungry politicians react and pander.

For the few of you who weren't aware of this very publicized drama, Britney Spears is a famous pop star who melted down in 2008, lost custody of her kids, and was involuntarily placed in a mental hospital for a period. A conservatorship—a legal proceeding in which someone is court-appointed to handle the affairs of an incompetent—was established and her father appointed to be her conservator. She continued to perform while under conservatorship and made a lot of money.

Britney chaffed at being under conservatorship and proclaimed her mental competence. She occasionally ranted in court and in social media, sometimes posting nude photos apparently intended to prove her sanity. Her fans formed the #FreeBritney movement to advocate for the termination of the conservatorship, and after much drama, it was terminated in late 2021. Only time will tell if she is now capable of managing her own affairs. Los Angeles is full of charming opportunists awaiting the vulnerable, and Hollywood offers lots of opportunities to self-destruct and go broke.

I have more than just a casual interest, having practiced conservatorships and elder law for more than 40 years, including in Los Angeles, where I knew a couple of the key actors in Britney's proceeding during the 1990s. I was recently alarmed to read that some fans of pop star Britney Spears are advocating for the "reform" of California's conservatorship laws, and apparently have the ear of a politician. At the urging of the #FreeBritney group, and some disability rights advocates, California Assemblymember Brian Maienschein (D-San Diego) has announced his intention to introduce legislation reforming the current law, to correct what they see are defects in the current process.

Very few conservatorships offer this much drama or controversy. The typical one is for an elderly person with dementia, or who has otherwise become mentally incapacitated, and needs someone to make medical decisions and handle their business affairs. Sometimes, they are being exploited by opportunists such as a drug-addicted family member or "friend" and may have lost their homes or savings. A conservatorship is necessary to stop the victimization and to handle their affairs.

Relatively rarely a proposed conservatee objects to conservatorship. This is problematic because the mental disabilities that created the need for the conservatorship may also render them delusional or incapable of understanding their deficiencies, and they may be insistent upon doing dangerous or irrational acts. Or sometimes, they may instead actually be competent and just the subject of another's attempt to inappropriately control their affairs. Sometimes, they may vacillate from moment to moment on whether they're opposed. Especially in family affairs, it can be difficult to sort out needs and motives, especially when the fame, wealth, looks, or charisma of the conservatee distort the process.

The current conservatorship process is already complicated and hideously expensive, with thousands of dollars in court fees alone, and much more in attorney's fees. The conservatee must be periodically interviewed and evaluated by a court investigator, and detailed periodic accountings must be filed and examined by the court, fees approved, and hearings held. Almost every substantial act of the conservator, such as selling assets or moving the conservatee, must be approved by the court.

Many people who need a conservatorship are unable to afford one because the cost would quickly exhaust their assets. The last time the Legislature "reformed" the process, it became even more expensive and inaccessible. Conservatorships are necessary, but what good is a protective process that few can afford? I hope we are spared the destructive effects of politicians who have no understanding of the process and are blindly implementing the demands of a pop star's fans.

The public reaction to Britney's drama has been sharply divided, with one side arguing "it's her money and her life, and she should be allowed to do whatever she wants," while the other argues that society should protect the vulnerable from themselves. One side saw her emotional tirades as confirmation that she should be freed, while the other saw them as proof she was crazy. Conservatorships comes down to a general philosophical question of personal autonomy and whether or not society ought to intervene in really bad decisions. My guess is that we're split roughly 50/50.

Ironically, I come down in the "protect" side, despite my usual libertarian leanings (with apologies to frequent libertarian commenter Gail Lightfoot, who finds me insufficiently doctrinaire). I have just seen so much exploitation that, despite my usual deference to Darwinian process and opposition to liberal paternalistic government, I think the truly vulnerable should be protected. Still, it is hard to not empathize with those who object to a "Big Brother" government injecting itself into one's choices, especially since the issue of mental competence is so subjective.

Your thoughts? Δ

Full Article & Source:

Conservatorship

Wendy Williams’ Bank Insists She Needs Guardianship Amid Health Issues: ‘We Are Concerned’

by Edna Rico

 

Wells Fargo continues to make disconcerting claims about Wendy Williams’ health.

 

A week after locking the daytime diva out of the millions in her account due to fears of “dementia or undue influence,” the bank has now alleged The Wendy Williams Show host is an “incapacitated person” who needs a guardianship.

On Thursday, Wells Fargo sent a letter to New York Supreme Court Judge Arlene Bluth requesting a hearing to determine whether the media personality needs a professional to intervene in her affairs. Attorney David Pikus wrote on behalf of the bank in the letter:

“We are concerned about [Williams’] situation. It is our hope that the Guardianship Part [of the court] will imminently appoint a temporary guardian or evaluator to review the situation and ensure that [Williams’] affairs are being properly handled.”

Yikes. When a bank is concerned, we should probably be concerned, too, right…?

The note came after Williams’ attorney Celeste McCaw filed an emergency petition last Friday claiming Wells Fargo had “for more than two weeks” denied the 57-year-old access to her “accounts, assets and statements” after her former financial adviser Lori Schiller alleged Wendy — who hasn’t hosted her daytime talk show since July 2021 due to ongoing health issues — was “of unsound mind.”

In the court docs, McCaw said Williams had fired Schiller as her adviser due to alleged “malfeasance” involving her accounts as well as “improper conduct in relation to their professional relationship.” Innerestingly, though, the lawyer admitted Williams “continues to rely on Schiller’s advisement.” Huh?? On Wednesday, Pikus argued in a separate letter sent to the judge that Wells Fargo “has strong reason to believe” Williams is a “victim of undue influence and financial exploitation.” He requested to keep the case “under seal” to “preserve the confidential nature.”

The bank’s attorney alleged Schiller had “recently witnessed signs of exploitation, including [Williams’] own expressed apprehensions” about the people around her, adding that “other independent third parties who know [Williams] well … share these concerns.”

In response to Wednesday’s letter, McCaw wrote that Williams “denies that she is the victim of undue influence and financial exploitation.” Wendy’s lawyer requested a temporary restraining order against the bank to restrain it “from freezing [Williams’] accounts and interfering with her right to access her financial assets and statements.”

A spokesperson for Wells Fargo said in a statement to Page Six Thursday:

 “We deny any allegations of improper actions with respect to Ms. Williams’ accounts and are fully participating in a court process to reach a resolution that is in her best interest. The financial well-being of our clients is at the heart of everything we do.”

This is getting stranger by the day, Perezcious readers. Who do U think is telling the truth here?

Full Article & Source:

Wendy Williams’ Bank Insists She Needs Guardianship Amid Health Issues: ‘We Are Concerned’ 

 

See Also: 

SHOCK CLAIMS Wendy Williams’ bank calls her an ‘incapacitated person’ who is possible ‘victim of financial exploitation’ in lawsuit

 

Judge summoned to high court to explain 2-year absence

A Connecticut judge has been summoned before the state Supreme Court to explain why she should not be disciplined or fired for failing to show up to work for at least the past two years while continuing to be paid

 

By DAVE COLLINS

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — A Connecticut judge has been summoned before the state Supreme Court to explain why she should not be disciplined or fired for failing to show up to work for at least the past two years while continuing to be paid.

The high court issued the summons on Thursday to Judge Alice Bruno and ordered her to appear before the justices on April 5.

Bruno, who is assigned to Waterbury Superior Court, is accusing court officials of refusing to accommodate her disability so she can return to work. She also claims Judicial Branch officials have retaliated against her.

Messages seeking comment were left for Bruno and court officials on Friday, when state workers were off for the Lincoln's Birthday holiday.

“Judge Bruno shall show cause why her failure to perform judicial functions for at least the last two years is not a violation of the following Rules contained within the Code of Judicial Conduct: 1.2 (Promoting Confidence in the Judiciary); 2.1 (Giving Precedence to the Duties of Judicial Office); 2.5 (Competence, Diligence, and Cooperation),” the summons says.

Bruno’s absence from work was first reported in November by lawyer and Hartford Courant columnist Kevin Rennie, a Republican former state lawmaker. The judge has not reported to work since Nov. 14, 2019, but the state has paid her more than $350,000 since then, according to judiciary documents Rennie obtained under the state Freedom of Information Act.

Bruno's lawyer, Jacques Parenteau, told The Associated Press on Friday that the judge has been out of work because Judicial Branch official refuse to accommodate her disability. The judge has lodged that allegation in a 120-paragraph complaint with the state Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, Parenteau said in an emailed statement.

The complaint also accuses court officials of retaliating against her for seeking the accommodation, which her doctors are requiring, Parenteau said.

“Judge Bruno continues to seek an accommodation that would allow her to return to work,” he said.

Parenteau declined to elaborate on the judge's disability.

In a letter Parenteau wrote to a court system human resources official in October 2020, he said the Judicial Branch appeared to be violating the federal Family and Medical Leave Act by refusing to allow Bruno to seek medical care to treat various physical and psychological conditions, and making disparaging remarks to her when she did seek care.

“Indeed, the hostility toward her conditions created a work environment that increasingly became more intolerable as the vicious cycle of anxiety leading to failure to perform resulted in hospitalization for heart attack-like symptoms in November of 2019,” Parenteau wrote.

He claimed mistreatment by court officials led to her accommodation requests and her being out of work.

State Rep. Steven Stafstrom, a Bridgeport Democrat and co-chair of the legislature's Judiciary Committee, supported the Supreme Court's summoning of Bruno to a hearing.

“It's about time,” he said. “Whenever anybody hasn't shown up to work for two years, presumably their employer has an obligation to have an understanding of why. My understanding is the Judicial Branch is questioning why she's still unable to perform her duties and she should have to explain that to the Supreme Court at this point.”

Full Article & Source:

Judge summoned to high court to explain 2-year absence

Former Olathe nursing home employee charged with mistreating elder person, identity theft

Nursing home employee charged with mistreating elderly

 

By: Andres Gutierrez , Jack Anstine

OLATHE, Kan. — KSHB 41 News usually doesn't show mugshots anymore, but its doing so in this case because the 39-year-old suspect faces a slew of charges that involve stealing from the elderly.

On Monday, the Johnson County District Attorney's Office stated their investigation isn't over and are encouraging other victims to come forward.

Patrica Ann Myler is charged with seven counts of mistreatment of an elder person, six counts of identity theft and three counts of computer crime targeting elderly residents at an Olathe nursing home, according to the Johnson County District Attorney's office

Beginning in March of 2019, Myler oversaw billing at the Villa St. Francis Nursing Home in Olathe.

During which time, the Johnson County District Attorney says she targeted elderly clients with a variety of crimes.

Her former boss says when Myler resigned in Dec. 2020, his team discovered thousands of dollars were improperly routed and they notified authorities.

"The billing should have gone to the state or through villa and that it was not done that way," Rodney Whittington, CEO of Villa St. Francis Nursing Home said in a phone interview Monday.

It was not only a shock but also an alert to review oversight.

"If you have ultimate authority and access then and you choose to abuse that, then it could happen that we continue to strengthen our processes re-examine it," Myler said.

Before Villa St. Francis, the Johnson County District Attorney says Myler was employed at AdventHealth Care Center in Overland Park at 6501 West 75th St. from June 2018 to February 2019.

A spokesperson for AdventHealth referred inquiries pertaining to the former employee to the Johnson County District Attorney's Office who wants to hear from residents who have may noticed any financial irregularities during the time Myler worked at either facility.

Myler was arrested for the alleged crimes after a collaborative investigation by the Kansas Department of Children and Families' Adult Protective Services division, the Olathe Police Department and the Johnson County District Attorney's office.

"Our older adults feel a lot of shame, a lot of embarrassment when these situations occur," Chrisy Khatib, with the Kansas Department for Children and Families said.

Almost a quarter of the cases Kansas DCF investigated last year involve financial exploitation of the elderly.

There are some red flags loved ones should watch out for.

"Are bills being paid on time? Are there additional people being added to signature cards? Are there large transactions missing? Large transactions meaning large money transactions being removed from bank accounts?" Khatib said

The AARP believes elder finance abuse is a growing threat that is largely under-reported.

"You know, sometimes people don't know they're being taken advantage of financially," Mary Tritsch with AARP Kansas said. "It may just be because they don't pay attention to their finances. Or maybe there's some cognitive problems impairments happening."

Usually learning about it in the first place begins with having an honest conversation.

"Just questions and make sure if you're a family member, that you let other family members know that you're concerned and that you're looking into it so that they don't think you're part of the problem," Tritsch said. "But it's really asking questions."

If you suspect your loved one to be victim of fraud in Kansas you call the Johnson County District Attorney’s "White Collar Crime" hotline at (913) 715-3140 or the Kansas Protection Report center at 1-800-922-5330.

Myler posted bond via Heartland Bail Bonds Monday evening after making her first appearance earlier in the day, according to court records.

Her attorney, Brandan Davies, released a statement to KSHB 41 News.

"We are at the initial steps of the legal process with Ms. Myler’s case. Our firm is doing an investigation into the allegations against Ms. Myler. Currently, the case is in litigation and we cannot comment further on a pending matter," Davies wrote in an e-mail

Another hearing is set in Myler's case on Feb. 17 at 9:00 a.m. in Division 3 at the Johnson County Courthouse. 

 

Full Article & Source:

Former Olathe nursing home employee charged with mistreating elder person, identity theft