How JustAnswer Works:

  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.

Ask RJ Your Own Question

RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience:  Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
18024604
Type Your Personal Injury Law Question Here...
RJ is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

RJ, I cant post anything here or on the second screen .I wil

Resolved Question:

RJ,
I cant post anything here or on the second screen .I will wait for a new one.
Submitted: 4 years ago.
Category: Personal Injury Law
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Post your questions here as a reply.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

I miss the old page there was a lot of really good stuff in there.

 

Now on the case.What is the financial explotation SOL.State court or federal court. I am looking on the legal appellate decision.Maybe you can find it but in Illinois not a penny to the trustees.I want to see.




I think if the judge sees this he may look at things a different way.During this time not only did we not have a legal remidy we did not know about it.



2006 .4 months and all of 2007, $1.0m spent by an incapacated woman daughters. living alone for $7,000 per months but the daughters wont let her go home.Personal attorneys close to $200,000

These were dont by an accountant.


The table posted above has the 2006 and 2007 disbursements listed (expenses, gifts, stock purchases, etc). Page 79 has the 2008 breakdown of expense by category.
Here is a table of the three years of data
Category 2006 2007 2008three years
Personal 14443 12051 587 27081_________________________________ More personal it is startng to add up.Remember Cardosa
Van 31150 0 0 31150____________________________________________ Dogs ,cats and rabbits
Nursing home 26482 23877 12200 $63.830_____________________________________Duplication because they would not my mother go home, we paid twice it is their turn to return the money
Medical 2554 11277 0 13831
Sitters/drivers 5051 34010 0 $39061__________________________________________??? Hard to verify without invoices
Credit card 32883 37844 0 $70727!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! My mothjers credit card used for personal use
Federal tax 13570 20217 716021 749808
IL tax 1927 3019 2000 $6946
Accounting/Legal 2911 38110 111206 $152227_______________________ As you can see legal fees are not broken out.you must add Flaxlmans to the Estate figure plus another $60,000
Annuity repay 0 669 0 669
Expenses of 0 31315 325 $31603___________________________________ just a basket to dump anything the \wantr to
Estate--------------------------------------------------$31000 Personal legal fees....Flaxman
Stock purchase 0 285000 190000 475000 Delete
Gift non-family 2000 4400 0 $6400
Life Insurance 0 30420 0 $30420
Misc 0 0 1288 $1288
Subtotal 132971 532209(NNN) NNN-NNNN$1687830
Family gifts 165018 78713 0 $243731
Total 297989 610922(NNN) NNN-NNNN$1931561
420,000 FORGERY

, TOTAL--- $ $2,351.560--- 28 months \The majority was spent between Sept.2006 and Nov. 2007 the big paynment was in2008 for federal taxes.Remember I got a call from China from my sisters telling me my mother would save money living with them.This alone I believe is financial explotation.Add it the $5.0

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

I was wrong he has the $700,000 plus numbers for federal taxes in his numners

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I do not the statute of limitations on the financial exploitation. In most states it is two or three years after you discover the exploitation. Statute of limitation are the same in state or federal court. This claim is a state law claim, but you could get in federal court based on diversity or if it is added to other claims that would be heard in federal court.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

$420,000 four for forgeries including mine.There is really no trustee as ex-husband had not found out.In the transcript of Marin County Flaxman makes it ver clear I did not want to dispurse the money.So they forge my signature deposit the funds.I try to redeposit but the account was closed.The money sat there for 9 months three months after my mother died.Without disbursing mine my sisters could not have taken theirs.How would the court look at theis.Can someone unknowingly commit a crime andmake ypou throir partner without your knowledge.I get differnt view.One said no harm no foul anothjer said forgery and beach of fiduciary another sayd the momney was part of the irrevocable trust so it is fraud

 

 

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
This is forgery, fraud, and breach of fiduciary duty.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

How do I fit in? I think I am fine on the finanicial explotation SOL.I was a trustee of my fathers trust so that I cant use.Same with the insurance trust but that didnt matter is was $340,000 before the forgery.They would never give me a copy of my mothers maybe I saw it two years ago.The accounting I sent you came out in May or June of 2009 that is the first time but it was not even broken down.Without that piece I could not have known.They alsys transferred from my sisters to my mothers so there could have been a lot more there.

 

So I want to make sure Before I call my lawyewr and he gets excited about getting out of the abuse.

 

Stay the course in the federal court add financial explotation in the federal or state court? If the state Juaine already has that in her suit.

 

Slayer statute?

 

The numbers sent you that my sisters spent what do you think

 

My attorneys want to check about appealing the independant trustee or freezing the assets.There is nothing the check is there.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You are an heir and a beneficiary you fut in this case. If you feel you can get a better judge in state court, go to state for the financial exploitation. The slayer statue could be added to it. The numbers you sent prove your claim and the damages you suffered. The independent trustee and freezing assets must be appealed.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Got it so if I cant prevail in the slayer statute no justice for my mother.

 

This is extremley important wherever iA go in the case but I need to know how it works.

 

A contingent remainderment benificiary can sue says the federal court.I have plenty of time on the statutes on some.On the surface it may appear irt is the same thing however how do you explain this example.I sue my sisters for the 13 year release and even for the forgiveness clause in the 2003 trust.I never know that xisted so maybe they cant pin violating the trust contest.Maybe I can bring a fraud claim against my sisters and Letizia for the 13 year write off.Juaine was a witness and thought it was something good for my mother.Maybe I am just confused me as a benificiary today or a contingent remainderment benificiary during my mothers life time is the same?One thing I know is their claim that we had to be income benificiaries during my mothers lifetime is errased.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
What you are describing is a beneficiary who can sue for fraud and breach of fiduciary duty. It does not matter what kind of beneficiary you are, you can still sue on these claims. The 13 year release and forgiveness are part pf these claims. You just bring forth the facts relating to the 13 years, the forgiveness, and all the other things your sisters and Letizia did. This will prove everything.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

The only reason my attorney called his morning was a threatening emal to move him or I was filing.

 

O.K since he has the be hand fed

 

1.Replead the trust case per our format.We have so many I dont know which to use.

 

3.Draft a financial abuse to be filed in the state or federal court.Is state cant the move it to the federal?If they do that maybe I can add the abuse.

 

4.Draft the slayer Statute to be foiled in the state or federal court.Will I have the same jurisdictional battle on that as the abuse?

 

Financial abuse and the trust case over lap a great deal does that matter

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You have jurisdiction on the slayer statute. You can file in state or federal court. It is up to you. File where you get a better judge.There should be no problems.Use this pleading.

Breach of Fiduciary Duty

1.Since 1979 my mother wanted to add me as a third trustee. I did not care as I wanted a bank. This never happened. Harris Bank, Northern trust, First National and Lake Shore, all agreed to by my mother as trustees. All got her out of the middle. All the money would have been professionally managed. Each time she said she would tell my sisters. I insisted she did not. She did and nothing else happened. Let me give you an example of what my sisters did by threatening and controlling my mother. Preserving family assets were not their concern. Any time between 1989-1997 I tried, had set up and here is what would have happened. My mother and fathers trust were worth $6.5 collectively. The bank set up a third trust VKR only. She does not have to ask her daughters when she needs a new pair of underwear

2.The first trusts would earn conservatively $350,000-$400,000 per year. My mother was to receive all of the income from both trusts. Everything would be paid from the new trust. Upon my Mothers death the principal would still be $6.5 and my mothers trust was hers to do what she wanted with.

3.My sisters fought this viciously behind my back each time. They would not give up control even at the expense of losing most of the principal. They threw money away and wasted it the entire time but hid it like everything else.

4.My mother in 2001 sent a letter to broker freeze account. My sisters sent a letter saying ignore my mother's letter. My mother did nothing.

5. Lawyer 2001-2002 told to draft trust unanimous consent, add me as a trustee, remove my sisters and my mother would serve as sole trustee, all three rejected as lawyer told my mother we should have beneficiaries sign off to prevent future lawsuits. 2002 signed by three that was mandate for future trust activity.

6. 2003 I am in China 2003 with forgiveness clause added, 13 year write off, and $150,000 for litigation1995 sisters take mothers checking account without her authority and place it in living trust all she gets is blank checks 2003 Mother entitled to income from both trusts $350,000, legally or breach of fiduciary, daughters decide to give mother an $8,000 per month allowance 2003 Forced to sell house she my children and I live in with her while I am in China 2003

7.1999 payment to me $1.5m, 2003 payment to me $2.0m threatened and denied.

8.1987 trust incapacity trust changed by forgery and fraud

9. 2006 By fraud and duress and undue influence mother forced to sign 2006 trust.

10. Wanting to go home 9/15/2006-11/2/2007 refused

11.I wish you were dead, I will sue you, and I will have you judged incompetent

12. From 1997-to my mother's death in 2007 $5.M of principal not including interest was withdrawn without one accounting.

13. My mother's living trust owned 635 shares of our families business (My shares) an eight year lawsuit began with the understanding if we prevailed the proceeds would be mine.
My sisters trustees convinced my mother the lawsuit may not prevail and she may be counter sued. She sold the stock to them but no money exchanged hands just a signed note from my mother to the trustee that she sold the stock to my sisters. As it turns out this transaction took place after the court ruling establishing the value $500,000 at a later date they sent gifts to my children however I could never determine the percentage because of the taxes.

14. FLR and VKR trust 13 year releases Fred is trustee, in China not notified. Verla is asked to come into Letizia's office fortunately she brought Juaine. Letezia was and has been Gretchen and Lynns attorney since 1999.According to Juaine it was Just a routine signing of a document in Verlas best interest. There was nothing discussed regarding the detail. This was carefully planned and carried out.

15. FLR trust three trustees 18 years all three must sign.2000 letter from Gretchen and Lynn to Blair says only two must sign (reverts back to simple majority before codicil $2.0m)
There seems to be a concern Fred did not open his mail.From 1982-2000 very few withdrawals. I did a great deal of oversees traveling.2000 after the change of trustees the volume of withdrawals went up at least four fold. Lynn and Gretchen knew for a fact I did not open my statements as when I was in China they were at my mothers. Five houses I lived in during that period and 30% of my time in China. For this to happen Blair and my sisters would have to work together to defraud my mother and I.

16. VKR irrevocable trust taken by fraud from Alvin while Verla is incapacitated. Alvin was forced off after 20 years of service. A forged signature became the new trustee.$420,000 withdrawn by using four forgeries. Alvin and Verla deprived from buy back. Letizia notarizes forged signature.

17. 15 months of incapacity $1.0m, living at home if fraud had not been committed $150,000 or breach of fiduciary, The irrevocable trust and the 2006 trusts were not disclosed to the beneficiary and when asked they denied making any changes

18. In November of 2006 both trusts were rewritten while my mother was mentally incapacitated and I was in China. As a beneficiary I was to be notified, the irrevocable trust in writing. I was not. In January of 2007 my mother wanted to go home so I went to North Carolina. My sisters would not let her go. I asked both of them if there were any changed to my mother's trust in my absence and their answer was no. Had they not lied to me and concealed the changes in November I take my mother home. Damages $850,000 from the difference spent in the next year versus what it should have been. In the alternative it would be breach of fiduciary. $5.0m in principal depleted in 18 years no accounting.1997-2007 $700,000 loss in 2000 stock market. Trustees lost nothing.

 

19. 2006 trust known incapacity by daughters of mother they draft a new trust making themselves successor trustees .The most telling part is my mother's sister was successor. Trustee. When she moved next to my mother to help my mother wrote into her trust forever $1,000 per month for life. That clause is gone what judge would believe an 88 year old woman would do that to her own sister.

20.Verla was 88 and unsophisticated as an investor. She trusted her daughters. She trusted the attorney. Each major revision, restatement, forgiveness or release was made in 2003 and 2006 I have a passport that will coincide with those dates.

21.There were four major documents or trusts that I know of that my mother was deceived or threatened into signing. Each time her son was in China. Each time she did not know the content of what she was signing. Each one, they would not give her a copy of for her file for fear of my finding it. As a beneficiary of a trust that I funded if two trustees can force their mother sign documents, conceal them from her mother until the mother's death this should be viewed as fraud.

 

22. A mother and father have three trusts. One the father was the granter in 1955 with a 1966 codicil, one was an irrevocable trust funded in 1987 by the mother, one was a living trust funded in 1989 and amended 10 times. On November 18th 2006 the grand slam was completed as impossible as it may seem. An attorney working together with the two daughters since 1999 have taken control of all three trusts $7.5m, by forgery, fraud and elder abuse. This was done with complete secrecy and concealment and an 85 year old mother who could not understand a trust agreement and a son 8000 miles away

23. The mothers brother was removed after 20 years, a sister removed after 10 years and her son. . My mother since 1980 relied on my advice before making any major financial decisions. It was very easy for someone to tell my mother one thing to get her to sign it when it really said something else. A trustee using trust funds for not trust related expenses.

24. While staying in Mill Valley my sister did not want my mother to go home under any circumstance.$5.5m and two trust changes would have been discovered plus $1.0m in withdrawals.

25. Her son was on his way from China. The daughter hired an attorney on 6/25/2007 $400.00 per hour. From what I can discern he is still on the trust payroll. While in Marin County I believe he billed the trust close to $200,000.He will title it in many ways but the botXXXXX XXXXXne was he was to keep my mother from going home and me from seeing her. He helps my sister end my mother's life and then pays himself from her own money. My sister and the attorney should be charged with fraud and punitive damages.

Fraud

Paragraphs 1-25 are reincorporated

Misrepresentation

Paragraphs 1-25 are reincorporated

 

Undue Influence

Paragraphs 1-25 are reincorporated

 

Duress

Paragraphs 1-25 are reincorporated

 

 

 

Add juanie_broadbent_wrongful_death to this pleading.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

I dont get Juaine.That is wrongful death in the federal court?I donmt know if the statutes of limitations can go from one plaintiff to another.

 

I found oue I am still proofing but this is the one you said ready to gile and had Ruffalo included

 

I tried to revise everything. Here is a draft. Look over it. I think you could use it as the new pleading.

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

 

NOW COME the Plaintiffs, Frederick W. Regnery, ("Plaintiff"), Lindsay Regnery ("Lindsay"), Frederick L. Regnery, ("Fred"), and Geoffrey Regnery ("Geoff"), by and through their attorneys, Fuchs & Roselli, Ltd., and as and for their Verified Complaint against the Defendants, Gretchen Regnery Wallerich ("Gretchen") and Lynn Regnery ("Lynn"), and Juaine Broadbent, in her capacity as Executrix of the Estate of Verla K. Regnery ("Juaine"), (Gretchen and Lynn collectively referred to hereinafter as "Defendants"), Plaintiffs state as follows:

Jurisdiction and Venue

1. Plaintiff is an Illinois resident who resides within the Village of Westmont and within the County of DuPage.

2. Lindsay, Fred, and Geoff are Plaintiff's children who are named as necessary parties insofar as they are co-Trustees of the Frederick W. Regnery Trust.

3. Gretchen is an individual, who and at all times herein relevant, resides in the state of California.

4. Lynn is an individual, who at all times herein relevant, resides in the state of North Carolina.

5. Juaine is an Illinois resident, named as a Defendant solely in her capacity as the Executrix of the Estate of Verla K. Regnery.

6. Pursuant to Section 5/2-101 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, this Court situated in DuPage County is, by operation of the facts alleged herein, the proper venue for this action.

Facts Common to All Counts

7. Plaintiffs hereby restate and reallege Paragraphs 1 through 6 of Jurisdiction and Venue as and for Paragraph 7 of this Facts Common to All Counts as though fully set forth herein.

8. Plaintiff, along with Gretchen and Lynn are siblings with the Plaintiff being the son of, and the Defendants being the daughters of Verla Kiehl Regnery ("Verla") and Frederick L. Regnery ("Frederick").

 

COUNT I FRAUD

 

In August of 2006 with sore swollen legs hips and ankles my mother was taken on a 7000 airline trip and ended up having a stroke and severe dementia.

 

 

9) My mother's living trust owned 635 shares of our families business (My shares) an eight year lawsuit began with the understanding if we prevailed the proceeds would be mine.
My sisters were the trustees. They convinced my mother the lawsuit may not prevail and she may be counter sued. She sold the stock to them but no money exchanged hands just a signed note from my mother to the trustee that she sold the stock to my sisters. As it turns out this transaction took place after the court ruling establishing the value $500,000 at a later date they sent gifts to my children.I could never determine the percentage because of the taxes.

 

10)FLR and VKR trust 13 year releases Fred is trustee, in China not notified. Verla is represented by the trustees attorney, also signs a lifetime forgiveness document for all loans, advances and gifts and has no idea of what she is signing. Her sister was with her.

This was a fraudulent scheme between Letizia,Gretchen and Lynn against Verla and Fred. $5.0m

This was carefully planned and carried out.

 

 

11)FLR trust three trustees 18 years all three must sign.2000 letter from Gretchen and Lynn to Blair says only two must sign (reverts back to simple majority before codicil $2.0m)
There seems to be a concern Fred did not open his mail. From 1982-2000 very few withdrawals. I did a great deal of oversees traveling.2000 after the change of trustees the volume of withdrawals went up at least four fold. Lynn and Gretchen knew for a fact I did not open my statements as when I was in China they were at my mothers. Five houses I lived in during that period and 30% of my time in China. For this to happen, Blair and my sisters would have to work together to defraud my mother and me.

 

12) VKR irrevocable trust taken from Alvin kiehl trustee,Verla's brother. while Verla is incapacitated. Alvin was forced off after 20 years of service.A forged signature became the new trustee. Then, $420,000 withdrawn by using four forgeries. Alvin and Verla deprived from buy back. clause. Letizia notarizes forged signature.

13) My mother was incapacitated for 15 months. During that time $1.0m was spent. Instead of $150,000 if she were living at home.. My mother owned a $3.4m irrevocable trust and a $2.5m 2003 living trust. In November of 2006 both trusts were rewritten while my mother was mentally incapacitated and I was in China. As a beneficiary I was to be notified,the irrevocable trust in writing.I was not.In January of 2007 my mother wanted to go home so I went to North Caroliana to get her..My sisters would not let her go.I asked both of them if there were any changed to my mothers trust in my absence and their answer was no.Had they not lied to me and concealed the changes of the trusts in November I would have take my mother home. Damages $850,000 from the difference spent by my sisters to the amount my mother living at home would have spent. $5.0m in principal depleated in 10 years no accounting.1997-2007., $700,000 loss in 2000 stock market.Trustees lost nothing as they sold their stoch before the market crash.

 

14) At the time the 2006 trust was drafted both sisters were very much awareof my mothers mental condition .The most telling part of the trust change was removing my mothers sister as successor trustee and taking her $1.000.00 per months guarantee away.

That clause is gone. Verla was 88 and unsophisticated as an investor. She trusted her daughters. She trusted the attorney. Each major revision,restatement,forgiveness or release was made in 2003 and 2006 I have a passport that will coincide with those dates.

 

15) There were four major documents or trusts that my mother was deceived or threatened into signing.Each time her son was in China. Each time she did not know the content of what she was signing.Each one they would not give her a copy of for her file for fear of me fnding it.

 

.The father was the grantor of a trust funded in 1966 an irrevocable trust From 1982 my sisters and I were its trustee.All activity in the trust must be signed off by the trustees. the grand slam was completed As impossible as it may seem working together with their attorney the daughters pulled off taking control of all three trusts by forgery,fraud,and elder abuse This was done with complete and utter silence and concealment and involved $7.5m.The mother had no idea of what she was signing and the son was 8000 away.

 

16)The mothers brother was removed after 20 years, a sister removed after 10 years and her son. My mother since 1980 relied on my advice before making any major financial decisions. It was very easy for someone to tell my mother one thing to get her to sign it when it really said something else.

 

17)While staying in Mill Vallley my sister did not want my mother to go home under any circumstance.$5.5m and two trust changes would have been discovered plus $1.0m in withdrawals.

 

18) Her son was on his way from China to pick up his mother in California My sister had hired an attorney at $400.00 per hour to keep me from taking my mother home.She has taken nearly 200,000 since to pay his legal bills He helps my sister end my mother's life and then pays himself from my mothers trust funds From 1989 to mothers death they were the sole trustees.No investment skills.2 of 3 children and a large estate.On at least seven occasions my mother tried to remove them as trustees or neutralize them each failed.Beginning in 2002 my mother says nothing is done in the future without three signatures 2003 I am in China and four major changes take place.2006 I am in China and the the irrevocable trust forgery and fraud and 2006 trust incapacity take place $5.5m in total

her died in 1980.One of his assets was 803 (12%) shares of a family business which was in serious financial trouble and $12.0m in debt. The value was $500.00 per share. One year later I purchased 635 shares for the same price to remove the president. The per share price was $500.00. Five years later I was forced to sell the company for $7500 per share. I purchased a $3.0m life insurance policy with the proceeds from my stock and made my sisters 1/3 beneficiaries each which were my sole decision. In six years since my sister Lynn pushed to sell her stock for $500.00 or $130,000 my sisters each received a windfall of $3.0m and had no involvement with the company. In 1989, I temporarily allowed my sisters to become trustees a bank was to take their place over the years. At least seven attempts were made to have our trusts professionally managed.

 

20) Frederick died on May 17, 1980. Prior to his death, on or about August 11, 1955, Frederick executed his Last Will ("Will"). On or about February 2, 1966, Frederick executed a Codicil to same ("Codicil"). The Will and Codicil provided that, in the event Verla survived Frederick by a period of thirty days, Marital Trust A ("Trust A") was to be created for the benefit of Verla. A true and accurate copy of the Will and Codicil of Frederick L. Regnery are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A and Exhibit B respectively.

21) In or about 1982, Plaintiff and Defendants were named successor Trustees of Trust A. The Third and Fifth Articles of the Will and Codicil provide with respect to the creation and administration of Trust A:

"THIRD: (b) All of the income from Trust "A" from the date of my death shall be paid to my wife, VERLA REGNERY, in convenient installments, at least quarter-annually, so long as she shall live. In addition to the net income of Trust "A", the Trustees shall pay at any time and from time to time to my wife, VERLA REGNERY, so long as she shall live, such amounts from the principal of Trust "A" as the Trustees in their absolute and sole discretion shall deem necessary, appropriate or advisable.

 

(c) Upon the death of my wife, the assets then remaining in Trust "A", with the income accrued thereon, shall be distributed to such person or persons or to the estate of my wife, free of all trusts created hereunder, in such manner and in such proportions as my wife may designate and appoint in and by her Last Will. Such power of appointment hereby conferred upon my wife shall be exercisable by her exclusively and in all events.

 

(d) If for any reason upon the death of my wife any part or all of Trust "A", including the income accrued thereon, shall fail to pass under the previous provisions of this Article, the entire assets then remaining in Trust "A", with all income accrued thereon, shall be added to Trust "B" and thereafter be administered and distributed pursuant to the provisions of Trust "B"."

 

See, Exhibit A, p.2-4;

...........

"THIRD: (a) If my wife, VERLA REGNERY, shall survive me for a period of thirty (30) days, I give, devise and bequeath unto CHARLES H. G. KIMBALL, FRED C. GRIFFITHS, and my brother, HENRY REGNERY, as Trustees, as a separate trust fund designated as Trust "A", an amount equal to one-half (1/2) of the value of my adjusted gross estate as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes, less an amount equal to the value, as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes, of any property or interests in property passing or which have passed to or for the benefit of my wife other than pursuant to this my Last will and with respect to which a martial deduction is allowable for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death. The gift made by this Article shall be limited to and satisfied out of property included in my estate for which a martial deduction is allowable for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death. Each asset of my estate distributed in kind to the Trustees of Trust "A" pursuant to the above provisions of this Article shall be valued for purposes of the said distribution at its value as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death or at its cost if such asset of my estate was purchased subsequent to my death. Also, assets of my estate distributed to the Trustees of Trust "A" pursuant to the above provision of this Article shall have an aggregate fair market value at the time of distribution fairly representative of Trust "A" fund's proportionate share of the appreciation or depreciation in value of all property included in my estate then available for distribution to the Trustees of Trust "A" which has occurred after my death."

 

"FIFTH: (m) If for any reason the Trustee of either Trust "A" or Trust "B" shall not be able to agree unanimously with respect to the exercise of any power, authority, duty or discretion delegated to them pursuant to this, my Last will, then the act of the majority of said Trustees shall govern and control and shall be binding upon the beneficiaries of and all persons dealing with Trust "A" and Trust "B" and the dissenting Trustee shall execute such document or instrument and take such action as may be required of him by the majority of said Trustees as may be necessary or appropriate to enable the majority of said Trustees to exercise any power, authority, duty or discretion granted to the Trustees of trust "A" or Trust "B" pursuant to this, my Last Will

 

 

See, Exhibit B, pp.1, 3.

22) Under the terms governing Trust A, before any action could be taken by any two Trustees, all three of the Trustees would be required to confer and determine whether or not a unanimous decision could be reached and all three trustees must sign off agree or consent

23) The Will further provides that all of the income earned from the Trust AN accounts was to be paid to Verla during her lifetime in convenient installments. See, Exhibit A, pp.2-4.In addition, the Trustees were permitted to pay such amounts from the principal of the Trust accounts to Verla which they deemed necessary, appropriate or advisable. See, Exhibit A, pp.2-4. Between at least the years of 2000 through the present, there have been maintained by William Blair & Company ("Blair") at their Chicago Offices, the following Trust AN accounts: Nos. 409-75939-1-9-136, 409-75939-1-9-906, 452-75939-1-9-906, 150-75939-1-9-906 ("Trust A Accounts").

24) In direct breach of the Third and Fifth Article of the Will and Codicil, as cited above, Defendants have on numerous occasions, through Blair's Chicago Offices, taken action by telephoning, mailing and faxing to Blair various requests for the unilateral withdrawal and/or transfer of funds from the Trust A Accounts without first advising, conferring with, or notifying Plaintiff in anyway whatsoever:

a) January 2002: $310,000.00

b) April 2002: $150,000.00

c) June 2002: $551,706.58

d) March 2003: $150,000.00

e) April 2003: $300,000.00

f) May 2003: $276,650.00

g) September 2007: $50,000.00

h) January 2008: $10,000.00

i) February 2008: $10,000.00

j) March 2008: $10,000.00

k) April 2008: $10,000.00

l) May 2008: $10,000.00

m) June 2008: $10,000.00

__________

Total 2002-2008: $1,848,356.50 This needs to be updated

 

25) In addition, Defendants made distributions, upon information and belief, that were in excess of the income earned on Trust A and did so without ever advising Plaintiff.

26) In breach of the clear terms of Trust A and in order to keep Plaintiff from learning of their conduct, on or about February 9, 2000, Defendants authored and delivered their letter to William Kasten at Blair's Chicago Offices proclaiming that all decisions, including any withdrawals or transfers, out of any Trust A Account must be agreed in writing by two of the three trustees. A true and accurate copy of the February 2000 letter to William Kasten is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit C.

27) In authoring and delivering Exhibit C, Defendants intentionally misrepresented and ignored those specific terms of Trust A which require all three Trustees (including Plaintiff) confer and determine whether there was a unanimous decision before the "majority rule" and all three trustees must sign off If there is no attempt to achieve unanimous consent majority rule does not apply.

28)Between at least the years 2000 to the present, Defendants engaged in a scheme through which they repeatedly directed that some or all of the $1,848,358.50 in funds be transferred from the Trust A Accounts -- as were then being maintained at Blair's Chicago Offices -- into checking/banking accounts at both Harris Bank and Wachovia Bank among others, from which accounts Defendants would then issue checks/withdrawals which were used by them for their own personal benefit and gain. In perpetrating their scheme, Defendants failed and refused to advise, notify, seek or obtain Plaintiff's consent all in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust duties to Verla and Plaintiff under the terms of Trust A.

29) As a result, the Trust A Accounts have been depleted from a starting value of $2,363,544.00 in January 2000 to $496,769.00 in June 2008 by the actions and conduct of Defendants taken at Blair's Chicago Offices and without Plaintiff's knowledge or consent.

30) On or about May 18, 1989, the Verla K. Regnery Trust was formed and executed in Hinsdale, Illinois. The Verla Trust along with its Restatements ("Verla Trust") was created for the primary benefit of Verla.

The 2002 trust marked a change and new standard for the future. All new trusts, amendments or trust related changes must be signed off by all three of Verla's children

 

31) On or about May 1, 2003, the Verla K. Regnery Trust was amended and restated in its entirety and was executed in Hinsdale, Illinois ("2003 Restatement"). A true and accurate copy of the 2003 Restatement is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit D .Fred was in China.His first knowledge of this trust was in January 2008. Undue influence and duress would force Verla to sign three multi million dollar changes without the presence of an attorney representing her.

32) The 2003 Restatement was again formed by Verla as Grantor with Gretchen and Lynn designated as Co-Trustees. Verla's sister Juaine was renamed as the co-trustee

33) The 2003 Restatement was amended to provide that the remainder of the trust estate shall be distributed into equal one-third (1/3) parts to each of the Grantor's three children, with Defendants to receive their portions outright and with Plaintiff to receive his portion in trust, the Frederick W. Regnery Trust of which Lindsay, Fred and Geoff were to serve as Co-Trustees. See, Exhibit D at Art. III, §3.

34) Therefore, as Co-Trustees of Plaintiff's Trust, Lindsay, Fred and Geoff are trust beneficiaries and thus, are owed certain fiduciary obligations under the Verla Trust.

35) The 2003 Restatement again provided that the Defendants acting as Co-Trustees, upon written request of a beneficiary were obligated "to render annual statements of the receipts and disbursements and of the financial condition of the trust to such beneficiary." See, Exhibit D at Art. VII, §1(v).

36) Despite Plaintiffs' repeated requests for annual accountings of the type required to be rendered under the 2002-2003 Restatements, the Defendants never once rendered a single accounting or supplied any annual accounting statements to them and instead intentionally concealed and withheld such information from them and Verla .

37) On May 1, 2003, Verla executed a Last Will and Testament of Verla K. Regnery ("Verla Will") that was admitted to probate in the Circuit Court of DuPage County, Illinois, on June 6, 2008.. A true and accurate copy of the Verla Will is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit E. True and accurate copies of the "Letters of Office" are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit F.

In Article III of the Verla Will, Verla appointed whatever property remained in Trust A to the Verla Trust as amended and restated.

See, Exhibit E at Art. III.

38) As part of their continuing scheme, in or about the summer of 2003, Defendants caused their attorneys, Thomas E. Swaney of the Chicago Law Firm of Sidley Austin Brown & Wood, LLP. ("Sidley"), to prepare blanket releases which were designed to insulate Defendants from liability for their many violations of their duties as Co-Trustees and fiduciaries including their failure to disclose or otherwise account for their spending and ongoing misappropriation of trust funds and assets as Co-Trustees. This was the first time the defendants used Sidley Austin.Their personal attorney Dan Letizia handled all previous trust matters for the trustees.

39) As part of the process of selling the family's Hinsdale home in 2003, Verla purchased (through her Trust) and took up residence in an undivided interest in a single family home located in Fairview Village (the "Fairview Village Home"), an assisted living facility in the Village of Downers Grove and within DuPage County. After selling the Hinsdale home, Verla took up residence in the Fairview Village Home which she thereafter maintained as her primary place of residence.

40) On or about September 2, 2003, Verla, at the urging and insistence of Defendants, was pressured to execute two separate "Approvals of Accounts and Release of Trustees" ("Releases") for both the Verla Trust and Trust A.Verla was not represented at the signing.Juaine Broadbent her sister accompiting her to Dan Letizia.Dan Letizia had been and still was Gretchen and Lynn's attorney since 1998 True and accurate copies of the Releases are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit G and Exhibit H respectively. Through these Releases prepared by Sidley, Verla was attributed with a statement, not of her own making: "I hereby approve any and all actions taken by the Trustees...through December 31, 2002, and hold the Trustees harmless against any and all liability to any person arising out of the trusteeship." See, Exhibit G at ¶5; Exhibit H at ¶6.

41) Not only had the Defendants failed to disclose, identify or account for their dissipation and misappropriation of trust assets anytime before having Verla sign the Releases, the tion way for Defendants to attempt to insulate themselves from and avoid any potential liability for their misappropriation and mishandling of the funds and assets belonging to both Verla's Trust and Trust A.

Neither Release was supported by any consideration and the preparation and execution of both was undertaken by Defendants who similarly failed to disclose, identify or account for their dissipation and misappropriation of trust assets anytime before having Verla sign the Releases.

Neither Release restricts Plaintiffs' rights and interests to obtain -- as beneficiaries and interested parties under the trusts - and Defendants duties and obligations to provide - as Co-Trustees and fiduciaries of the same trusts - accountings and to render annual statements (for every year in which they served as Co-Trustees) of the receipts and disbursements and of the financial condition of the trust to each such beneficiary. None of these rights or duties are abrogated in any way by the Releases - which aside from being ill-gotten and unenforceable as against Verla - are instruments to which none of the Plaintiffs agreed, knew of, or were made a party to and to which none are consequently bound. Fred was a trustee and benificiary.He was in China.He first became aware of this release in January of 2008

42) Moreover, in light of the fact that the Verla Trust specifically provides that the trustees could only distribute trust principal to Verla during her lifetime and could only distribute income to a party other than Verla only as Verla might "from time to time direct in writing," any principal distributions made by the trustees to parties other than Verla are arguably invalid as contrary to the provisions of the Verla Trust. In addition, those distributions of income could have been made only after prior written directives were issued by Verla, regardless of whether Verla approved the distributions through the Release issued after the distributions were made. As a continuation of their scheme and grand slam of 2003.My sisters withdrew

.

43) On or about February 7, 2005, while Verla was vacationing with Lynn in North Carolina, Lynn had Verla assessed by Memory Assessment and Research Services ("Mars") to establish a baseline of memory functioning. The 2005 Mars evaluation revealed that Verla had previously suffered two heart attacks, the last one being 8 years prior, and concluded that Verla's memory was impaired when compared to that of her peers and was significantly below the expected level of functioning but that her recall of visual material and working memory were intact. In or about July of 2006, Verla was taken from her home in Downers Grove not feeling well and first taken to a wedding and in total 6000 on an airplane.With her heart condition and severe edema Mrs Regnery should not have left.her home. On her way back from California, Verla traveled to Washington D.C., Maryland and North Carolina. At some point during this trip, Verla suffered a stroke or a series of strokes for which she was ultimately hospitalized in North Carolina.

44) On or about November 21, 2006, Lynn brought Verla into the same Mars facility in North Carolina for a second evaluation. The 2006 Mars report concluded that Verla displayed "significant decline... across all measures of memory functioning." A true and accurate copy of the 2006 Mars Report is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit I.

The 2006 Mars Report further found that Verla's "current cognitive test scores indicate clinically significant impairment in virtually all measured areas of cognitive functioning," and "represent a vascular dementia.

 

45) Only four (4) days before the Mars evaluation, on or about November 17, 2006, the Defendants caused the Verla Trust to be once again restated ("2006 Restatement"). A true and accurate copy of the 2006 Restatement is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit J.

46) The 2006 Restatement was prepared by an Oak Brook Terrace attorney, Dan Letizia, and names Verla as Grantor with Gretchen and Lynn designated as Co-Trustees with the remainder of the trust estate to be distributed as it was in the 2003 Restatement, equal one-third hen(1/3) parts to each of the Grantor's three children. It should be noted that Plaintiffs are contesting the 2006 Restatement. However, unlike the 2003 Restatement, the 2006 Restatement deleted those portions of the Trust which provided that upon Verla's death: (i) Defendants would cease to act as Co-Trustees; and (ii) that Juaine Broadbent (Verla's sister) would serve as successor Trustee. See, Exhibit D at Art. I, §2.

47)"Defendants undertook an active role in overseeing and insisting upon the changes in the 2006 Restatement, providing that Defendants would continue to serve as Co-Trustees even upon Verla's death. Defendants' actions in this regard -- undertaken at a time when Verla lacked the mental capacity to restate her Trust much less appreciate the legal meaning and significance of the 2006 Restatement - were initiated by Defendants as part of a continuing scheme of financial exploitation against Verla by removing her only living sister as successor Trustee in favor of Defendants. See, Exhibit J, at Art. I, §1.

48) At all times herein relevant, there were certain accounts maintained by Blair in the name of the Verla Trust: account numbers 409-75938-10 and 150-75940-16 ("Verla Trust Accounts").

49)Throughout the period they have served as Co-Trustees, Defendants have depleted the Verla Trust Accounts in violation of the terms of the Verla Trust and in breach of their fiduciary duties which activities they have attempted to conceal by failing and refusing to render to Plaintiffs a single annual statement of the receipts and disbursements or of the financial condition of the Verla Trust, despite their repeated demands and by using the trust owned funds and assets for their own personal purposes rather than towards the care, support and comfort of Verla.

50) Between at least 2002 and 2008, Gretchen and Lynn have used the funds and assets belonging to the Verla Trust Accounts for their own benefit and gain in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust obligations owed to Plaintiffs as Co-Trustees of the Verla Trust.

Upon information and belief, Gretchen and Lynn have repeatedly directed that funds be transferred from the Verla Trust Accounts into checking/banking accounts at both Harris Bank and Wachovia Bank among others, from which accounts Defendants would then issue checks/withdrawals which were used by them for their own personal benefit and gain. As part of this scheme, between at least 2002 and 2008 Defendants failed and refused to account to Plaintiffs despite their repeated demands, all in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust duties to Plaintiffs under the terms of Verla Trust and in violation of their duties to furnish annual accountings as required under Section 11(a) of the Illinois Trusts and Fiduciaries Act. 760 ILCS 5/11 (West 2007).

51)Between at least 2002 and 2008, Defendants have repeatedly authorized the transfer of funds from the Trust A Accounts into the Verla Trust Account for the intended purpose of gaining more complete control over these funds as Co-Trustees without the involvement of Plaintiff (who at all times remained a third Trustee of Trust A); some or all of these funds were used by Defendants for their own personal benefit and gain in violation of both Trust A and the Verla Trust as well as their fiduciary duties under each such trust.

52) At the time of her death, Verla was visiting with Gretchen and staying in the latter's California home where she died at age 88 on November 2, 2007.

53) At all times material, Verla maintained, through her Trust, ownership of the Fairview Village Home which she furnished and where she received her mail and housed her personal files, papers, jewelry, clothing, artwork, personal belongings and effects.

54)In or about June of 2007, Defendant-Lynn appeared at Verla's Fairview Village Home while Verla was visiting Defendant-Gretchen in California, and then and there gained entry into the home and removed and purloined substantially all of Verla's furnishings, personal files, papers, jewelry, clothing, artwork, personal belongings and effects, some of which belonged to Plaintiff - Fred

55)The actions of Lynn in emptying Verla's Fairview Village Home were undertaken purposefully and maliciously and with the prior knowledge, involvement and/or direction of Gretchen so as to remove from Verla the personal liberty, right and ability to return to her home.

56)Shortly after removing these items from Verla's Fairview Village Home, Defendant -Lynn then transported many of the items to the Village of Woodridge and sold substantially all of the furnishings and much of Verla's other personal belongings in a garage sale which was conducted by her at the home of the in-laws of her daughter Gretchen. Since the sale, Lynn has at no time accounted to Verla, Verla's Trust or Plaintiff for the items taken by her from Verla's Fairview Village Home. Lynn's daughter Gretchen was paid $2,000 from the VKR checking account by Lynn for her help with the removal and sale of Verla's personal belongings. Since Verla's death, Gretchen and Lynn have continued to withdraw and transfer funds from both the Trust A Accounts and the Verla Trust Accounts.Since this complaint was drafted $10,000 per month was withdrawn until March of 2009.An additional $100,000 was withdrawn in July of 2008.

 

57) In December 2007, a request for a formal accounting was made by Lindsay as to the Verla Trust Accounts. To date, Defendants have failed, despite acknowledgement from their counsel that they have a duty to do so, to issue a formal accounting. In doing so, Defendants have incredulously suggested that the costs to do so would be incurred by Plaintiff's Trust only. A true and accurate copy of the email from Lindsey to attorney Peter Flaxman dated December 26, 2007 is attached hereto as Exhibit K. A true and accurate copy of Flaxman's January 17, 2008 letter in response is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit L.

58)Most recently, another demand for an accounting was made by Plaintiff with respect to both the Trust A Accounts and the Verla Trust Accounts and Defendants have persisted in their refusal to render or supply any such accounting. True and accurate copies of the letters dated August 29, 2008 sent by Plaintiff to Sidley and Blair are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Group Exhibit M. The Verla Trust provides that the administration of the Trust shall be governed by the laws of the State of Illinois.

59)As Trustees of Trust A and the Verla Trust, Defendants owed a fiduciary duty to manage the trust assets in the best interest of the trust estate and beneficiaries of these trusts.

60) That duty included a duty of good faith and loyalty to act in Verla's best interest and not for the Defendants' own personal interests.

61) Pursuant to 5/ 4 et seq.; 4.14, 4.20 (West 2007), Defendants' fiduciary duty included, but was not limited to:

a) Not to take or use for their own personal use and benefit any trust property; and

b) To maintain and keep records of all trust expenditures and to prudently safeguard, invest and account for all trust property and assets and to refrain from exploiting or using any such property and assets for their own personal gain or benefit

 

 

62) Defendants must account for all the funds they have taken and withdrawn from the Verla Trust and Trust A, and a constructive trust must be imposed upon all of Defendants' funds, accounts or assets wherever found in amounts sufficient to reimburse and make whole the Verla Trust and the Trust A of all misappropriated, converted, unaccounted for funds or assets duly belonging to the Verla Trust and Trust A.

 

Count II Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT III MISREPRESENTATION

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT IV VIOLATION OF TRUST AND ABUSE OF TRUST PRINCIPAL

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

COUNT V DURESS

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT VI UNDUE INFLUENCE

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

I dont get Juaine.That is wrongful death in the federal court?I donmt know if the statutes of limitations can go from one plaintiff to another.

 

I found oue I am still proofing but this is the one you said ready to gile and had Ruffalo included

 

I tried to revise everything. Here is a draft. Look over it. I think you could use it as the new pleading.

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

 

NOW COME the Plaintiffs, Frederick W. Regnery, ("Plaintiff"), Lindsay Regnery ("Lindsay"), Frederick L. Regnery, ("Fred"), and Geoffrey Regnery ("Geoff"), by and through their attorneys, Fuchs & Roselli, Ltd., and as and for their Verified Complaint against the Defendants, Gretchen Regnery Wallerich ("Gretchen") and Lynn Regnery ("Lynn"), and Juaine Broadbent, in her capacity as Executrix of the Estate of Verla K. Regnery ("Juaine"), (Gretchen and Lynn collectively referred to hereinafter as "Defendants"), Plaintiffs state as follows:

Jurisdiction and Venue

1. Plaintiff is an Illinois resident who resides within the Village of Westmont and within the County of DuPage.

2. Lindsay, Fred, and Geoff are Plaintiff's children who are named as necessary parties insofar as they are co-Trustees of the Frederick W. Regnery Trust.

3. Gretchen is an individual, who and at all times herein relevant, resides in the state of California.

4. Lynn is an individual, who at all times herein relevant, resides in the state of North Carolina.

5. Juaine is an Illinois resident, named as a Defendant solely in her capacity as the Executrix of the Estate of Verla K. Regnery.

6. Pursuant to Section 5/2-101 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, this Court situated in DuPage County is, by operation of the facts alleged herein, the proper venue for this action.

Facts Common to All Counts

7. Plaintiffs hereby restate and reallege Paragraphs 1 through 6 of Jurisdiction and Venue as and for Paragraph 7 of this Facts Common to All Counts as though fully set forth herein.

8. Plaintiff, along with Gretchen and Lynn are siblings with the Plaintiff being the son of, and the Defendants being the daughters of Verla Kiehl Regnery ("Verla") and Frederick L. Regnery ("Frederick").

 

COUNT I FRAUD

 

In August of 2006 with sore swollen legs hips and ankles my mother was taken on a 7000 airline trip and ended up having a stroke and severe dementia.

 

 

9) My mother's living trust owned 635 shares of our families business (My shares) an eight year lawsuit began with the understanding if we prevailed the proceeds would be mine.
My sisters were the trustees. They convinced my mother the lawsuit may not prevail and she may be counter sued. She sold the stock to them but no money exchanged hands just a signed note from my mother to the trustee that she sold the stock to my sisters. As it turns out this transaction took place after the court ruling establishing the value $500,000 at a later date they sent gifts to my children.I could never determine the percentage because of the taxes.

 

10)FLR and VKR trust 13 year releases Fred is trustee, in China not notified. Verla is represented by the trustees attorney, also signs a lifetime forgiveness document for all loans, advances and gifts and has no idea of what she is signing. Her sister was with her.

This was a fraudulent scheme between Letizia,Gretchen and Lynn against Verla and Fred. $5.0m

This was carefully planned and carried out.

 

 

11)FLR trust three trustees 18 years all three must sign.2000 letter from Gretchen and Lynn to Blair says only two must sign (reverts back to simple majority before codicil $2.0m)
There seems to be a concern Fred did not open his mail. From 1982-2000 very few withdrawals. I did a great deal of oversees traveling.2000 after the change of trustees the volume of withdrawals went up at least four fold. Lynn and Gretchen knew for a fact I did not open my statements as when I was in China they were at my mothers. Five houses I lived in during that period and 30% of my time in China. For this to happen, Blair and my sisters would have to work together to defraud my mother and me.

 

12) VKR irrevocable trust taken from Alvin kiehl trustee,Verla's brother. while Verla is incapacitated. Alvin was forced off after 20 years of service.A forged signature became the new trustee. Then, $420,000 withdrawn by using four forgeries. Alvin and Verla deprived from buy back. clause. Letizia notarizes forged signature.

13) My mother was incapacitated for 15 months. During that time $1.0m was spent. Instead of $150,000 if she were living at home.. My mother owned a $3.4m irrevocable trust and a $2.5m 2003 living trust. In November of 2006 both trusts were rewritten while my mother was mentally incapacitated and I was in China. As a beneficiary I was to be notified,the irrevocable trust in writing.I was not.In January of 2007 my mother wanted to go home so I went to North Caroliana to get her..My sisters would not let her go.I asked both of them if there were any changed to my mothers trust in my absence and their answer was no.Had they not lied to me and concealed the changes of the trusts in November I would have take my mother home. Damages $850,000 from the difference spent by my sisters to the amount my mother living at home would have spent. $5.0m in principal depleated in 10 years no accounting.1997-2007., $700,000 loss in 2000 stock market.Trustees lost nothing as they sold their stoch before the market crash.

 

14) At the time the 2006 trust was drafted both sisters were very much awareof my mothers mental condition .The most telling part of the trust change was removing my mothers sister as successor trustee and taking her $1.000.00 per months guarantee away.

That clause is gone. Verla was 88 and unsophisticated as an investor. She trusted her daughters. She trusted the attorney. Each major revision,restatement,forgiveness or release was made in 2003 and 2006 I have a passport that will coincide with those dates.

 

15) There were four major documents or trusts that my mother was deceived or threatened into signing.Each time her son was in China. Each time she did not know the content of what she was signing.Each one they would not give her a copy of for her file for fear of me fnding it.

 

.The father was the grantor of a trust funded in 1966 an irrevocable trust From 1982 my sisters and I were its trustee.All activity in the trust must be signed off by the trustees. the grand slam was completed As impossible as it may seem working together with their attorney the daughters pulled off taking control of all three trusts by forgery,fraud,and elder abuse This was done with complete and utter silence and concealment and involved $7.5m.The mother had no idea of what she was signing and the son was 8000 away.

 

16)The mothers brother was removed after 20 years, a sister removed after 10 years and her son. My mother since 1980 relied on my advice before making any major financial decisions. It was very easy for someone to tell my mother one thing to get her to sign it when it really said something else.

 

17)While staying in Mill Vallley my sister did not want my mother to go home under any circumstance.$5.5m and two trust changes would have been discovered plus $1.0m in withdrawals.

 

18) Her son was on his way from China to pick up his mother in California My sister had hired an attorney at $400.00 per hour to keep me from taking my mother home.She has taken nearly 200,000 since to pay his legal bills He helps my sister end my mother's life and then pays himself from my mothers trust funds From 1989 to mothers death they were the sole trustees.No investment skills.2 of 3 children and a large estate.On at least seven occasions my mother tried to remove them as trustees or neutralize them each failed.Beginning in 2002 my mother says nothing is done in the future without three signatures 2003 I am in China and four major changes take place.2006 I am in China and the the irrevocable trust forgery and fraud and 2006 trust incapacity take place $5.5m in total

her died in 1980.One of his assets was 803 (12%) shares of a family business which was in serious financial trouble and $12.0m in debt. The value was $500.00 per share. One year later I purchased 635 shares for the same price to remove the president. The per share price was $500.00. Five years later I was forced to sell the company for $7500 per share. I purchased a $3.0m life insurance policy with the proceeds from my stock and made my sisters 1/3 beneficiaries each which were my sole decision. In six years since my sister Lynn pushed to sell her stock for $500.00 or $130,000 my sisters each received a windfall of $3.0m and had no involvement with the company. In 1989, I temporarily allowed my sisters to become trustees a bank was to take their place over the years. At least seven attempts were made to have our trusts professionally managed.

 

20) Frederick died on May 17, 1980. Prior to his death, on or about August 11, 1955, Frederick executed his Last Will ("Will"). On or about February 2, 1966, Frederick executed a Codicil to same ("Codicil"). The Will and Codicil provided that, in the event Verla survived Frederick by a period of thirty days, Marital Trust A ("Trust A") was to be created for the benefit of Verla. A true and accurate copy of the Will and Codicil of Frederick L. Regnery are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A and Exhibit B respectively.

21) In or about 1982, Plaintiff and Defendants were named successor Trustees of Trust A. The Third and Fifth Articles of the Will and Codicil provide with respect to the creation and administration of Trust A:

"THIRD: (b) All of the income from Trust "A" from the date of my death shall be paid to my wife, VERLA REGNERY, in convenient installments, at least quarter-annually, so long as she shall live. In addition to the net income of Trust "A", the Trustees shall pay at any time and from time to time to my wife, VERLA REGNERY, so long as she shall live, such amounts from the principal of Trust "A" as the Trustees in their absolute and sole discretion shall deem necessary, appropriate or advisable.

 

(c) Upon the death of my wife, the assets then remaining in Trust "A", with the income accrued thereon, shall be distributed to such person or persons or to the estate of my wife, free of all trusts created hereunder, in such manner and in such proportions as my wife may designate and appoint in and by her Last Will. Such power of appointment hereby conferred upon my wife shall be exercisable by her exclusively and in all events.

 

(d) If for any reason upon the death of my wife any part or all of Trust "A", including the income accrued thereon, shall fail to pass under the previous provisions of this Article, the entire assets then remaining in Trust "A", with all income accrued thereon, shall be added to Trust "B" and thereafter be administered and distributed pursuant to the provisions of Trust "B"."

 

See, Exhibit A, p.2-4;

...........

"THIRD: (a) If my wife, VERLA REGNERY, shall survive me for a period of thirty (30) days, I give, devise and bequeath unto CHARLES H. G. KIMBALL, FRED C. GRIFFITHS, and my brother, HENRY REGNERY, as Trustees, as a separate trust fund designated as Trust "A", an amount equal to one-half (1/2) of the value of my adjusted gross estate as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes, less an amount equal to the value, as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes, of any property or interests in property passing or which have passed to or for the benefit of my wife other than pursuant to this my Last will and with respect to which a martial deduction is allowable for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death. The gift made by this Article shall be limited to and satisfied out of property included in my estate for which a martial deduction is allowable for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death. Each asset of my estate distributed in kind to the Trustees of Trust "A" pursuant to the above provisions of this Article shall be valued for purposes of the said distribution at its value as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death or at its cost if such asset of my estate was purchased subsequent to my death. Also, assets of my estate distributed to the Trustees of Trust "A" pursuant to the above provision of this Article shall have an aggregate fair market value at the time of distribution fairly representative of Trust "A" fund's proportionate share of the appreciation or depreciation in value of all property included in my estate then available for distribution to the Trustees of Trust "A" which has occurred after my death."

 

"FIFTH: (m) If for any reason the Trustee of either Trust "A" or Trust "B" shall not be able to agree unanimously with respect to the exercise of any power, authority, duty or discretion delegated to them pursuant to this, my Last will, then the act of the majority of said Trustees shall govern and control and shall be binding upon the beneficiaries of and all persons dealing with Trust "A" and Trust "B" and the dissenting Trustee shall execute such document or instrument and take such action as may be required of him by the majority of said Trustees as may be necessary or appropriate to enable the majority of said Trustees to exercise any power, authority, duty or discretion granted to the Trustees of trust "A" or Trust "B" pursuant to this, my Last Will

 

 

See, Exhibit B, pp.1, 3.

22) Under the terms governing Trust A, before any action could be taken by any two Trustees, all three of the Trustees would be required to confer and determine whether or not a unanimous decision could be reached and all three trustees must sign off agree or consent

23) The Will further provides that all of the income earned from the Trust AN accounts was to be paid to Verla during her lifetime in convenient installments. See, Exhibit A, pp.2-4.In addition, the Trustees were permitted to pay such amounts from the principal of the Trust accounts to Verla which they deemed necessary, appropriate or advisable. See, Exhibit A, pp.2-4. Between at least the years of 2000 through the present, there have been maintained by William Blair & Company ("Blair") at their Chicago Offices, the following Trust AN accounts: Nos. 409-75939-1-9-136, 409-75939-1-9-906, 452-75939-1-9-906, 150-75939-1-9-906 ("Trust A Accounts").

24) In direct breach of the Third and Fifth Article of the Will and Codicil, as cited above, Defendants have on numerous occasions, through Blair's Chicago Offices, taken action by telephoning, mailing and faxing to Blair various requests for the unilateral withdrawal and/or transfer of funds from the Trust A Accounts without first advising, conferring with, or notifying Plaintiff in anyway whatsoever:

a) January 2002: $310,000.00

b) April 2002: $150,000.00

c) June 2002: $551,706.58

d) March 2003: $150,000.00

e) April 2003: $300,000.00

f) May 2003: $276,650.00

g) September 2007: $50,000.00

h) January 2008: $10,000.00

i) February 2008: $10,000.00

j) March 2008: $10,000.00

k) April 2008: $10,000.00

l) May 2008: $10,000.00

m) June 2008: $10,000.00

__________

Total 2002-2008: $1,848,356.50 This needs to be updated

 

25) In addition, Defendants made distributions, upon information and belief, that were in excess of the income earned on Trust A and did so without ever advising Plaintiff.

26) In breach of the clear terms of Trust A and in order to keep Plaintiff from learning of their conduct, on or about February 9, 2000, Defendants authored and delivered their letter to William Kasten at Blair's Chicago Offices proclaiming that all decisions, including any withdrawals or transfers, out of any Trust A Account must be agreed in writing by two of the three trustees. A true and accurate copy of the February 2000 letter to William Kasten is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit C.

27) In authoring and delivering Exhibit C, Defendants intentionally misrepresented and ignored those specific terms of Trust A which require all three Trustees (including Plaintiff) confer and determine whether there was a unanimous decision before the "majority rule" and all three trustees must sign off If there is no attempt to achieve unanimous consent majority rule does not apply.

28)Between at least the years 2000 to the present, Defendants engaged in a scheme through which they repeatedly directed that some or all of the $1,848,358.50 in funds be transferred from the Trust A Accounts -- as were then being maintained at Blair's Chicago Offices -- into checking/banking accounts at both Harris Bank and Wachovia Bank among others, from which accounts Defendants would then issue checks/withdrawals which were used by them for their own personal benefit and gain. In perpetrating their scheme, Defendants failed and refused to advise, notify, seek or obtain Plaintiff's consent all in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust duties to Verla and Plaintiff under the terms of Trust A.

29) As a result, the Trust A Accounts have been depleted from a starting value of $2,363,544.00 in January 2000 to $496,769.00 in June 2008 by the actions and conduct of Defendants taken at Blair's Chicago Offices and without Plaintiff's knowledge or consent.

30) On or about May 18, 1989, the Verla K. Regnery Trust was formed and executed in Hinsdale, Illinois. The Verla Trust along with its Restatements ("Verla Trust") was created for the primary benefit of Verla.

The 2002 trust marked a change and new standard for the future. All new trusts, amendments or trust related changes must be signed off by all three of Verla's children

 

31) On or about May 1, 2003, the Verla K. Regnery Trust was amended and restated in its entirety and was executed in Hinsdale, Illinois ("2003 Restatement"). A true and accurate copy of the 2003 Restatement is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit D .Fred was in China.His first knowledge of this trust was in January 2008. Undue influence and duress would force Verla to sign three multi million dollar changes without the presence of an attorney representing her.

32) The 2003 Restatement was again formed by Verla as Grantor with Gretchen and Lynn designated as Co-Trustees. Verla's sister Juaine was renamed as the co-trustee

33) The 2003 Restatement was amended to provide that the remainder of the trust estate shall be distributed into equal one-third (1/3) parts to each of the Grantor's three children, with Defendants to receive their portions outright and with Plaintiff to receive his portion in trust, the Frederick W. Regnery Trust of which Lindsay, Fred and Geoff were to serve as Co-Trustees. See, Exhibit D at Art. III, §3.

34) Therefore, as Co-Trustees of Plaintiff's Trust, Lindsay, Fred and Geoff are trust beneficiaries and thus, are owed certain fiduciary obligations under the Verla Trust.

35) The 2003 Restatement again provided that the Defendants acting as Co-Trustees, upon written request of a beneficiary were obligated "to render annual statements of the receipts and disbursements and of the financial condition of the trust to such beneficiary." See, Exhibit D at Art. VII, §1(v).

36) Despite Plaintiffs' repeated requests for annual accountings of the type required to be rendered under the 2002-2003 Restatements, the Defendants never once rendered a single accounting or supplied any annual accounting statements to them and instead intentionally concealed and withheld such information from them and Verla .

37) On May 1, 2003, Verla executed a Last Will and Testament of Verla K. Regnery ("Verla Will") that was admitted to probate in the Circuit Court of DuPage County, Illinois, on June 6, 2008.. A true and accurate copy of the Verla Will is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit E. True and accurate copies of the "Letters of Office" are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit F.

In Article III of the Verla Will, Verla appointed whatever property remained in Trust A to the Verla Trust as amended and restated.

See, Exhibit E at Art. III.

38) As part of their continuing scheme, in or about the summer of 2003, Defendants caused their attorneys, Thomas E. Swaney of the Chicago Law Firm of Sidley Austin Brown & Wood, LLP. ("Sidley"), to prepare blanket releases which were designed to insulate Defendants from liability for their many violations of their duties as Co-Trustees and fiduciaries including their failure to disclose or otherwise account for their spending and ongoing misappropriation of trust funds and assets as Co-Trustees. This was the first time the defendants used Sidley Austin.Their personal attorney Dan Letizia handled all previous trust matters for the trustees.

39) As part of the process of selling the family's Hinsdale home in 2003, Verla purchased (through her Trust) and took up residence in an undivided interest in a single family home located in Fairview Village (the "Fairview Village Home"), an assisted living facility in the Village of Downers Grove and within DuPage County. After selling the Hinsdale home, Verla took up residence in the Fairview Village Home which she thereafter maintained as her primary place of residence.

40) On or about September 2, 2003, Verla, at the urging and insistence of Defendants, was pressured to execute two separate "Approvals of Accounts and Release of Trustees" ("Releases") for both the Verla Trust and Trust A.Verla was not represented at the signing.Juaine Broadbent her sister accompiting her to Dan Letizia.Dan Letizia had been and still was Gretchen and Lynn's attorney since 1998 True and accurate copies of the Releases are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit G and Exhibit H respectively. Through these Releases prepared by Sidley, Verla was attributed with a statement, not of her own making: "I hereby approve any and all actions taken by the Trustees...through December 31, 2002, and hold the Trustees harmless against any and all liability to any person arising out of the trusteeship." See, Exhibit G at ¶5; Exhibit H at ¶6.

41) Not only had the Defendants failed to disclose, identify or account for their dissipation and misappropriation of trust assets anytime before having Verla sign the Releases, the tion way for Defendants to attempt to insulate themselves from and avoid any potential liability for their misappropriation and mishandling of the funds and assets belonging to both Verla's Trust and Trust A.

Neither Release was supported by any consideration and the preparation and execution of both was undertaken by Defendants who similarly failed to disclose, identify or account for their dissipation and misappropriation of trust assets anytime before having Verla sign the Releases.

Neither Release restricts Plaintiffs' rights and interests to obtain -- as beneficiaries and interested parties under the trusts - and Defendants duties and obligations to provide - as Co-Trustees and fiduciaries of the same trusts - accountings and to render annual statements (for every year in which they served as Co-Trustees) of the receipts and disbursements and of the financial condition of the trust to each such beneficiary. None of these rights or duties are abrogated in any way by the Releases - which aside from being ill-gotten and unenforceable as against Verla - are instruments to which none of the Plaintiffs agreed, knew of, or were made a party to and to which none are consequently bound. Fred was a trustee and benificiary.He was in China.He first became aware of this release in January of 2008

42) Moreover, in light of the fact that the Verla Trust specifically provides that the trustees could only distribute trust principal to Verla during her lifetime and could only distribute income to a party other than Verla only as Verla might "from time to time direct in writing," any principal distributions made by the trustees to parties other than Verla are arguably invalid as contrary to the provisions of the Verla Trust. In addition, those distributions of income could have been made only after prior written directives were issued by Verla, regardless of whether Verla approved the distributions through the Release issued after the distributions were made. As a continuation of their scheme and grand slam of 2003.My sisters withdrew

.

43) On or about February 7, 2005, while Verla was vacationing with Lynn in North Carolina, Lynn had Verla assessed by Memory Assessment and Research Services ("Mars") to establish a baseline of memory functioning. The 2005 Mars evaluation revealed that Verla had previously suffered two heart attacks, the last one being 8 years prior, and concluded that Verla's memory was impaired when compared to that of her peers and was significantly below the expected level of functioning but that her recall of visual material and working memory were intact. In or about July of 2006, Verla was taken from her home in Downers Grove not feeling well and first taken to a wedding and in total 6000 on an airplane.With her heart condition and severe edema Mrs Regnery should not have left.her home. On her way back from California, Verla traveled to Washington D.C., Maryland and North Carolina. At some point during this trip, Verla suffered a stroke or a series of strokes for which she was ultimately hospitalized in North Carolina.

44) On or about November 21, 2006, Lynn brought Verla into the same Mars facility in North Carolina for a second evaluation. The 2006 Mars report concluded that Verla displayed "significant decline... across all measures of memory functioning." A true and accurate copy of the 2006 Mars Report is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit I.

The 2006 Mars Report further found that Verla's "current cognitive test scores indicate clinically significant impairment in virtually all measured areas of cognitive functioning," and "represent a vascular dementia.

 

45) Only four (4) days before the Mars evaluation, on or about November 17, 2006, the Defendants caused the Verla Trust to be once again restated ("2006 Restatement"). A true and accurate copy of the 2006 Restatement is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit J.

46) The 2006 Restatement was prepared by an Oak Brook Terrace attorney, Dan Letizia, and names Verla as Grantor with Gretchen and Lynn designated as Co-Trustees with the remainder of the trust estate to be distributed as it was in the 2003 Restatement, equal one-third hen(1/3) parts to each of the Grantor's three children. It should be noted that Plaintiffs are contesting the 2006 Restatement. However, unlike the 2003 Restatement, the 2006 Restatement deleted those portions of the Trust which provided that upon Verla's death: (i) Defendants would cease to act as Co-Trustees; and (ii) that Juaine Broadbent (Verla's sister) would serve as successor Trustee. See, Exhibit D at Art. I, §2.

47)"Defendants undertook an active role in overseeing and insisting upon the changes in the 2006 Restatement, providing that Defendants would continue to serve as Co-Trustees even upon Verla's death. Defendants' actions in this regard -- undertaken at a time when Verla lacked the mental capacity to restate her Trust much less appreciate the legal meaning and significance of the 2006 Restatement - were initiated by Defendants as part of a continuing scheme of financial exploitation against Verla by removing her only living sister as successor Trustee in favor of Defendants. See, Exhibit J, at Art. I, §1.

48) At all times herein relevant, there were certain accounts maintained by Blair in the name of the Verla Trust: account numbers 409-75938-10 and 150-75940-16 ("Verla Trust Accounts").

49)Throughout the period they have served as Co-Trustees, Defendants have depleted the Verla Trust Accounts in violation of the terms of the Verla Trust and in breach of their fiduciary duties which activities they have attempted to conceal by failing and refusing to render to Plaintiffs a single annual statement of the receipts and disbursements or of the financial condition of the Verla Trust, despite their repeated demands and by using the trust owned funds and assets for their own personal purposes rather than towards the care, support and comfort of Verla.

50) Between at least 2002 and 2008, Gretchen and Lynn have used the funds and assets belonging to the Verla Trust Accounts for their own benefit and gain in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust obligations owed to Plaintiffs as Co-Trustees of the Verla Trust.

Upon information and belief, Gretchen and Lynn have repeatedly directed that funds be transferred from the Verla Trust Accounts into checking/banking accounts at both Harris Bank and Wachovia Bank among others, from which accounts Defendants would then issue checks/withdrawals which were used by them for their own personal benefit and gain. As part of this scheme, between at least 2002 and 2008 Defendants failed and refused to account to Plaintiffs despite their repeated demands, all in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust duties to Plaintiffs under the terms of Verla Trust and in violation of their duties to furnish annual accountings as required under Section 11(a) of the Illinois Trusts and Fiduciaries Act. 760 ILCS 5/11 (West 2007).

51)Between at least 2002 and 2008, Defendants have repeatedly authorized the transfer of funds from the Trust A Accounts into the Verla Trust Account for the intended purpose of gaining more complete control over these funds as Co-Trustees without the involvement of Plaintiff (who at all times remained a third Trustee of Trust A); some or all of these funds were used by Defendants for their own personal benefit and gain in violation of both Trust A and the Verla Trust as well as their fiduciary duties under each such trust.

52) At the time of her death, Verla was visiting with Gretchen and staying in the latter's California home where she died at age 88 on November 2, 2007.

53) At all times material, Verla maintained, through her Trust, ownership of the Fairview Village Home which she furnished and where she received her mail and housed her personal files, papers, jewelry, clothing, artwork, personal belongings and effects.

54)In or about June of 2007, Defendant-Lynn appeared at Verla's Fairview Village Home while Verla was visiting Defendant-Gretchen in California, and then and there gained entry into the home and removed and purloined substantially all of Verla's furnishings, personal files, papers, jewelry, clothing, artwork, personal belongings and effects, some of which belonged to Plaintiff - Fred

55)The actions of Lynn in emptying Verla's Fairview Village Home were undertaken purposefully and maliciously and with the prior knowledge, involvement and/or direction of Gretchen so as to remove from Verla the personal liberty, right and ability to return to her home.

56)Shortly after removing these items from Verla's Fairview Village Home, Defendant -Lynn then transported many of the items to the Village of Woodridge and sold substantially all of the furnishings and much of Verla's other personal belongings in a garage sale which was conducted by her at the home of the in-laws of her daughter Gretchen. Since the sale, Lynn has at no time accounted to Verla, Verla's Trust or Plaintiff for the items taken by her from Verla's Fairview Village Home. Lynn's daughter Gretchen was paid $2,000 from the VKR checking account by Lynn for her help with the removal and sale of Verla's personal belongings. Since Verla's death, Gretchen and Lynn have continued to withdraw and transfer funds from both the Trust A Accounts and the Verla Trust Accounts.Since this complaint was drafted $10,000 per month was withdrawn until March of 2009.An additional $100,000 was withdrawn in July of 2008.

 

57) In December 2007, a request for a formal accounting was made by Lindsay as to the Verla Trust Accounts. To date, Defendants have failed, despite acknowledgement from their counsel that they have a duty to do so, to issue a formal accounting. In doing so, Defendants have incredulously suggested that the costs to do so would be incurred by Plaintiff's Trust only. A true and accurate copy of the email from Lindsey to attorney Peter Flaxman dated December 26, 2007 is attached hereto as Exhibit K. A true and accurate copy of Flaxman's January 17, 2008 letter in response is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit L.

58)Most recently, another demand for an accounting was made by Plaintiff with respect to both the Trust A Accounts and the Verla Trust Accounts and Defendants have persisted in their refusal to render or supply any such accounting. True and accurate copies of the letters dated August 29, 2008 sent by Plaintiff to Sidley and Blair are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Group Exhibit M. The Verla Trust provides that the administration of the Trust shall be governed by the laws of the State of Illinois.

59)As Trustees of Trust A and the Verla Trust, Defendants owed a fiduciary duty to manage the trust assets in the best interest of the trust estate and beneficiaries of these trusts.

60) That duty included a duty of good faith and loyalty to act in Verla's best interest and not for the Defendants' own personal interests.

61) Pursuant to 5/ 4 et seq.; 4.14, 4.20 (West 2007), Defendants' fiduciary duty included, but was not limited to:

a) Not to take or use for their own personal use and benefit any trust property; and

b) To maintain and keep records of all trust expenditures and to prudently safeguard, invest and account for all trust property and assets and to refrain from exploiting or using any such property and assets for their own personal gain or benefit

 

 

62) Defendants must account for all the funds they have taken and withdrawn from the Verla Trust and Trust A, and a constructive trust must be imposed upon all of Defendants' funds, accounts or assets wherever found in amounts sufficient to reimburse and make whole the Verla Trust and the Trust A of all misappropriated, converted, unaccounted for funds or assets duly belonging to the Verla Trust and Trust A.

 

Count II Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT III MISREPRESENTATION

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT IV VIOLATION OF TRUST AND ABUSE OF TRUST PRINCIPAL

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

COUNT V DURESS

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT VI UNDUE INFLUENCE

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

I dont get Juaine.That is wrongful death in the federal court?I donmt know if the statutes of limitations can go from one plaintiff to another.

 

I found oue I am still proofing but this is the one you said ready to gile and had Ruffalo included

 

I tried to revise everything. Here is a draft. Look over it. I think you could use it as the new pleading.

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

 

NOW COME the Plaintiffs, Frederick W. Regnery, ("Plaintiff"), Lindsay Regnery ("Lindsay"), Frederick L. Regnery, ("Fred"), and Geoffrey Regnery ("Geoff"), by and through their attorneys, Fuchs & Roselli, Ltd., and as and for their Verified Complaint against the Defendants, Gretchen Regnery Wallerich ("Gretchen") and Lynn Regnery ("Lynn"), and Juaine Broadbent, in her capacity as Executrix of the Estate of Verla K. Regnery ("Juaine"), (Gretchen and Lynn collectively referred to hereinafter as "Defendants"), Plaintiffs state as follows:

Jurisdiction and Venue

1. Plaintiff is an Illinois resident who resides within the Village of Westmont and within the County of DuPage.

2. Lindsay, Fred, and Geoff are Plaintiff's children who are named as necessary parties insofar as they are co-Trustees of the Frederick W. Regnery Trust.

3. Gretchen is an individual, who and at all times herein relevant, resides in the state of California.

4. Lynn is an individual, who at all times herein relevant, resides in the state of North Carolina.

5. Juaine is an Illinois resident, named as a Defendant solely in her capacity as the Executrix of the Estate of Verla K. Regnery.

6. Pursuant to Section 5/2-101 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, this Court situated in DuPage County is, by operation of the facts alleged herein, the proper venue for this action.

Facts Common to All Counts

7. Plaintiffs hereby restate and reallege Paragraphs 1 through 6 of Jurisdiction and Venue as and for Paragraph 7 of this Facts Common to All Counts as though fully set forth herein.

8. Plaintiff, along with Gretchen and Lynn are siblings with the Plaintiff being the son of, and the Defendants being the daughters of Verla Kiehl Regnery ("Verla") and Frederick L. Regnery ("Frederick").

 

COUNT I FRAUD

 

In August of 2006 with sore swollen legs hips and ankles my mother was taken on a 7000 airline trip and ended up having a stroke and severe dementia.

 

 

9) My mother's living trust owned 635 shares of our families business (My shares) an eight year lawsuit began with the understanding if we prevailed the proceeds would be mine.
My sisters were the trustees. They convinced my mother the lawsuit may not prevail and she may be counter sued. She sold the stock to them but no money exchanged hands just a signed note from my mother to the trustee that she sold the stock to my sisters. As it turns out this transaction took place after the court ruling establishing the value $500,000 at a later date they sent gifts to my children.I could never determine the percentage because of the taxes.

 

10)FLR and VKR trust 13 year releases Fred is trustee, in China not notified. Verla is represented by the trustees attorney, also signs a lifetime forgiveness document for all loans, advances and gifts and has no idea of what she is signing. Her sister was with her.

This was a fraudulent scheme between Letizia,Gretchen and Lynn against Verla and Fred. $5.0m

This was carefully planned and carried out.

 

 

11)FLR trust three trustees 18 years all three must sign.2000 letter from Gretchen and Lynn to Blair says only two must sign (reverts back to simple majority before codicil $2.0m)
There seems to be a concern Fred did not open his mail. From 1982-2000 very few withdrawals. I did a great deal of oversees traveling.2000 after the change of trustees the volume of withdrawals went up at least four fold. Lynn and Gretchen knew for a fact I did not open my statements as when I was in China they were at my mothers. Five houses I lived in during that period and 30% of my time in China. For this to happen, Blair and my sisters would have to work together to defraud my mother and me.

 

12) VKR irrevocable trust taken from Alvin kiehl trustee,Verla's brother. while Verla is incapacitated. Alvin was forced off after 20 years of service.A forged signature became the new trustee. Then, $420,000 withdrawn by using four forgeries. Alvin and Verla deprived from buy back. clause. Letizia notarizes forged signature.

13) My mother was incapacitated for 15 months. During that time $1.0m was spent. Instead of $150,000 if she were living at home.. My mother owned a $3.4m irrevocable trust and a $2.5m 2003 living trust. In November of 2006 both trusts were rewritten while my mother was mentally incapacitated and I was in China. As a beneficiary I was to be notified,the irrevocable trust in writing.I was not.In January of 2007 my mother wanted to go home so I went to North Caroliana to get her..My sisters would not let her go.I asked both of them if there were any changed to my mothers trust in my absence and their answer was no.Had they not lied to me and concealed the changes of the trusts in November I would have take my mother home. Damages $850,000 from the difference spent by my sisters to the amount my mother living at home would have spent. $5.0m in principal depleated in 10 years no accounting.1997-2007., $700,000 loss in 2000 stock market.Trustees lost nothing as they sold their stoch before the market crash.

 

14) At the time the 2006 trust was drafted both sisters were very much awareof my mothers mental condition .The most telling part of the trust change was removing my mothers sister as successor trustee and taking her $1.000.00 per months guarantee away.

That clause is gone. Verla was 88 and unsophisticated as an investor. She trusted her daughters. She trusted the attorney. Each major revision,restatement,forgiveness or release was made in 2003 and 2006 I have a passport that will coincide with those dates.

 

15) There were four major documents or trusts that my mother was deceived or threatened into signing.Each time her son was in China. Each time she did not know the content of what she was signing.Each one they would not give her a copy of for her file for fear of me fnding it.

 

.The father was the grantor of a trust funded in 1966 an irrevocable trust From 1982 my sisters and I were its trustee.All activity in the trust must be signed off by the trustees. the grand slam was completed As impossible as it may seem working together with their attorney the daughters pulled off taking control of all three trusts by forgery,fraud,and elder abuse This was done with complete and utter silence and concealment and involved $7.5m.The mother had no idea of what she was signing and the son was 8000 away.

 

16)The mothers brother was removed after 20 years, a sister removed after 10 years and her son. My mother since 1980 relied on my advice before making any major financial decisions. It was very easy for someone to tell my mother one thing to get her to sign it when it really said something else.

 

17)While staying in Mill Vallley my sister did not want my mother to go home under any circumstance.$5.5m and two trust changes would have been discovered plus $1.0m in withdrawals.

 

18) Her son was on his way from China to pick up his mother in California My sister had hired an attorney at $400.00 per hour to keep me from taking my mother home.She has taken nearly 200,000 since to pay his legal bills He helps my sister end my mother's life and then pays himself from my mothers trust funds From 1989 to mothers death they were the sole trustees.No investment skills.2 of 3 children and a large estate.On at least seven occasions my mother tried to remove them as trustees or neutralize them each failed.Beginning in 2002 my mother says nothing is done in the future without three signatures 2003 I am in China and four major changes take place.2006 I am in China and the the irrevocable trust forgery and fraud and 2006 trust incapacity take place $5.5m in total

her died in 1980.One of his assets was 803 (12%) shares of a family business which was in serious financial trouble and $12.0m in debt. The value was $500.00 per share. One year later I purchased 635 shares for the same price to remove the president. The per share price was $500.00. Five years later I was forced to sell the company for $7500 per share. I purchased a $3.0m life insurance policy with the proceeds from my stock and made my sisters 1/3 beneficiaries each which were my sole decision. In six years since my sister Lynn pushed to sell her stock for $500.00 or $130,000 my sisters each received a windfall of $3.0m and had no involvement with the company. In 1989, I temporarily allowed my sisters to become trustees a bank was to take their place over the years. At least seven attempts were made to have our trusts professionally managed.

 

20) Frederick died on May 17, 1980. Prior to his death, on or about August 11, 1955, Frederick executed his Last Will ("Will"). On or about February 2, 1966, Frederick executed a Codicil to same ("Codicil"). The Will and Codicil provided that, in the event Verla survived Frederick by a period of thirty days, Marital Trust A ("Trust A") was to be created for the benefit of Verla. A true and accurate copy of the Will and Codicil of Frederick L. Regnery are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A and Exhibit B respectively.

21) In or about 1982, Plaintiff and Defendants were named successor Trustees of Trust A. The Third and Fifth Articles of the Will and Codicil provide with respect to the creation and administration of Trust A:

"THIRD: (b) All of the income from Trust "A" from the date of my death shall be paid to my wife, VERLA REGNERY, in convenient installments, at least quarter-annually, so long as she shall live. In addition to the net income of Trust "A", the Trustees shall pay at any time and from time to time to my wife, VERLA REGNERY, so long as she shall live, such amounts from the principal of Trust "A" as the Trustees in their absolute and sole discretion shall deem necessary, appropriate or advisable.

 

(c) Upon the death of my wife, the assets then remaining in Trust "A", with the income accrued thereon, shall be distributed to such person or persons or to the estate of my wife, free of all trusts created hereunder, in such manner and in such proportions as my wife may designate and appoint in and by her Last Will. Such power of appointment hereby conferred upon my wife shall be exercisable by her exclusively and in all events.

 

(d) If for any reason upon the death of my wife any part or all of Trust "A", including the income accrued thereon, shall fail to pass under the previous provisions of this Article, the entire assets then remaining in Trust "A", with all income accrued thereon, shall be added to Trust "B" and thereafter be administered and distributed pursuant to the provisions of Trust "B"."

 

See, Exhibit A, p.2-4;

...........

"THIRD: (a) If my wife, VERLA REGNERY, shall survive me for a period of thirty (30) days, I give, devise and bequeath unto CHARLES H. G. KIMBALL, FRED C. GRIFFITHS, and my brother, HENRY REGNERY, as Trustees, as a separate trust fund designated as Trust "A", an amount equal to one-half (1/2) of the value of my adjusted gross estate as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes, less an amount equal to the value, as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes, of any property or interests in property passing or which have passed to or for the benefit of my wife other than pursuant to this my Last will and with respect to which a martial deduction is allowable for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death. The gift made by this Article shall be limited to and satisfied out of property included in my estate for which a martial deduction is allowable for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death. Each asset of my estate distributed in kind to the Trustees of Trust "A" pursuant to the above provisions of this Article shall be valued for purposes of the said distribution at its value as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death or at its cost if such asset of my estate was purchased subsequent to my death. Also, assets of my estate distributed to the Trustees of Trust "A" pursuant to the above provision of this Article shall have an aggregate fair market value at the time of distribution fairly representative of Trust "A" fund's proportionate share of the appreciation or depreciation in value of all property included in my estate then available for distribution to the Trustees of Trust "A" which has occurred after my death."

 

"FIFTH: (m) If for any reason the Trustee of either Trust "A" or Trust "B" shall not be able to agree unanimously with respect to the exercise of any power, authority, duty or discretion delegated to them pursuant to this, my Last will, then the act of the majority of said Trustees shall govern and control and shall be binding upon the beneficiaries of and all persons dealing with Trust "A" and Trust "B" and the dissenting Trustee shall execute such document or instrument and take such action as may be required of him by the majority of said Trustees as may be necessary or appropriate to enable the majority of said Trustees to exercise any power, authority, duty or discretion granted to the Trustees of trust "A" or Trust "B" pursuant to this, my Last Will

 

 

See, Exhibit B, pp.1, 3.

22) Under the terms governing Trust A, before any action could be taken by any two Trustees, all three of the Trustees would be required to confer and determine whether or not a unanimous decision could be reached and all three trustees must sign off agree or consent

23) The Will further provides that all of the income earned from the Trust AN accounts was to be paid to Verla during her lifetime in convenient installments. See, Exhibit A, pp.2-4.In addition, the Trustees were permitted to pay such amounts from the principal of the Trust accounts to Verla which they deemed necessary, appropriate or advisable. See, Exhibit A, pp.2-4. Between at least the years of 2000 through the present, there have been maintained by William Blair & Company ("Blair") at their Chicago Offices, the following Trust AN accounts: Nos. 409-75939-1-9-136, 409-75939-1-9-906, 452-75939-1-9-906, 150-75939-1-9-906 ("Trust A Accounts").

24) In direct breach of the Third and Fifth Article of the Will and Codicil, as cited above, Defendants have on numerous occasions, through Blair's Chicago Offices, taken action by telephoning, mailing and faxing to Blair various requests for the unilateral withdrawal and/or transfer of funds from the Trust A Accounts without first advising, conferring with, or notifying Plaintiff in anyway whatsoever:

a) January 2002: $310,000.00

b) April 2002: $150,000.00

c) June 2002: $551,706.58

d) March 2003: $150,000.00

e) April 2003: $300,000.00

f) May 2003: $276,650.00

g) September 2007: $50,000.00

h) January 2008: $10,000.00

i) February 2008: $10,000.00

j) March 2008: $10,000.00

k) April 2008: $10,000.00

l) May 2008: $10,000.00

m) June 2008: $10,000.00

__________

Total 2002-2008: $1,848,356.50 This needs to be updated

 

25) In addition, Defendants made distributions, upon information and belief, that were in excess of the income earned on Trust A and did so without ever advising Plaintiff.

26) In breach of the clear terms of Trust A and in order to keep Plaintiff from learning of their conduct, on or about February 9, 2000, Defendants authored and delivered their letter to William Kasten at Blair's Chicago Offices proclaiming that all decisions, including any withdrawals or transfers, out of any Trust A Account must be agreed in writing by two of the three trustees. A true and accurate copy of the February 2000 letter to William Kasten is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit C.

27) In authoring and delivering Exhibit C, Defendants intentionally misrepresented and ignored those specific terms of Trust A which require all three Trustees (including Plaintiff) confer and determine whether there was a unanimous decision before the "majority rule" and all three trustees must sign off If there is no attempt to achieve unanimous consent majority rule does not apply.

28)Between at least the years 2000 to the present, Defendants engaged in a scheme through which they repeatedly directed that some or all of the $1,848,358.50 in funds be transferred from the Trust A Accounts -- as were then being maintained at Blair's Chicago Offices -- into checking/banking accounts at both Harris Bank and Wachovia Bank among others, from which accounts Defendants would then issue checks/withdrawals which were used by them for their own personal benefit and gain. In perpetrating their scheme, Defendants failed and refused to advise, notify, seek or obtain Plaintiff's consent all in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust duties to Verla and Plaintiff under the terms of Trust A.

29) As a result, the Trust A Accounts have been depleted from a starting value of $2,363,544.00 in January 2000 to $496,769.00 in June 2008 by the actions and conduct of Defendants taken at Blair's Chicago Offices and without Plaintiff's knowledge or consent.

30) On or about May 18, 1989, the Verla K. Regnery Trust was formed and executed in Hinsdale, Illinois. The Verla Trust along with its Restatements ("Verla Trust") was created for the primary benefit of Verla.

The 2002 trust marked a change and new standard for the future. All new trusts, amendments or trust related changes must be signed off by all three of Verla's children

 

31) On or about May 1, 2003, the Verla K. Regnery Trust was amended and restated in its entirety and was executed in Hinsdale, Illinois ("2003 Restatement"). A true and accurate copy of the 2003 Restatement is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit D .Fred was in China.His first knowledge of this trust was in January 2008. Undue influence and duress would force Verla to sign three multi million dollar changes without the presence of an attorney representing her.

32) The 2003 Restatement was again formed by Verla as Grantor with Gretchen and Lynn designated as Co-Trustees. Verla's sister Juaine was renamed as the co-trustee

33) The 2003 Restatement was amended to provide that the remainder of the trust estate shall be distributed into equal one-third (1/3) parts to each of the Grantor's three children, with Defendants to receive their portions outright and with Plaintiff to receive his portion in trust, the Frederick W. Regnery Trust of which Lindsay, Fred and Geoff were to serve as Co-Trustees. See, Exhibit D at Art. III, §3.

34) Therefore, as Co-Trustees of Plaintiff's Trust, Lindsay, Fred and Geoff are trust beneficiaries and thus, are owed certain fiduciary obligations under the Verla Trust.

35) The 2003 Restatement again provided that the Defendants acting as Co-Trustees, upon written request of a beneficiary were obligated "to render annual statements of the receipts and disbursements and of the financial condition of the trust to such beneficiary." See, Exhibit D at Art. VII, §1(v).

36) Despite Plaintiffs' repeated requests for annual accountings of the type required to be rendered under the 2002-2003 Restatements, the Defendants never once rendered a single accounting or supplied any annual accounting statements to them and instead intentionally concealed and withheld such information from them and Verla .

37) On May 1, 2003, Verla executed a Last Will and Testament of Verla K. Regnery ("Verla Will") that was admitted to probate in the Circuit Court of DuPage County, Illinois, on June 6, 2008.. A true and accurate copy of the Verla Will is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit E. True and accurate copies of the "Letters of Office" are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit F.

In Article III of the Verla Will, Verla appointed whatever property remained in Trust A to the Verla Trust as amended and restated.

See, Exhibit E at Art. III.

38) As part of their continuing scheme, in or about the summer of 2003, Defendants caused their attorneys, Thomas E. Swaney of the Chicago Law Firm of Sidley Austin Brown & Wood, LLP. ("Sidley"), to prepare blanket releases which were designed to insulate Defendants from liability for their many violations of their duties as Co-Trustees and fiduciaries including their failure to disclose or otherwise account for their spending and ongoing misappropriation of trust funds and assets as Co-Trustees. This was the first time the defendants used Sidley Austin.Their personal attorney Dan Letizia handled all previous trust matters for the trustees.

39) As part of the process of selling the family's Hinsdale home in 2003, Verla purchased (through her Trust) and took up residence in an undivided interest in a single family home located in Fairview Village (the "Fairview Village Home"), an assisted living facility in the Village of Downers Grove and within DuPage County. After selling the Hinsdale home, Verla took up residence in the Fairview Village Home which she thereafter maintained as her primary place of residence.

40) On or about September 2, 2003, Verla, at the urging and insistence of Defendants, was pressured to execute two separate "Approvals of Accounts and Release of Trustees" ("Releases") for both the Verla Trust and Trust A.Verla was not represented at the signing.Juaine Broadbent her sister accompiting her to Dan Letizia.Dan Letizia had been and still was Gretchen and Lynn's attorney since 1998 True and accurate copies of the Releases are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit G and Exhibit H respectively. Through these Releases prepared by Sidley, Verla was attributed with a statement, not of her own making: "I hereby approve any and all actions taken by the Trustees...through December 31, 2002, and hold the Trustees harmless against any and all liability to any person arising out of the trusteeship." See, Exhibit G at ¶5; Exhibit H at ¶6.

41) Not only had the Defendants failed to disclose, identify or account for their dissipation and misappropriation of trust assets anytime before having Verla sign the Releases, the tion way for Defendants to attempt to insulate themselves from and avoid any potential liability for their misappropriation and mishandling of the funds and assets belonging to both Verla's Trust and Trust A.

Neither Release was supported by any consideration and the preparation and execution of both was undertaken by Defendants who similarly failed to disclose, identify or account for their dissipation and misappropriation of trust assets anytime before having Verla sign the Releases.

Neither Release restricts Plaintiffs' rights and interests to obtain -- as beneficiaries and interested parties under the trusts - and Defendants duties and obligations to provide - as Co-Trustees and fiduciaries of the same trusts - accountings and to render annual statements (for every year in which they served as Co-Trustees) of the receipts and disbursements and of the financial condition of the trust to each such beneficiary. None of these rights or duties are abrogated in any way by the Releases - which aside from being ill-gotten and unenforceable as against Verla - are instruments to which none of the Plaintiffs agreed, knew of, or were made a party to and to which none are consequently bound. Fred was a trustee and benificiary.He was in China.He first became aware of this release in January of 2008

42) Moreover, in light of the fact that the Verla Trust specifically provides that the trustees could only distribute trust principal to Verla during her lifetime and could only distribute income to a party other than Verla only as Verla might "from time to time direct in writing," any principal distributions made by the trustees to parties other than Verla are arguably invalid as contrary to the provisions of the Verla Trust. In addition, those distributions of income could have been made only after prior written directives were issued by Verla, regardless of whether Verla approved the distributions through the Release issued after the distributions were made. As a continuation of their scheme and grand slam of 2003.My sisters withdrew

.

43) On or about February 7, 2005, while Verla was vacationing with Lynn in North Carolina, Lynn had Verla assessed by Memory Assessment and Research Services ("Mars") to establish a baseline of memory functioning. The 2005 Mars evaluation revealed that Verla had previously suffered two heart attacks, the last one being 8 years prior, and concluded that Verla's memory was impaired when compared to that of her peers and was significantly below the expected level of functioning but that her recall of visual material and working memory were intact. In or about July of 2006, Verla was taken from her home in Downers Grove not feeling well and first taken to a wedding and in total 6000 on an airplane.With her heart condition and severe edema Mrs Regnery should not have left.her home. On her way back from California, Verla traveled to Washington D.C., Maryland and North Carolina. At some point during this trip, Verla suffered a stroke or a series of strokes for which she was ultimately hospitalized in North Carolina.

44) On or about November 21, 2006, Lynn brought Verla into the same Mars facility in North Carolina for a second evaluation. The 2006 Mars report concluded that Verla displayed "significant decline... across all measures of memory functioning." A true and accurate copy of the 2006 Mars Report is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit I.

The 2006 Mars Report further found that Verla's "current cognitive test scores indicate clinically significant impairment in virtually all measured areas of cognitive functioning," and "represent a vascular dementia.

 

45) Only four (4) days before the Mars evaluation, on or about November 17, 2006, the Defendants caused the Verla Trust to be once again restated ("2006 Restatement"). A true and accurate copy of the 2006 Restatement is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit J.

46) The 2006 Restatement was prepared by an Oak Brook Terrace attorney, Dan Letizia, and names Verla as Grantor with Gretchen and Lynn designated as Co-Trustees with the remainder of the trust estate to be distributed as it was in the 2003 Restatement, equal one-third hen(1/3) parts to each of the Grantor's three children. It should be noted that Plaintiffs are contesting the 2006 Restatement. However, unlike the 2003 Restatement, the 2006 Restatement deleted those portions of the Trust which provided that upon Verla's death: (i) Defendants would cease to act as Co-Trustees; and (ii) that Juaine Broadbent (Verla's sister) would serve as successor Trustee. See, Exhibit D at Art. I, §2.

47)"Defendants undertook an active role in overseeing and insisting upon the changes in the 2006 Restatement, providing that Defendants would continue to serve as Co-Trustees even upon Verla's death. Defendants' actions in this regard -- undertaken at a time when Verla lacked the mental capacity to restate her Trust much less appreciate the legal meaning and significance of the 2006 Restatement - were initiated by Defendants as part of a continuing scheme of financial exploitation against Verla by removing her only living sister as successor Trustee in favor of Defendants. See, Exhibit J, at Art. I, §1.

48) At all times herein relevant, there were certain accounts maintained by Blair in the name of the Verla Trust: account numbers 409-75938-10 and 150-75940-16 ("Verla Trust Accounts").

49)Throughout the period they have served as Co-Trustees, Defendants have depleted the Verla Trust Accounts in violation of the terms of the Verla Trust and in breach of their fiduciary duties which activities they have attempted to conceal by failing and refusing to render to Plaintiffs a single annual statement of the receipts and disbursements or of the financial condition of the Verla Trust, despite their repeated demands and by using the trust owned funds and assets for their own personal purposes rather than towards the care, support and comfort of Verla.

50) Between at least 2002 and 2008, Gretchen and Lynn have used the funds and assets belonging to the Verla Trust Accounts for their own benefit and gain in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust obligations owed to Plaintiffs as Co-Trustees of the Verla Trust.

Upon information and belief, Gretchen and Lynn have repeatedly directed that funds be transferred from the Verla Trust Accounts into checking/banking accounts at both Harris Bank and Wachovia Bank among others, from which accounts Defendants would then issue checks/withdrawals which were used by them for their own personal benefit and gain. As part of this scheme, between at least 2002 and 2008 Defendants failed and refused to account to Plaintiffs despite their repeated demands, all in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust duties to Plaintiffs under the terms of Verla Trust and in violation of their duties to furnish annual accountings as required under Section 11(a) of the Illinois Trusts and Fiduciaries Act. 760 ILCS 5/11 (West 2007).

51)Between at least 2002 and 2008, Defendants have repeatedly authorized the transfer of funds from the Trust A Accounts into the Verla Trust Account for the intended purpose of gaining more complete control over these funds as Co-Trustees without the involvement of Plaintiff (who at all times remained a third Trustee of Trust A); some or all of these funds were used by Defendants for their own personal benefit and gain in violation of both Trust A and the Verla Trust as well as their fiduciary duties under each such trust.

52) At the time of her death, Verla was visiting with Gretchen and staying in the latter's California home where she died at age 88 on November 2, 2007.

53) At all times material, Verla maintained, through her Trust, ownership of the Fairview Village Home which she furnished and where she received her mail and housed her personal files, papers, jewelry, clothing, artwork, personal belongings and effects.

54)In or about June of 2007, Defendant-Lynn appeared at Verla's Fairview Village Home while Verla was visiting Defendant-Gretchen in California, and then and there gained entry into the home and removed and purloined substantially all of Verla's furnishings, personal files, papers, jewelry, clothing, artwork, personal belongings and effects, some of which belonged to Plaintiff - Fred

55)The actions of Lynn in emptying Verla's Fairview Village Home were undertaken purposefully and maliciously and with the prior knowledge, involvement and/or direction of Gretchen so as to remove from Verla the personal liberty, right and ability to return to her home.

56)Shortly after removing these items from Verla's Fairview Village Home, Defendant -Lynn then transported many of the items to the Village of Woodridge and sold substantially all of the furnishings and much of Verla's other personal belongings in a garage sale which was conducted by her at the home of the in-laws of her daughter Gretchen. Since the sale, Lynn has at no time accounted to Verla, Verla's Trust or Plaintiff for the items taken by her from Verla's Fairview Village Home. Lynn's daughter Gretchen was paid $2,000 from the VKR checking account by Lynn for her help with the removal and sale of Verla's personal belongings. Since Verla's death, Gretchen and Lynn have continued to withdraw and transfer funds from both the Trust A Accounts and the Verla Trust Accounts.Since this complaint was drafted $10,000 per month was withdrawn until March of 2009.An additional $100,000 was withdrawn in July of 2008.

 

57) In December 2007, a request for a formal accounting was made by Lindsay as to the Verla Trust Accounts. To date, Defendants have failed, despite acknowledgement from their counsel that they have a duty to do so, to issue a formal accounting. In doing so, Defendants have incredulously suggested that the costs to do so would be incurred by Plaintiff's Trust only. A true and accurate copy of the email from Lindsey to attorney Peter Flaxman dated December 26, 2007 is attached hereto as Exhibit K. A true and accurate copy of Flaxman's January 17, 2008 letter in response is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit L.

58)Most recently, another demand for an accounting was made by Plaintiff with respect to both the Trust A Accounts and the Verla Trust Accounts and Defendants have persisted in their refusal to render or supply any such accounting. True and accurate copies of the letters dated August 29, 2008 sent by Plaintiff to Sidley and Blair are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Group Exhibit M. The Verla Trust provides that the administration of the Trust shall be governed by the laws of the State of Illinois.

59)As Trustees of Trust A and the Verla Trust, Defendants owed a fiduciary duty to manage the trust assets in the best interest of the trust estate and beneficiaries of these trusts.

60) That duty included a duty of good faith and loyalty to act in Verla's best interest and not for the Defendants' own personal interests.

61) Pursuant to 5/ 4 et seq.; 4.14, 4.20 (West 2007), Defendants' fiduciary duty included, but was not limited to:

a) Not to take or use for their own personal use and benefit any trust property; and

b) To maintain and keep records of all trust expenditures and to prudently safeguard, invest and account for all trust property and assets and to refrain from exploiting or using any such property and assets for their own personal gain or benefit

 

 

62) Defendants must account for all the funds they have taken and withdrawn from the Verla Trust and Trust A, and a constructive trust must be imposed upon all of Defendants' funds, accounts or assets wherever found in amounts sufficient to reimburse and make whole the Verla Trust and the Trust A of all misappropriated, converted, unaccounted for funds or assets duly belonging to the Verla Trust and Trust A.

 

Count II Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT III MISREPRESENTATION

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT IV VIOLATION OF TRUST AND ABUSE OF TRUST PRINCIPAL

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

COUNT V DURESS

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT VI UNDUE INFLUENCE

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

I dont get Juaine.That is wrongful death in the federal court?I donmt know if the statutes of limitations can go from one plaintiff to another.

 

I found oue I am still proofing but this is the one you said ready to gile and had Ruffalo included

 

I tried to revise everything. Here is a draft. Look over it. I think you could use it as the new pleading.

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

 

NOW COME the Plaintiffs, Frederick W. Regnery, ("Plaintiff"), Lindsay Regnery ("Lindsay"), Frederick L. Regnery, ("Fred"), and Geoffrey Regnery ("Geoff"), by and through their attorneys, Fuchs & Roselli, Ltd., and as and for their Verified Complaint against the Defendants, Gretchen Regnery Wallerich ("Gretchen") and Lynn Regnery ("Lynn"), and Juaine Broadbent, in her capacity as Executrix of the Estate of Verla K. Regnery ("Juaine"), (Gretchen and Lynn collectively referred to hereinafter as "Defendants"), Plaintiffs state as follows:

Jurisdiction and Venue

1. Plaintiff is an Illinois resident who resides within the Village of Westmont and within the County of DuPage.

2. Lindsay, Fred, and Geoff are Plaintiff's children who are named as necessary parties insofar as they are co-Trustees of the Frederick W. Regnery Trust.

3. Gretchen is an individual, who and at all times herein relevant, resides in the state of California.

4. Lynn is an individual, who at all times herein relevant, resides in the state of North Carolina.

5. Juaine is an Illinois resident, named as a Defendant solely in her capacity as the Executrix of the Estate of Verla K. Regnery.

6. Pursuant to Section 5/2-101 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, this Court situated in DuPage County is, by operation of the facts alleged herein, the proper venue for this action.

Facts Common to All Counts

7. Plaintiffs hereby restate and reallege Paragraphs 1 through 6 of Jurisdiction and Venue as and for Paragraph 7 of this Facts Common to All Counts as though fully set forth herein.

8. Plaintiff, along with Gretchen and Lynn are siblings with the Plaintiff being the son of, and the Defendants being the daughters of Verla Kiehl Regnery ("Verla") and Frederick L. Regnery ("Frederick").

 

COUNT I FRAUD

 

In August of 2006 with sore swollen legs hips and ankles my mother was taken on a 7000 airline trip and ended up having a stroke and severe dementia.

 

 

9) My mother's living trust owned 635 shares of our families business (My shares) an eight year lawsuit began with the understanding if we prevailed the proceeds would be mine.
My sisters were the trustees. They convinced my mother the lawsuit may not prevail and she may be counter sued. She sold the stock to them but no money exchanged hands just a signed note from my mother to the trustee that she sold the stock to my sisters. As it turns out this transaction took place after the court ruling establishing the value $500,000 at a later date they sent gifts to my children.I could never determine the percentage because of the taxes.

 

10)FLR and VKR trust 13 year releases Fred is trustee, in China not notified. Verla is represented by the trustees attorney, also signs a lifetime forgiveness document for all loans, advances and gifts and has no idea of what she is signing. Her sister was with her.

This was a fraudulent scheme between Letizia,Gretchen and Lynn against Verla and Fred. $5.0m

This was carefully planned and carried out.

 

 

11)FLR trust three trustees 18 years all three must sign.2000 letter from Gretchen and Lynn to Blair says only two must sign (reverts back to simple majority before codicil $2.0m)
There seems to be a concern Fred did not open his mail. From 1982-2000 very few withdrawals. I did a great deal of oversees traveling.2000 after the change of trustees the volume of withdrawals went up at least four fold. Lynn and Gretchen knew for a fact I did not open my statements as when I was in China they were at my mothers. Five houses I lived in during that period and 30% of my time in China. For this to happen, Blair and my sisters would have to work together to defraud my mother and me.

 

12) VKR irrevocable trust taken from Alvin kiehl trustee,Verla's brother. while Verla is incapacitated. Alvin was forced off after 20 years of service.A forged signature became the new trustee. Then, $420,000 withdrawn by using four forgeries. Alvin and Verla deprived from buy back. clause. Letizia notarizes forged signature.

13) My mother was incapacitated for 15 months. During that time $1.0m was spent. Instead of $150,000 if she were living at home.. My mother owned a $3.4m irrevocable trust and a $2.5m 2003 living trust. In November of 2006 both trusts were rewritten while my mother was mentally incapacitated and I was in China. As a beneficiary I was to be notified,the irrevocable trust in writing.I was not.In January of 2007 my mother wanted to go home so I went to North Caroliana to get her..My sisters would not let her go.I asked both of them if there were any changed to my mothers trust in my absence and their answer was no.Had they not lied to me and concealed the changes of the trusts in November I would have take my mother home. Damages $850,000 from the difference spent by my sisters to the amount my mother living at home would have spent. $5.0m in principal depleated in 10 years no accounting.1997-2007., $700,000 loss in 2000 stock market.Trustees lost nothing as they sold their stoch before the market crash.

 

14) At the time the 2006 trust was drafted both sisters were very much awareof my mothers mental condition .The most telling part of the trust change was removing my mothers sister as successor trustee and taking her $1.000.00 per months guarantee away.

That clause is gone. Verla was 88 and unsophisticated as an investor. She trusted her daughters. She trusted the attorney. Each major revision,restatement,forgiveness or release was made in 2003 and 2006 I have a passport that will coincide with those dates.

 

15) There were four major documents or trusts that my mother was deceived or threatened into signing.Each time her son was in China. Each time she did not know the content of what she was signing.Each one they would not give her a copy of for her file for fear of me fnding it.

 

.The father was the grantor of a trust funded in 1966 an irrevocable trust From 1982 my sisters and I were its trustee.All activity in the trust must be signed off by the trustees. the grand slam was completed As impossible as it may seem working together with their attorney the daughters pulled off taking control of all three trusts by forgery,fraud,and elder abuse This was done with complete and utter silence and concealment and involved $7.5m.The mother had no idea of what she was signing and the son was 8000 away.

 

16)The mothers brother was removed after 20 years, a sister removed after 10 years and her son. My mother since 1980 relied on my advice before making any major financial decisions. It was very easy for someone to tell my mother one thing to get her to sign it when it really said something else.

 

17)While staying in Mill Vallley my sister did not want my mother to go home under any circumstance.$5.5m and two trust changes would have been discovered plus $1.0m in withdrawals.

 

18) Her son was on his way from China to pick up his mother in California My sister had hired an attorney at $400.00 per hour to keep me from taking my mother home.She has taken nearly 200,000 since to pay his legal bills He helps my sister end my mother's life and then pays himself from my mothers trust funds From 1989 to mothers death they were the sole trustees.No investment skills.2 of 3 children and a large estate.On at least seven occasions my mother tried to remove them as trustees or neutralize them each failed.Beginning in 2002 my mother says nothing is done in the future without three signatures 2003 I am in China and four major changes take place.2006 I am in China and the the irrevocable trust forgery and fraud and 2006 trust incapacity take place $5.5m in total

her died in 1980.One of his assets was 803 (12%) shares of a family business which was in serious financial trouble and $12.0m in debt. The value was $500.00 per share. One year later I purchased 635 shares for the same price to remove the president. The per share price was $500.00. Five years later I was forced to sell the company for $7500 per share. I purchased a $3.0m life insurance policy with the proceeds from my stock and made my sisters 1/3 beneficiaries each which were my sole decision. In six years since my sister Lynn pushed to sell her stock for $500.00 or $130,000 my sisters each received a windfall of $3.0m and had no involvement with the company. In 1989, I temporarily allowed my sisters to become trustees a bank was to take their place over the years. At least seven attempts were made to have our trusts professionally managed.

 

20) Frederick died on May 17, 1980. Prior to his death, on or about August 11, 1955, Frederick executed his Last Will ("Will"). On or about February 2, 1966, Frederick executed a Codicil to same ("Codicil"). The Will and Codicil provided that, in the event Verla survived Frederick by a period of thirty days, Marital Trust A ("Trust A") was to be created for the benefit of Verla. A true and accurate copy of the Will and Codicil of Frederick L. Regnery are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A and Exhibit B respectively.

21) In or about 1982, Plaintiff and Defendants were named successor Trustees of Trust A. The Third and Fifth Articles of the Will and Codicil provide with respect to the creation and administration of Trust A:

"THIRD: (b) All of the income from Trust "A" from the date of my death shall be paid to my wife, VERLA REGNERY, in convenient installments, at least quarter-annually, so long as she shall live. In addition to the net income of Trust "A", the Trustees shall pay at any time and from time to time to my wife, VERLA REGNERY, so long as she shall live, such amounts from the principal of Trust "A" as the Trustees in their absolute and sole discretion shall deem necessary, appropriate or advisable.

 

(c) Upon the death of my wife, the assets then remaining in Trust "A", with the income accrued thereon, shall be distributed to such person or persons or to the estate of my wife, free of all trusts created hereunder, in such manner and in such proportions as my wife may designate and appoint in and by her Last Will. Such power of appointment hereby conferred upon my wife shall be exercisable by her exclusively and in all events.

 

(d) If for any reason upon the death of my wife any part or all of Trust "A", including the income accrued thereon, shall fail to pass under the previous provisions of this Article, the entire assets then remaining in Trust "A", with all income accrued thereon, shall be added to Trust "B" and thereafter be administered and distributed pursuant to the provisions of Trust "B"."

 

See, Exhibit A, p.2-4;

...........

"THIRD: (a) If my wife, VERLA REGNERY, shall survive me for a period of thirty (30) days, I give, devise and bequeath unto CHARLES H. G. KIMBALL, FRED C. GRIFFITHS, and my brother, HENRY REGNERY, as Trustees, as a separate trust fund designated as Trust "A", an amount equal to one-half (1/2) of the value of my adjusted gross estate as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes, less an amount equal to the value, as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes, of any property or interests in property passing or which have passed to or for the benefit of my wife other than pursuant to this my Last will and with respect to which a martial deduction is allowable for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death. The gift made by this Article shall be limited to and satisfied out of property included in my estate for which a martial deduction is allowable for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death. Each asset of my estate distributed in kind to the Trustees of Trust "A" pursuant to the above provisions of this Article shall be valued for purposes of the said distribution at its value as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death or at its cost if such asset of my estate was purchased subsequent to my death. Also, assets of my estate distributed to the Trustees of Trust "A" pursuant to the above provision of this Article shall have an aggregate fair market value at the time of distribution fairly representative of Trust "A" fund's proportionate share of the appreciation or depreciation in value of all property included in my estate then available for distribution to the Trustees of Trust "A" which has occurred after my death."

 

"FIFTH: (m) If for any reason the Trustee of either Trust "A" or Trust "B" shall not be able to agree unanimously with respect to the exercise of any power, authority, duty or discretion delegated to them pursuant to this, my Last will, then the act of the majority of said Trustees shall govern and control and shall be binding upon the beneficiaries of and all persons dealing with Trust "A" and Trust "B" and the dissenting Trustee shall execute such document or instrument and take such action as may be required of him by the majority of said Trustees as may be necessary or appropriate to enable the majority of said Trustees to exercise any power, authority, duty or discretion granted to the Trustees of trust "A" or Trust "B" pursuant to this, my Last Will

 

 

See, Exhibit B, pp.1, 3.

22) Under the terms governing Trust A, before any action could be taken by any two Trustees, all three of the Trustees would be required to confer and determine whether or not a unanimous decision could be reached and all three trustees must sign off agree or consent

23) The Will further provides that all of the income earned from the Trust AN accounts was to be paid to Verla during her lifetime in convenient installments. See, Exhibit A, pp.2-4.In addition, the Trustees were permitted to pay such amounts from the principal of the Trust accounts to Verla which they deemed necessary, appropriate or advisable. See, Exhibit A, pp.2-4. Between at least the years of 2000 through the present, there have been maintained by William Blair & Company ("Blair") at their Chicago Offices, the following Trust AN accounts: Nos. 409-75939-1-9-136, 409-75939-1-9-906, 452-75939-1-9-906, 150-75939-1-9-906 ("Trust A Accounts").

24) In direct breach of the Third and Fifth Article of the Will and Codicil, as cited above, Defendants have on numerous occasions, through Blair's Chicago Offices, taken action by telephoning, mailing and faxing to Blair various requests for the unilateral withdrawal and/or transfer of funds from the Trust A Accounts without first advising, conferring with, or notifying Plaintiff in anyway whatsoever:

a) January 2002: $310,000.00

b) April 2002: $150,000.00

c) June 2002: $551,706.58

d) March 2003: $150,000.00

e) April 2003: $300,000.00

f) May 2003: $276,650.00

g) September 2007: $50,000.00

h) January 2008: $10,000.00

i) February 2008: $10,000.00

j) March 2008: $10,000.00

k) April 2008: $10,000.00

l) May 2008: $10,000.00

m) June 2008: $10,000.00

__________

Total 2002-2008: $1,848,356.50 This needs to be updated

 

25) In addition, Defendants made distributions, upon information and belief, that were in excess of the income earned on Trust A and did so without ever advising Plaintiff.

26) In breach of the clear terms of Trust A and in order to keep Plaintiff from learning of their conduct, on or about February 9, 2000, Defendants authored and delivered their letter to William Kasten at Blair's Chicago Offices proclaiming that all decisions, including any withdrawals or transfers, out of any Trust A Account must be agreed in writing by two of the three trustees. A true and accurate copy of the February 2000 letter to William Kasten is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit C.

27) In authoring and delivering Exhibit C, Defendants intentionally misrepresented and ignored those specific terms of Trust A which require all three Trustees (including Plaintiff) confer and determine whether there was a unanimous decision before the "majority rule" and all three trustees must sign off If there is no attempt to achieve unanimous consent majority rule does not apply.

28)Between at least the years 2000 to the present, Defendants engaged in a scheme through which they repeatedly directed that some or all of the $1,848,358.50 in funds be transferred from the Trust A Accounts -- as were then being maintained at Blair's Chicago Offices -- into checking/banking accounts at both Harris Bank and Wachovia Bank among others, from which accounts Defendants would then issue checks/withdrawals which were used by them for their own personal benefit and gain. In perpetrating their scheme, Defendants failed and refused to advise, notify, seek or obtain Plaintiff's consent all in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust duties to Verla and Plaintiff under the terms of Trust A.

29) As a result, the Trust A Accounts have been depleted from a starting value of $2,363,544.00 in January 2000 to $496,769.00 in June 2008 by the actions and conduct of Defendants taken at Blair's Chicago Offices and without Plaintiff's knowledge or consent.

30) On or about May 18, 1989, the Verla K. Regnery Trust was formed and executed in Hinsdale, Illinois. The Verla Trust along with its Restatements ("Verla Trust") was created for the primary benefit of Verla.

The 2002 trust marked a change and new standard for the future. All new trusts, amendments or trust related changes must be signed off by all three of Verla's children

 

31) On or about May 1, 2003, the Verla K. Regnery Trust was amended and restated in its entirety and was executed in Hinsdale, Illinois ("2003 Restatement"). A true and accurate copy of the 2003 Restatement is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit D .Fred was in China.His first knowledge of this trust was in January 2008. Undue influence and duress would force Verla to sign three multi million dollar changes without the presence of an attorney representing her.

32) The 2003 Restatement was again formed by Verla as Grantor with Gretchen and Lynn designated as Co-Trustees. Verla's sister Juaine was renamed as the co-trustee

33) The 2003 Restatement was amended to provide that the remainder of the trust estate shall be distributed into equal one-third (1/3) parts to each of the Grantor's three children, with Defendants to receive their portions outright and with Plaintiff to receive his portion in trust, the Frederick W. Regnery Trust of which Lindsay, Fred and Geoff were to serve as Co-Trustees. See, Exhibit D at Art. III, §3.

34) Therefore, as Co-Trustees of Plaintiff's Trust, Lindsay, Fred and Geoff are trust beneficiaries and thus, are owed certain fiduciary obligations under the Verla Trust.

35) The 2003 Restatement again provided that the Defendants acting as Co-Trustees, upon written request of a beneficiary were obligated "to render annual statements of the receipts and disbursements and of the financial condition of the trust to such beneficiary." See, Exhibit D at Art. VII, §1(v).

36) Despite Plaintiffs' repeated requests for annual accountings of the type required to be rendered under the 2002-2003 Restatements, the Defendants never once rendered a single accounting or supplied any annual accounting statements to them and instead intentionally concealed and withheld such information from them and Verla .

37) On May 1, 2003, Verla executed a Last Will and Testament of Verla K. Regnery ("Verla Will") that was admitted to probate in the Circuit Court of DuPage County, Illinois, on June 6, 2008.. A true and accurate copy of the Verla Will is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit E. True and accurate copies of the "Letters of Office" are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit F.

In Article III of the Verla Will, Verla appointed whatever property remained in Trust A to the Verla Trust as amended and restated.

See, Exhibit E at Art. III.

38) As part of their continuing scheme, in or about the summer of 2003, Defendants caused their attorneys, Thomas E. Swaney of the Chicago Law Firm of Sidley Austin Brown & Wood, LLP. ("Sidley"), to prepare blanket releases which were designed to insulate Defendants from liability for their many violations of their duties as Co-Trustees and fiduciaries including their failure to disclose or otherwise account for their spending and ongoing misappropriation of trust funds and assets as Co-Trustees. This was the first time the defendants used Sidley Austin.Their personal attorney Dan Letizia handled all previous trust matters for the trustees.

39) As part of the process of selling the family's Hinsdale home in 2003, Verla purchased (through her Trust) and took up residence in an undivided interest in a single family home located in Fairview Village (the "Fairview Village Home"), an assisted living facility in the Village of Downers Grove and within DuPage County. After selling the Hinsdale home, Verla took up residence in the Fairview Village Home which she thereafter maintained as her primary place of residence.

40) On or about September 2, 2003, Verla, at the urging and insistence of Defendants, was pressured to execute two separate "Approvals of Accounts and Release of Trustees" ("Releases") for both the Verla Trust and Trust A.Verla was not represented at the signing.Juaine Broadbent her sister accompiting her to Dan Letizia.Dan Letizia had been and still was Gretchen and Lynn's attorney since 1998 True and accurate copies of the Releases are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit G and Exhibit H respectively. Through these Releases prepared by Sidley, Verla was attributed with a statement, not of her own making: "I hereby approve any and all actions taken by the Trustees...through December 31, 2002, and hold the Trustees harmless against any and all liability to any person arising out of the trusteeship." See, Exhibit G at ¶5; Exhibit H at ¶6.

41) Not only had the Defendants failed to disclose, identify or account for their dissipation and misappropriation of trust assets anytime before having Verla sign the Releases, the tion way for Defendants to attempt to insulate themselves from and avoid any potential liability for their misappropriation and mishandling of the funds and assets belonging to both Verla's Trust and Trust A.

Neither Release was supported by any consideration and the preparation and execution of both was undertaken by Defendants who similarly failed to disclose, identify or account for their dissipation and misappropriation of trust assets anytime before having Verla sign the Releases.

Neither Release restricts Plaintiffs' rights and interests to obtain -- as beneficiaries and interested parties under the trusts - and Defendants duties and obligations to provide - as Co-Trustees and fiduciaries of the same trusts - accountings and to render annual statements (for every year in which they served as Co-Trustees) of the receipts and disbursements and of the financial condition of the trust to each such beneficiary. None of these rights or duties are abrogated in any way by the Releases - which aside from being ill-gotten and unenforceable as against Verla - are instruments to which none of the Plaintiffs agreed, knew of, or were made a party to and to which none are consequently bound. Fred was a trustee and benificiary.He was in China.He first became aware of this release in January of 2008

42) Moreover, in light of the fact that the Verla Trust specifically provides that the trustees could only distribute trust principal to Verla during her lifetime and could only distribute income to a party other than Verla only as Verla might "from time to time direct in writing," any principal distributions made by the trustees to parties other than Verla are arguably invalid as contrary to the provisions of the Verla Trust. In addition, those distributions of income could have been made only after prior written directives were issued by Verla, regardless of whether Verla approved the distributions through the Release issued after the distributions were made. As a continuation of their scheme and grand slam of 2003.My sisters withdrew

.

43) On or about February 7, 2005, while Verla was vacationing with Lynn in North Carolina, Lynn had Verla assessed by Memory Assessment and Research Services ("Mars") to establish a baseline of memory functioning. The 2005 Mars evaluation revealed that Verla had previously suffered two heart attacks, the last one being 8 years prior, and concluded that Verla's memory was impaired when compared to that of her peers and was significantly below the expected level of functioning but that her recall of visual material and working memory were intact. In or about July of 2006, Verla was taken from her home in Downers Grove not feeling well and first taken to a wedding and in total 6000 on an airplane.With her heart condition and severe edema Mrs Regnery should not have left.her home. On her way back from California, Verla traveled to Washington D.C., Maryland and North Carolina. At some point during this trip, Verla suffered a stroke or a series of strokes for which she was ultimately hospitalized in North Carolina.

44) On or about November 21, 2006, Lynn brought Verla into the same Mars facility in North Carolina for a second evaluation. The 2006 Mars report concluded that Verla displayed "significant decline... across all measures of memory functioning." A true and accurate copy of the 2006 Mars Report is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit I.

The 2006 Mars Report further found that Verla's "current cognitive test scores indicate clinically significant impairment in virtually all measured areas of cognitive functioning," and "represent a vascular dementia.

 

45) Only four (4) days before the Mars evaluation, on or about November 17, 2006, the Defendants caused the Verla Trust to be once again restated ("2006 Restatement"). A true and accurate copy of the 2006 Restatement is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit J.

46) The 2006 Restatement was prepared by an Oak Brook Terrace attorney, Dan Letizia, and names Verla as Grantor with Gretchen and Lynn designated as Co-Trustees with the remainder of the trust estate to be distributed as it was in the 2003 Restatement, equal one-third hen(1/3) parts to each of the Grantor's three children. It should be noted that Plaintiffs are contesting the 2006 Restatement. However, unlike the 2003 Restatement, the 2006 Restatement deleted those portions of the Trust which provided that upon Verla's death: (i) Defendants would cease to act as Co-Trustees; and (ii) that Juaine Broadbent (Verla's sister) would serve as successor Trustee. See, Exhibit D at Art. I, §2.

47)"Defendants undertook an active role in overseeing and insisting upon the changes in the 2006 Restatement, providing that Defendants would continue to serve as Co-Trustees even upon Verla's death. Defendants' actions in this regard -- undertaken at a time when Verla lacked the mental capacity to restate her Trust much less appreciate the legal meaning and significance of the 2006 Restatement - were initiated by Defendants as part of a continuing scheme of financial exploitation against Verla by removing her only living sister as successor Trustee in favor of Defendants. See, Exhibit J, at Art. I, §1.

48) At all times herein relevant, there were certain accounts maintained by Blair in the name of the Verla Trust: account numbers 409-75938-10 and 150-75940-16 ("Verla Trust Accounts").

49)Throughout the period they have served as Co-Trustees, Defendants have depleted the Verla Trust Accounts in violation of the terms of the Verla Trust and in breach of their fiduciary duties which activities they have attempted to conceal by failing and refusing to render to Plaintiffs a single annual statement of the receipts and disbursements or of the financial condition of the Verla Trust, despite their repeated demands and by using the trust owned funds and assets for their own personal purposes rather than towards the care, support and comfort of Verla.

50) Between at least 2002 and 2008, Gretchen and Lynn have used the funds and assets belonging to the Verla Trust Accounts for their own benefit and gain in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust obligations owed to Plaintiffs as Co-Trustees of the Verla Trust.

Upon information and belief, Gretchen and Lynn have repeatedly directed that funds be transferred from the Verla Trust Accounts into checking/banking accounts at both Harris Bank and Wachovia Bank among others, from which accounts Defendants would then issue checks/withdrawals which were used by them for their own personal benefit and gain. As part of this scheme, between at least 2002 and 2008 Defendants failed and refused to account to Plaintiffs despite their repeated demands, all in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust duties to Plaintiffs under the terms of Verla Trust and in violation of their duties to furnish annual accountings as required under Section 11(a) of the Illinois Trusts and Fiduciaries Act. 760 ILCS 5/11 (West 2007).

51)Between at least 2002 and 2008, Defendants have repeatedly authorized the transfer of funds from the Trust A Accounts into the Verla Trust Account for the intended purpose of gaining more complete control over these funds as Co-Trustees without the involvement of Plaintiff (who at all times remained a third Trustee of Trust A); some or all of these funds were used by Defendants for their own personal benefit and gain in violation of both Trust A and the Verla Trust as well as their fiduciary duties under each such trust.

52) At the time of her death, Verla was visiting with Gretchen and staying in the latter's California home where she died at age 88 on November 2, 2007.

53) At all times material, Verla maintained, through her Trust, ownership of the Fairview Village Home which she furnished and where she received her mail and housed her personal files, papers, jewelry, clothing, artwork, personal belongings and effects.

54)In or about June of 2007, Defendant-Lynn appeared at Verla's Fairview Village Home while Verla was visiting Defendant-Gretchen in California, and then and there gained entry into the home and removed and purloined substantially all of Verla's furnishings, personal files, papers, jewelry, clothing, artwork, personal belongings and effects, some of which belonged to Plaintiff - Fred

55)The actions of Lynn in emptying Verla's Fairview Village Home were undertaken purposefully and maliciously and with the prior knowledge, involvement and/or direction of Gretchen so as to remove from Verla the personal liberty, right and ability to return to her home.

56)Shortly after removing these items from Verla's Fairview Village Home, Defendant -Lynn then transported many of the items to the Village of Woodridge and sold substantially all of the furnishings and much of Verla's other personal belongings in a garage sale which was conducted by her at the home of the in-laws of her daughter Gretchen. Since the sale, Lynn has at no time accounted to Verla, Verla's Trust or Plaintiff for the items taken by her from Verla's Fairview Village Home. Lynn's daughter Gretchen was paid $2,000 from the VKR checking account by Lynn for her help with the removal and sale of Verla's personal belongings. Since Verla's death, Gretchen and Lynn have continued to withdraw and transfer funds from both the Trust A Accounts and the Verla Trust Accounts.Since this complaint was drafted $10,000 per month was withdrawn until March of 2009.An additional $100,000 was withdrawn in July of 2008.

 

57) In December 2007, a request for a formal accounting was made by Lindsay as to the Verla Trust Accounts. To date, Defendants have failed, despite acknowledgement from their counsel that they have a duty to do so, to issue a formal accounting. In doing so, Defendants have incredulously suggested that the costs to do so would be incurred by Plaintiff's Trust only. A true and accurate copy of the email from Lindsey to attorney Peter Flaxman dated December 26, 2007 is attached hereto as Exhibit K. A true and accurate copy of Flaxman's January 17, 2008 letter in response is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit L.

58)Most recently, another demand for an accounting was made by Plaintiff with respect to both the Trust A Accounts and the Verla Trust Accounts and Defendants have persisted in their refusal to render or supply any such accounting. True and accurate copies of the letters dated August 29, 2008 sent by Plaintiff to Sidley and Blair are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Group Exhibit M. The Verla Trust provides that the administration of the Trust shall be governed by the laws of the State of Illinois.

59)As Trustees of Trust A and the Verla Trust, Defendants owed a fiduciary duty to manage the trust assets in the best interest of the trust estate and beneficiaries of these trusts.

60) That duty included a duty of good faith and loyalty to act in Verla's best interest and not for the Defendants' own personal interests.

61) Pursuant to 5/ 4 et seq.; 4.14, 4.20 (West 2007), Defendants' fiduciary duty included, but was not limited to:

a) Not to take or use for their own personal use and benefit any trust property; and

b) To maintain and keep records of all trust expenditures and to prudently safeguard, invest and account for all trust property and assets and to refrain from exploiting or using any such property and assets for their own personal gain or benefit

 

 

62) Defendants must account for all the funds they have taken and withdrawn from the Verla Trust and Trust A, and a constructive trust must be imposed upon all of Defendants' funds, accounts or assets wherever found in amounts sufficient to reimburse and make whole the Verla Trust and the Trust A of all misappropriated, converted, unaccounted for funds or assets duly belonging to the Verla Trust and Trust A.

 

Count II Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT III MISREPRESENTATION

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT IV VIOLATION OF TRUST AND ABUSE OF TRUST PRINCIPAL

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

COUNT V DURESS

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT VI UNDUE INFLUENCE

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

I dont get Juaine.That is wrongful death in the federal court?I donmt know if the statutes of limitations can go from one plaintiff to another.

 

I found oue I am still proofing but this is the one you said ready to gile and had Ruffalo included

 

I tried to revise everything. Here is a draft. Look over it. I think you could use it as the new pleading.

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

 

NOW COME the Plaintiffs, Frederick W. Regnery, ("Plaintiff"), Lindsay Regnery ("Lindsay"), Frederick L. Regnery, ("Fred"), and Geoffrey Regnery ("Geoff"), by and through their attorneys, Fuchs & Roselli, Ltd., and as and for their Verified Complaint against the Defendants, Gretchen Regnery Wallerich ("Gretchen") and Lynn Regnery ("Lynn"), and Juaine Broadbent, in her capacity as Executrix of the Estate of Verla K. Regnery ("Juaine"), (Gretchen and Lynn collectively referred to hereinafter as "Defendants"), Plaintiffs state as follows:

Jurisdiction and Venue

1. Plaintiff is an Illinois resident who resides within the Village of Westmont and within the County of DuPage.

2. Lindsay, Fred, and Geoff are Plaintiff's children who are named as necessary parties insofar as they are co-Trustees of the Frederick W. Regnery Trust.

3. Gretchen is an individual, who and at all times herein relevant, resides in the state of California.

4. Lynn is an individual, who at all times herein relevant, resides in the state of North Carolina.

5. Juaine is an Illinois resident, named as a Defendant solely in her capacity as the Executrix of the Estate of Verla K. Regnery.

6. Pursuant to Section 5/2-101 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, this Court situated in DuPage County is, by operation of the facts alleged herein, the proper venue for this action.

Facts Common to All Counts

7. Plaintiffs hereby restate and reallege Paragraphs 1 through 6 of Jurisdiction and Venue as and for Paragraph 7 of this Facts Common to All Counts as though fully set forth herein.

8. Plaintiff, along with Gretchen and Lynn are siblings with the Plaintiff being the son of, and the Defendants being the daughters of Verla Kiehl Regnery ("Verla") and Frederick L. Regnery ("Frederick").

 

COUNT I FRAUD

 

In August of 2006 with sore swollen legs hips and ankles my mother was taken on a 7000 airline trip and ended up having a stroke and severe dementia.

 

 

9) My mother's living trust owned 635 shares of our families business (My shares) an eight year lawsuit began with the understanding if we prevailed the proceeds would be mine.
My sisters were the trustees. They convinced my mother the lawsuit may not prevail and she may be counter sued. She sold the stock to them but no money exchanged hands just a signed note from my mother to the trustee that she sold the stock to my sisters. As it turns out this transaction took place after the court ruling establishing the value $500,000 at a later date they sent gifts to my children.I could never determine the percentage because of the taxes.

 

10)FLR and VKR trust 13 year releases Fred is trustee, in China not notified. Verla is represented by the trustees attorney, also signs a lifetime forgiveness document for all loans, advances and gifts and has no idea of what she is signing. Her sister was with her.

This was a fraudulent scheme between Letizia,Gretchen and Lynn against Verla and Fred. $5.0m

This was carefully planned and carried out.

 

 

11)FLR trust three trustees 18 years all three must sign.2000 letter from Gretchen and Lynn to Blair says only two must sign (reverts back to simple majority before codicil $2.0m)
There seems to be a concern Fred did not open his mail. From 1982-2000 very few withdrawals. I did a great deal of oversees traveling.2000 after the change of trustees the volume of withdrawals went up at least four fold. Lynn and Gretchen knew for a fact I did not open my statements as when I was in China they were at my mothers. Five houses I lived in during that period and 30% of my time in China. For this to happen, Blair and my sisters would have to work together to defraud my mother and me.

 

12) VKR irrevocable trust taken from Alvin kiehl trustee,Verla's brother. while Verla is incapacitated. Alvin was forced off after 20 years of service.A forged signature became the new trustee. Then, $420,000 withdrawn by using four forgeries. Alvin and Verla deprived from buy back. clause. Letizia notarizes forged signature.

13) My mother was incapacitated for 15 months. During that time $1.0m was spent. Instead of $150,000 if she were living at home.. My mother owned a $3.4m irrevocable trust and a $2.5m 2003 living trust. In November of 2006 both trusts were rewritten while my mother was mentally incapacitated and I was in China. As a beneficiary I was to be notified,the irrevocable trust in writing.I was not.In January of 2007 my mother wanted to go home so I went to North Caroliana to get her..My sisters would not let her go.I asked both of them if there were any changed to my mothers trust in my absence and their answer was no.Had they not lied to me and concealed the changes of the trusts in November I would have take my mother home. Damages $850,000 from the difference spent by my sisters to the amount my mother living at home would have spent. $5.0m in principal depleated in 10 years no accounting.1997-2007., $700,000 loss in 2000 stock market.Trustees lost nothing as they sold their stoch before the market crash.

 

14) At the time the 2006 trust was drafted both sisters were very much awareof my mothers mental condition .The most telling part of the trust change was removing my mothers sister as successor trustee and taking her $1.000.00 per months guarantee away.

That clause is gone. Verla was 88 and unsophisticated as an investor. She trusted her daughters. She trusted the attorney. Each major revision,restatement,forgiveness or release was made in 2003 and 2006 I have a passport that will coincide with those dates.

 

15) There were four major documents or trusts that my mother was deceived or threatened into signing.Each time her son was in China. Each time she did not know the content of what she was signing.Each one they would not give her a copy of for her file for fear of me fnding it.

 

.The father was the grantor of a trust funded in 1966 an irrevocable trust From 1982 my sisters and I were its trustee.All activity in the trust must be signed off by the trustees. the grand slam was completed As impossible as it may seem working together with their attorney the daughters pulled off taking control of all three trusts by forgery,fraud,and elder abuse This was done with complete and utter silence and concealment and involved $7.5m.The mother had no idea of what she was signing and the son was 8000 away.

 

16)The mothers brother was removed after 20 years, a sister removed after 10 years and her son. My mother since 1980 relied on my advice before making any major financial decisions. It was very easy for someone to tell my mother one thing to get her to sign it when it really said something else.

 

17)While staying in Mill Vallley my sister did not want my mother to go home under any circumstance.$5.5m and two trust changes would have been discovered plus $1.0m in withdrawals.

 

18) Her son was on his way from China to pick up his mother in California My sister had hired an attorney at $400.00 per hour to keep me from taking my mother home.She has taken nearly 200,000 since to pay his legal bills He helps my sister end my mother's life and then pays himself from my mothers trust funds From 1989 to mothers death they were the sole trustees.No investment skills.2 of 3 children and a large estate.On at least seven occasions my mother tried to remove them as trustees or neutralize them each failed.Beginning in 2002 my mother says nothing is done in the future without three signatures 2003 I am in China and four major changes take place.2006 I am in China and the the irrevocable trust forgery and fraud and 2006 trust incapacity take place $5.5m in total

her died in 1980.One of his assets was 803 (12%) shares of a family business which was in serious financial trouble and $12.0m in debt. The value was $500.00 per share. One year later I purchased 635 shares for the same price to remove the president. The per share price was $500.00. Five years later I was forced to sell the company for $7500 per share. I purchased a $3.0m life insurance policy with the proceeds from my stock and made my sisters 1/3 beneficiaries each which were my sole decision. In six years since my sister Lynn pushed to sell her stock for $500.00 or $130,000 my sisters each received a windfall of $3.0m and had no involvement with the company. In 1989, I temporarily allowed my sisters to become trustees a bank was to take their place over the years. At least seven attempts were made to have our trusts professionally managed.

 

20) Frederick died on May 17, 1980. Prior to his death, on or about August 11, 1955, Frederick executed his Last Will ("Will"). On or about February 2, 1966, Frederick executed a Codicil to same ("Codicil"). The Will and Codicil provided that, in the event Verla survived Frederick by a period of thirty days, Marital Trust A ("Trust A") was to be created for the benefit of Verla. A true and accurate copy of the Will and Codicil of Frederick L. Regnery are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A and Exhibit B respectively.

21) In or about 1982, Plaintiff and Defendants were named successor Trustees of Trust A. The Third and Fifth Articles of the Will and Codicil provide with respect to the creation and administration of Trust A:

"THIRD: (b) All of the income from Trust "A" from the date of my death shall be paid to my wife, VERLA REGNERY, in convenient installments, at least quarter-annually, so long as she shall live. In addition to the net income of Trust "A", the Trustees shall pay at any time and from time to time to my wife, VERLA REGNERY, so long as she shall live, such amounts from the principal of Trust "A" as the Trustees in their absolute and sole discretion shall deem necessary, appropriate or advisable.

 

(c) Upon the death of my wife, the assets then remaining in Trust "A", with the income accrued thereon, shall be distributed to such person or persons or to the estate of my wife, free of all trusts created hereunder, in such manner and in such proportions as my wife may designate and appoint in and by her Last Will. Such power of appointment hereby conferred upon my wife shall be exercisable by her exclusively and in all events.

 

(d) If for any reason upon the death of my wife any part or all of Trust "A", including the income accrued thereon, shall fail to pass under the previous provisions of this Article, the entire assets then remaining in Trust "A", with all income accrued thereon, shall be added to Trust "B" and thereafter be administered and distributed pursuant to the provisions of Trust "B"."

 

See, Exhibit A, p.2-4;

...........

"THIRD: (a) If my wife, VERLA REGNERY, shall survive me for a period of thirty (30) days, I give, devise and bequeath unto CHARLES H. G. KIMBALL, FRED C. GRIFFITHS, and my brother, HENRY REGNERY, as Trustees, as a separate trust fund designated as Trust "A", an amount equal to one-half (1/2) of the value of my adjusted gross estate as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes, less an amount equal to the value, as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes, of any property or interests in property passing or which have passed to or for the benefit of my wife other than pursuant to this my Last will and with respect to which a martial deduction is allowable for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death. The gift made by this Article shall be limited to and satisfied out of property included in my estate for which a martial deduction is allowable for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death. Each asset of my estate distributed in kind to the Trustees of Trust "A" pursuant to the above provisions of this Article shall be valued for purposes of the said distribution at its value as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death or at its cost if such asset of my estate was purchased subsequent to my death. Also, assets of my estate distributed to the Trustees of Trust "A" pursuant to the above provision of this Article shall have an aggregate fair market value at the time of distribution fairly representative of Trust "A" fund's proportionate share of the appreciation or depreciation in value of all property included in my estate then available for distribution to the Trustees of Trust "A" which has occurred after my death."

 

"FIFTH: (m) If for any reason the Trustee of either Trust "A" or Trust "B" shall not be able to agree unanimously with respect to the exercise of any power, authority, duty or discretion delegated to them pursuant to this, my Last will, then the act of the majority of said Trustees shall govern and control and shall be binding upon the beneficiaries of and all persons dealing with Trust "A" and Trust "B" and the dissenting Trustee shall execute such document or instrument and take such action as may be required of him by the majority of said Trustees as may be necessary or appropriate to enable the majority of said Trustees to exercise any power, authority, duty or discretion granted to the Trustees of trust "A" or Trust "B" pursuant to this, my Last Will

 

 

See, Exhibit B, pp.1, 3.

22) Under the terms governing Trust A, before any action could be taken by any two Trustees, all three of the Trustees would be required to confer and determine whether or not a unanimous decision could be reached and all three trustees must sign off agree or consent

23) The Will further provides that all of the income earned from the Trust AN accounts was to be paid to Verla during her lifetime in convenient installments. See, Exhibit A, pp.2-4.In addition, the Trustees were permitted to pay such amounts from the principal of the Trust accounts to Verla which they deemed necessary, appropriate or advisable. See, Exhibit A, pp.2-4. Between at least the years of 2000 through the present, there have been maintained by William Blair & Company ("Blair") at their Chicago Offices, the following Trust AN accounts: Nos. 409-75939-1-9-136, 409-75939-1-9-906, 452-75939-1-9-906, 150-75939-1-9-906 ("Trust A Accounts").

24) In direct breach of the Third and Fifth Article of the Will and Codicil, as cited above, Defendants have on numerous occasions, through Blair's Chicago Offices, taken action by telephoning, mailing and faxing to Blair various requests for the unilateral withdrawal and/or transfer of funds from the Trust A Accounts without first advising, conferring with, or notifying Plaintiff in anyway whatsoever:

a) January 2002: $310,000.00

b) April 2002: $150,000.00

c) June 2002: $551,706.58

d) March 2003: $150,000.00

e) April 2003: $300,000.00

f) May 2003: $276,650.00

g) September 2007: $50,000.00

h) January 2008: $10,000.00

i) February 2008: $10,000.00

j) March 2008: $10,000.00

k) April 2008: $10,000.00

l) May 2008: $10,000.00

m) June 2008: $10,000.00

__________

Total 2002-2008: $1,848,356.50 This needs to be updated

 

25) In addition, Defendants made distributions, upon information and belief, that were in excess of the income earned on Trust A and did so without ever advising Plaintiff.

26) In breach of the clear terms of Trust A and in order to keep Plaintiff from learning of their conduct, on or about February 9, 2000, Defendants authored and delivered their letter to William Kasten at Blair's Chicago Offices proclaiming that all decisions, including any withdrawals or transfers, out of any Trust A Account must be agreed in writing by two of the three trustees. A true and accurate copy of the February 2000 letter to William Kasten is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit C.

27) In authoring and delivering Exhibit C, Defendants intentionally misrepresented and ignored those specific terms of Trust A which require all three Trustees (including Plaintiff) confer and determine whether there was a unanimous decision before the "majority rule" and all three trustees must sign off If there is no attempt to achieve unanimous consent majority rule does not apply.

28)Between at least the years 2000 to the present, Defendants engaged in a scheme through which they repeatedly directed that some or all of the $1,848,358.50 in funds be transferred from the Trust A Accounts -- as were then being maintained at Blair's Chicago Offices -- into checking/banking accounts at both Harris Bank and Wachovia Bank among others, from which accounts Defendants would then issue checks/withdrawals which were used by them for their own personal benefit and gain. In perpetrating their scheme, Defendants failed and refused to advise, notify, seek or obtain Plaintiff's consent all in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust duties to Verla and Plaintiff under the terms of Trust A.

29) As a result, the Trust A Accounts have been depleted from a starting value of $2,363,544.00 in January 2000 to $496,769.00 in June 2008 by the actions and conduct of Defendants taken at Blair's Chicago Offices and without Plaintiff's knowledge or consent.

30) On or about May 18, 1989, the Verla K. Regnery Trust was formed and executed in Hinsdale, Illinois. The Verla Trust along with its Restatements ("Verla Trust") was created for the primary benefit of Verla.

The 2002 trust marked a change and new standard for the future. All new trusts, amendments or trust related changes must be signed off by all three of Verla's children

 

31) On or about May 1, 2003, the Verla K. Regnery Trust was amended and restated in its entirety and was executed in Hinsdale, Illinois ("2003 Restatement"). A true and accurate copy of the 2003 Restatement is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit D .Fred was in China.His first knowledge of this trust was in January 2008. Undue influence and duress would force Verla to sign three multi million dollar changes without the presence of an attorney representing her.

32) The 2003 Restatement was again formed by Verla as Grantor with Gretchen and Lynn designated as Co-Trustees. Verla's sister Juaine was renamed as the co-trustee

33) The 2003 Restatement was amended to provide that the remainder of the trust estate shall be distributed into equal one-third (1/3) parts to each of the Grantor's three children, with Defendants to receive their portions outright and with Plaintiff to receive his portion in trust, the Frederick W. Regnery Trust of which Lindsay, Fred and Geoff were to serve as Co-Trustees. See, Exhibit D at Art. III, §3.

34) Therefore, as Co-Trustees of Plaintiff's Trust, Lindsay, Fred and Geoff are trust beneficiaries and thus, are owed certain fiduciary obligations under the Verla Trust.

35) The 2003 Restatement again provided that the Defendants acting as Co-Trustees, upon written request of a beneficiary were obligated "to render annual statements of the receipts and disbursements and of the financial condition of the trust to such beneficiary." See, Exhibit D at Art. VII, §1(v).

36) Despite Plaintiffs' repeated requests for annual accountings of the type required to be rendered under the 2002-2003 Restatements, the Defendants never once rendered a single accounting or supplied any annual accounting statements to them and instead intentionally concealed and withheld such information from them and Verla .

37) On May 1, 2003, Verla executed a Last Will and Testament of Verla K. Regnery ("Verla Will") that was admitted to probate in the Circuit Court of DuPage County, Illinois, on June 6, 2008.. A true and accurate copy of the Verla Will is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit E. True and accurate copies of the "Letters of Office" are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit F.

In Article III of the Verla Will, Verla appointed whatever property remained in Trust A to the Verla Trust as amended and restated.

See, Exhibit E at Art. III.

38) As part of their continuing scheme, in or about the summer of 2003, Defendants caused their attorneys, Thomas E. Swaney of the Chicago Law Firm of Sidley Austin Brown & Wood, LLP. ("Sidley"), to prepare blanket releases which were designed to insulate Defendants from liability for their many violations of their duties as Co-Trustees and fiduciaries including their failure to disclose or otherwise account for their spending and ongoing misappropriation of trust funds and assets as Co-Trustees. This was the first time the defendants used Sidley Austin.Their personal attorney Dan Letizia handled all previous trust matters for the trustees.

39) As part of the process of selling the family's Hinsdale home in 2003, Verla purchased (through her Trust) and took up residence in an undivided interest in a single family home located in Fairview Village (the "Fairview Village Home"), an assisted living facility in the Village of Downers Grove and within DuPage County. After selling the Hinsdale home, Verla took up residence in the Fairview Village Home which she thereafter maintained as her primary place of residence.

40) On or about September 2, 2003, Verla, at the urging and insistence of Defendants, was pressured to execute two separate "Approvals of Accounts and Release of Trustees" ("Releases") for both the Verla Trust and Trust A.Verla was not represented at the signing.Juaine Broadbent her sister accompiting her to Dan Letizia.Dan Letizia had been and still was Gretchen and Lynn's attorney since 1998 True and accurate copies of the Releases are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit G and Exhibit H respectively. Through these Releases prepared by Sidley, Verla was attributed with a statement, not of her own making: "I hereby approve any and all actions taken by the Trustees...through December 31, 2002, and hold the Trustees harmless against any and all liability to any person arising out of the trusteeship." See, Exhibit G at ¶5; Exhibit H at ¶6.

41) Not only had the Defendants failed to disclose, identify or account for their dissipation and misappropriation of trust assets anytime before having Verla sign the Releases, the tion way for Defendants to attempt to insulate themselves from and avoid any potential liability for their misappropriation and mishandling of the funds and assets belonging to both Verla's Trust and Trust A.

Neither Release was supported by any consideration and the preparation and execution of both was undertaken by Defendants who similarly failed to disclose, identify or account for their dissipation and misappropriation of trust assets anytime before having Verla sign the Releases.

Neither Release restricts Plaintiffs' rights and interests to obtain -- as beneficiaries and interested parties under the trusts - and Defendants duties and obligations to provide - as Co-Trustees and fiduciaries of the same trusts - accountings and to render annual statements (for every year in which they served as Co-Trustees) of the receipts and disbursements and of the financial condition of the trust to each such beneficiary. None of these rights or duties are abrogated in any way by the Releases - which aside from being ill-gotten and unenforceable as against Verla - are instruments to which none of the Plaintiffs agreed, knew of, or were made a party to and to which none are consequently bound. Fred was a trustee and benificiary.He was in China.He first became aware of this release in January of 2008

42) Moreover, in light of the fact that the Verla Trust specifically provides that the trustees could only distribute trust principal to Verla during her lifetime and could only distribute income to a party other than Verla only as Verla might "from time to time direct in writing," any principal distributions made by the trustees to parties other than Verla are arguably invalid as contrary to the provisions of the Verla Trust. In addition, those distributions of income could have been made only after prior written directives were issued by Verla, regardless of whether Verla approved the distributions through the Release issued after the distributions were made. As a continuation of their scheme and grand slam of 2003.My sisters withdrew

.

43) On or about February 7, 2005, while Verla was vacationing with Lynn in North Carolina, Lynn had Verla assessed by Memory Assessment and Research Services ("Mars") to establish a baseline of memory functioning. The 2005 Mars evaluation revealed that Verla had previously suffered two heart attacks, the last one being 8 years prior, and concluded that Verla's memory was impaired when compared to that of her peers and was significantly below the expected level of functioning but that her recall of visual material and working memory were intact. In or about July of 2006, Verla was taken from her home in Downers Grove not feeling well and first taken to a wedding and in total 6000 on an airplane.With her heart condition and severe edema Mrs Regnery should not have left.her home. On her way back from California, Verla traveled to Washington D.C., Maryland and North Carolina. At some point during this trip, Verla suffered a stroke or a series of strokes for which she was ultimately hospitalized in North Carolina.

44) On or about November 21, 2006, Lynn brought Verla into the same Mars facility in North Carolina for a second evaluation. The 2006 Mars report concluded that Verla displayed "significant decline... across all measures of memory functioning." A true and accurate copy of the 2006 Mars Report is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit I.

The 2006 Mars Report further found that Verla's "current cognitive test scores indicate clinically significant impairment in virtually all measured areas of cognitive functioning," and "represent a vascular dementia.

 

45) Only four (4) days before the Mars evaluation, on or about November 17, 2006, the Defendants caused the Verla Trust to be once again restated ("2006 Restatement"). A true and accurate copy of the 2006 Restatement is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit J.

46) The 2006 Restatement was prepared by an Oak Brook Terrace attorney, Dan Letizia, and names Verla as Grantor with Gretchen and Lynn designated as Co-Trustees with the remainder of the trust estate to be distributed as it was in the 2003 Restatement, equal one-third hen(1/3) parts to each of the Grantor's three children. It should be noted that Plaintiffs are contesting the 2006 Restatement. However, unlike the 2003 Restatement, the 2006 Restatement deleted those portions of the Trust which provided that upon Verla's death: (i) Defendants would cease to act as Co-Trustees; and (ii) that Juaine Broadbent (Verla's sister) would serve as successor Trustee. See, Exhibit D at Art. I, §2.

47)"Defendants undertook an active role in overseeing and insisting upon the changes in the 2006 Restatement, providing that Defendants would continue to serve as Co-Trustees even upon Verla's death. Defendants' actions in this regard -- undertaken at a time when Verla lacked the mental capacity to restate her Trust much less appreciate the legal meaning and significance of the 2006 Restatement - were initiated by Defendants as part of a continuing scheme of financial exploitation against Verla by removing her only living sister as successor Trustee in favor of Defendants. See, Exhibit J, at Art. I, §1.

48) At all times herein relevant, there were certain accounts maintained by Blair in the name of the Verla Trust: account numbers 409-75938-10 and 150-75940-16 ("Verla Trust Accounts").

49)Throughout the period they have served as Co-Trustees, Defendants have depleted the Verla Trust Accounts in violation of the terms of the Verla Trust and in breach of their fiduciary duties which activities they have attempted to conceal by failing and refusing to render to Plaintiffs a single annual statement of the receipts and disbursements or of the financial condition of the Verla Trust, despite their repeated demands and by using the trust owned funds and assets for their own personal purposes rather than towards the care, support and comfort of Verla.

50) Between at least 2002 and 2008, Gretchen and Lynn have used the funds and assets belonging to the Verla Trust Accounts for their own benefit and gain in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust obligations owed to Plaintiffs as Co-Trustees of the Verla Trust.

Upon information and belief, Gretchen and Lynn have repeatedly directed that funds be transferred from the Verla Trust Accounts into checking/banking accounts at both Harris Bank and Wachovia Bank among others, from which accounts Defendants would then issue checks/withdrawals which were used by them for their own personal benefit and gain. As part of this scheme, between at least 2002 and 2008 Defendants failed and refused to account to Plaintiffs despite their repeated demands, all in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust duties to Plaintiffs under the terms of Verla Trust and in violation of their duties to furnish annual accountings as required under Section 11(a) of the Illinois Trusts and Fiduciaries Act. 760 ILCS 5/11 (West 2007).

51)Between at least 2002 and 2008, Defendants have repeatedly authorized the transfer of funds from the Trust A Accounts into the Verla Trust Account for the intended purpose of gaining more complete control over these funds as Co-Trustees without the involvement of Plaintiff (who at all times remained a third Trustee of Trust A); some or all of these funds were used by Defendants for their own personal benefit and gain in violation of both Trust A and the Verla Trust as well as their fiduciary duties under each such trust.

52) At the time of her death, Verla was visiting with Gretchen and staying in the latter's California home where she died at age 88 on November 2, 2007.

53) At all times material, Verla maintained, through her Trust, ownership of the Fairview Village Home which she furnished and where she received her mail and housed her personal files, papers, jewelry, clothing, artwork, personal belongings and effects.

54)In or about June of 2007, Defendant-Lynn appeared at Verla's Fairview Village Home while Verla was visiting Defendant-Gretchen in California, and then and there gained entry into the home and removed and purloined substantially all of Verla's furnishings, personal files, papers, jewelry, clothing, artwork, personal belongings and effects, some of which belonged to Plaintiff - Fred

55)The actions of Lynn in emptying Verla's Fairview Village Home were undertaken purposefully and maliciously and with the prior knowledge, involvement and/or direction of Gretchen so as to remove from Verla the personal liberty, right and ability to return to her home.

56)Shortly after removing these items from Verla's Fairview Village Home, Defendant -Lynn then transported many of the items to the Village of Woodridge and sold substantially all of the furnishings and much of Verla's other personal belongings in a garage sale which was conducted by her at the home of the in-laws of her daughter Gretchen. Since the sale, Lynn has at no time accounted to Verla, Verla's Trust or Plaintiff for the items taken by her from Verla's Fairview Village Home. Lynn's daughter Gretchen was paid $2,000 from the VKR checking account by Lynn for her help with the removal and sale of Verla's personal belongings. Since Verla's death, Gretchen and Lynn have continued to withdraw and transfer funds from both the Trust A Accounts and the Verla Trust Accounts.Since this complaint was drafted $10,000 per month was withdrawn until March of 2009.An additional $100,000 was withdrawn in July of 2008.

 

57) In December 2007, a request for a formal accounting was made by Lindsay as to the Verla Trust Accounts. To date, Defendants have failed, despite acknowledgement from their counsel that they have a duty to do so, to issue a formal accounting. In doing so, Defendants have incredulously suggested that the costs to do so would be incurred by Plaintiff's Trust only. A true and accurate copy of the email from Lindsey to attorney Peter Flaxman dated December 26, 2007 is attached hereto as Exhibit K. A true and accurate copy of Flaxman's January 17, 2008 letter in response is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit L.

58)Most recently, another demand for an accounting was made by Plaintiff with respect to both the Trust A Accounts and the Verla Trust Accounts and Defendants have persisted in their refusal to render or supply any such accounting. True and accurate copies of the letters dated August 29, 2008 sent by Plaintiff to Sidley and Blair are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Group Exhibit M. The Verla Trust provides that the administration of the Trust shall be governed by the laws of the State of Illinois.

59)As Trustees of Trust A and the Verla Trust, Defendants owed a fiduciary duty to manage the trust assets in the best interest of the trust estate and beneficiaries of these trusts.

60) That duty included a duty of good faith and loyalty to act in Verla's best interest and not for the Defendants' own personal interests.

61) Pursuant to 5/ 4 et seq.; 4.14, 4.20 (West 2007), Defendants' fiduciary duty included, but was not limited to:

a) Not to take or use for their own personal use and benefit any trust property; and

b) To maintain and keep records of all trust expenditures and to prudently safeguard, invest and account for all trust property and assets and to refrain from exploiting or using any such property and assets for their own personal gain or benefit

 

 

62) Defendants must account for all the funds they have taken and withdrawn from the Verla Trust and Trust A, and a constructive trust must be imposed upon all of Defendants' funds, accounts or assets wherever found in amounts sufficient to reimburse and make whole the Verla Trust and the Trust A of all misappropriated, converted, unaccounted for funds or assets duly belonging to the Verla Trust and Trust A.

 

Count II Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT III MISREPRESENTATION

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT IV VIOLATION OF TRUST AND ABUSE OF TRUST PRINCIPAL

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

COUNT V DURESS

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT VI UNDUE INFLUENCE

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
This looks good add it to what I posted earlier. Check Juanie's complaint. It has language about the slayer statute add that language as well.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

1.Since 1979 my mother wanted to add me as a third trustee. I did not care as I wanted a bank. This never happened. Harris Bank, Northern trust, First National and Lake Shore, all agreed to by my mother as trustees. All got her out of the middle. All the money would have been professionally managed. Each time she said she would tell my sisters. I insisted she did not. She did and nothing else happened. Let me give you an example of what my sisters did by threatening and controlling my mother. Preserving family assets were not their concern. Any time between 1989-1997 I tried, had set up and here is what would have happened. My mother and fathers trust were worth $6.5 collectively. The bank set up a third trust VKR only. She does not have to ask her daughters when she needs a new pair of underwear

 

UNDUE INFLUENCE AND DURESS

 

 

2.The first trusts would earn conservatively $350,000-$400,000 per year. My mother was to receive all of the income from both trusts. Everything would be paid from the new trust. Upon my Mothers death the principal would still be $6.5 and my mothers trust was hers to do what she wanted with.

 

 

UNDUE INFLUENCE AND DURESS

 

 

3.My sisters fought this viciously behind my back each time. They would not give up control even at the expense of losing most of the principal. They threw money away and wasted it the entire time but hid it like everything else.

 

 

UNDUE INFLUENCE AND DURESS

 

 

4.My mother in 2001 sent a letter to broker freeze account. My sisters sent a letter saying ignore my mother's letter. My mother did nothing.

 

UNDUE INFLUENCE

 

 

5. Lawyer 2001-2002 told to draft trust unanimous consent, add me as a trustee, remove my sisters and my mother would serve as sole trustee, all three rejected as lawyer told my mother we should have beneficiaries sign off to prevent future lawsuits. 2002 signed by three that was mandate for future trust activity.

 

COLLUSION WITH THE INTENT TO COMMIT FRAUD

 

 

6. 2003 I am in China 2003 with forgiveness clause added, 13 year write off, and $150,000 for litigation1995 sisters take mothers checking account without her authority and place it in living trust all she gets is blank checks 2003 Mother entitled to income from both trusts $350,000, legally or breach of fiduciary, daughters decide to give mother an $8,000 per month allowance 2003 Forced to sell house she my children and I live in with her while I am in China 2003

 

FRAUD

 

 

7.1999 payment to me $1.5m, 2003 payment to me $2.0m threatened and denied.

 

UNDUE INFLUENCE AND DURESS

 

 

8.1987 trust incapacity trust changed by forgery and fraud

 

FORGERY

 

 

9. 2006 By fraud and duress and undue influence mother forced to sign 2006 trust.

 

FRAUD or FRAUDULANT CONCEALMENT

 

10. Wanting to go home 9/15/2006-11/2/2007 refused

 

 

FALSE IMPRISONMENT

 

 

 

11.I wish you were dead, I will sue you, and I will have you judged incompetent

 

 

12. From 1997-to my mother's death in 2007 $5.M of principal not including interest was withdrawn without one accounting.

 

FINANCIAL EXPLOTATION

 

 

13. My mother's living trust owned 635 shares of our families business (My shares) an eight year lawsuit began with the understanding if we prevailed the proceeds would be mine.

My sisters trustees convinced my mother the lawsuit may not prevail and she may be counter sued. She sold the stock to them but no money exchanged hands just a signed note from my mother to the trustee that she sold the stock to my sisters. As it turns out this transaction took place after the court ruling establishing the value $500,000 at a later date they sent gifts to my children however I could never determine the percentage because of the taxes.

 

BREACH OF FIDUCIARY

 

 

14. FLR and VKR trust 13 year releases Fred is trustee, in China not notified. Verla is asked to come into Letizia's office fortunately she brought Juaine. Letezia was and has been Gretchen and Lynns attorney since 1999.According to Juaine it was Just a routine signing of a document in Verlas best interest. There was nothing discussed regarding the detail. This was carefully planned and carried out.

 

FRAUD

 

 

15. FLR trust three trustees 18 years all three must sign.2000 letter from Gretchen and Lynn to Blair says only two must sign (reverts back to simple majority before codicil $2.0m)
There seems to be a concern Fred did not open his mail.From 1982-2000 very few withdrawals. I did a great deal of oversees traveling.2000 after the change of trustees the volume of withdrawals went up at least four fold. Lynn and Gretchen knew for a fact I did not open my statements as when I was in China they were at my mothers. Five houses I lived in during that period and 30% of my time in China. For this to happen Blair and my sisters would have to work together to defraud my mother and I.

 

 

FRAUD OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE BREACH OF FIDUCIARY

 



16. VKR irrevocable trust taken by fraud from Alvin while Verla is incapacitated. Alvin was forced off after 20 years of service. A forged signature became the new trustee.$420,000 withdrawn by using four forgeries. Alvin and Verla deprived from buy back. Letizia notarizes forged signature.

 

FRAUD AND FORGERY

 

 

17. 15 months of incapacity $1.0m, living at home if fraud had not been committed $150,000 or breach of fiduciary, The irrevocable trust and the 2006 trusts were not disclosed to the beneficiary and when asked they denied making any changes

 

FRAUD and FRAUDULANT CONCEALMENT

 

 

18. In November of 2006 both trusts were rewritten while my mother was mentally incapacitated and I was in China. As a beneficiary I was to be notified, the irrevocable trust in writing. I was not. In January of 2007 my mother wanted to go home so I went to North Carolina. My sisters would not let her go. I asked both of them if there were any changed to my mother's trust in my absence and their answer was no. Had they not lied to me and concealed the changes in November I take my mother home. Damages $850,000 from the difference spent in the next year versus what it should have been. In the alternative it would be breach of fiduciary. $5.0m in principal depleted in 18 years no accounting.1997-2007 $700,000 loss in 2000 stock market. Trustees lost nothing. You can use they for the trust case as well. You need to use the time line for 2006 through 2008 for teh slayer statute. Bring in the transcript of what your sisters said. Use this for the 13 years.

 

 

FRAUD AND FRAUDULANT CONCEALMENT

 

 

19.2000 markey crash trust loses $700,000 trustees lose nothing as they sold before the crash

 

 

GROSS NEEGLEGENCE GROSS VIOLATION OF THJE PRUDENT INVESTORS RULE

 

 

 

 

20.In 2000 the trustees formed a partnership with thetrust attorney. In the ensuing years this became a CONSPIRACY, COLLUSION, FRAUD, FORGERY, EMBEZZLEMENT,FRAUDULANT CONCEALMENT AND FINALLY THE DEATH OF THE GRANTOR as a result the trust fell from $6.6 to $1.7m

 


 

 

FRAUD AND DECEIT-INTRODUCTION

Conduct may constitute fraud because of an intentional misrepresentation, concealment, a false promise or a negligent misrepresentation.

DECEIT

A deceit is either:

1. The suggestion, as a fact, of that which is not true, by one who does not believe it to be true;

2. The assertion, as a fact, of that which is not true, by one who has no reasonable ground for believing it to be true;

3. The suppression of a fact, by one who is bound to disclose it, or who gives information of other facts which are likely to mislead for want of communication of that fact; or,

4. A promise, made without any intention of performing it. (Cal.Civ.Code § 1710)

INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION

The essential elements of a claim of fraud by an intentional misrepresentation are:

1. The defendant must have made a representation as to a past or existing material fact;

2. The representation must have been false;

3. The defendant must have known that the representation was false when made or must have made the representation recklessly without knowing whether it was true or false;

4. The defendant must have made the representation with an intent to defraud the plaintiff, that is, he she must have made the representation for the purpose of inducing the plaintiff to rely upon it and to act or to refrain from acting in reliance thereon;

5. The plaintiff must have been unaware of the falsity of the representation; must have acted in reliance upon the truth of the representation and must have been justified in relying upon the representation;

6. And, finally, as a result of the reliance upon the truth of the representation, the plaintiff must have sustained damage. (See, Cal.Civ.Code § 1572; Stansfield v. Starkey (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d 59.)

EXPRESSION OF OPINION

Ordinarily, expressions of opinion are not treated as representations of fact upon which to base actionable fraud. However, when one party possesses or holds himself out as possessing superior knowledge or special information regarding the subject of a representation, and the other party is so situated that he or she may reasonably rely upon such supposed superior knowledge or special information, a representation made by the party possessing or holding himself out as possessing such knowledge or information will be treated as a representation of fact although if made by any other person it might be regarded as an expression of opinion. When a party states an opinion as a fact, in such a manner that it is reasonable to rely and act upon it as a fact, it may be treated as a representation of fact.

CONCEALMENT

Concealment is a term of art which includes mere nondisclosure when a party has a duty to disclose. (See, e.g., Lingsch v. Savage (1963) 213 Cal.App.2d 729, 738; Rest.2d Torts, § 551)

The essential elements of a claim of fraud by concealment are:

1. The defendant must have concealed or suppressed a material fact;

2. The defendant must have been under a duty to disclose the fact to the plaintiff;

3. The defendant must have intentionally concealed or suppressed the fact with the intent to defraud the plaintiff;

4. The plaintiff must have been unaware of the fact and would not have acted as he or she did if he or she had known of the concealed or suppressed fact;

5. And, finally, the concealment or suppression of the fact caused the plaintiff to sustain damage.

NONDISCLOSURE OF KNOWN FACTS

Where material facts are known to one party and not to the other, failure to disclose them is not actionable fraud unless there is some relationship between the parties which gives rise to a duty to disclose such known facts.

A duty to disclose known facts arises where the party having knowledge of the facts is in a fiduciary or a confidential relationship. A fiduciary or a confidential relationship exists whenever under the circumstances trust and confidence reasonably may be and is reposed by one person in the integrity and fidelity of another.

A duty to disclose known facts arises in the absence of a fiduciary or a confidential relationship where one party knows of material facts and also knows that such facts are neither known nor readily accessible to the other party.

Failure to disclose a negative fact where it will have a foreseeably depressing effect on income expected to be generated by a business is tortious. (See Rest.2d Torts, § 551, illus. 11.)

ACTIVE CONCEALMENT OF KNOWN FACTS

Intentional concealment exists where a party:

(1) Knows of defects in a property and intentionally conceals them, or

(2) Actively prevents investigation and discovery of material facts by the other party, or

(3) While under no duty to speak, nevertheless does so, but does not speak honestly or makes misleading statements or suppresses facts which materially qualify those stated.

The essential elements of a claim of fraud by a false promise are:

1. The defendant must have made a promise as to a material matter and, at the time it was made, he or she must have intended not to perform it;

2. The defendant must have made the promise with an intent to defraud the plaintiff, that is, he or she must have made the promise for the purpose of inducing plaintiff to rely upon it and to act or refrain from acting in reliance upon it;

3. The plaintiff must have been unaware of the defendant's intention not to perform the promise; he or she must have acted in reliance upon the promise and must have been justified in relying upon the promise made by the defendant;

4. And, finally, as a result of reliance upon defendant's promise, the plaintiff must have sustained damage.

PROOF OF INTENT NOT TO PERFORM

The conduct of a party making a promise, either before or after the promise was made, may be taken into consideration in determining whether there was an intention not to perform the promise when made.

NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION

The essential elements of a claim of fraud by a negligent misrepresentation are:

1. The defendant must have made a representation as to a past or existing material fact;

2. The representation must have been untrue;

3. Regardless of his or her actual belief the defendant must have made the representation without any reasonable ground for believing it to be true;

4. The representation must have been made with the intent to induce plaintiff to rely upon it;

5. The plaintiff must have been unaware of the falsity of the representation; must have acted in reliance upon the truth of the representation and must have been justified in relying upon the representation;

6. And, finally, as a result of the reliance upon the truth of the representation, the plaintiff must have sustained damage. (Gagne v. Bertran (1954) 43 C.2d 481.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
This is excellent. Show this to your lawyer.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
You decide but after you do can you put Ruffalo's in place anf me some idea where to go with Juaines.Ruffalo and Mournier I think grammar,spelling and senance structure are fine but mine need to be fixed any ideas.How about soneonde at JA.Is there any rule of thumb how many lines should be inccluded in each count.I recognize some will be longer but can any one be one sentance
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
The have them on JA what should I tell them I want them do
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
There are no rules as to length of the counts. I do not think we can shorten any of them. You do not need to copy Juanie's pleading. Her pleading mentions the slayer statute. Put that part of her pleading in your pleading. I think your pleading has everything relevant from Ruffalo's pleading. Tell the people on the site to check them for grammar and spelling.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

 

You made several with very good headings and bottoms and below my counts were Ruffelo's.Other tan a mention of William Blair I dont se really any duplications

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Use what you just posted earlier today. I think that is the best one.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray Is this it

 

I tried to revise everything. Here is a draft. Look over it. I think you could use it as the new pleading.

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

 

NOW COME the Plaintiffs, Frederick W. Regnery, ("Plaintiff"), Lindsay Regnery ("Lindsay"), Frederick L. Regnery, ("Fred"), and Geoffrey Regnery ("Geoff"), by and through their attorneys, Fuchs & Roselli, Ltd., and as and for their Verified Complaint against the Defendants, Gretchen Regnery Wallerich ("Gretchen") and Lynn Regnery ("Lynn"), and Juaine Broadbent, in her capacity as Executrix of the Estate of Verla K. Regnery ("Juaine"), (Gretchen and Lynn collectively referred to hereinafter as "Defendants"), Plaintiffs state as follows:

Jurisdiction and Venue

1. Plaintiff is an Illinois resident who resides within the Village of Westmont and within the County of DuPage.

2. Lindsay, Fred, and Geoff are Plaintiff's children who are named as necessary parties insofar as they are co-Trustees of the Frederick W. Regnery Trust.

3. Gretchen is an individual, who and at all times herein relevant, resides in the state of California.

4. Lynn is an individual, who at all times herein relevant, resides in the state of North Carolina.

5. Juaine is an Illinois resident, named as a Defendant solely in her capacity as the Executrix of the Estate of Verla K. Regnery.

6. Pursuant to Section 5/2-101 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, this Court situated in DuPage County is, by operation of the facts alleged herein, the proper venue for this action.

Facts Common to All Counts

7. Plaintiffs hereby restate and reallege Paragraphs 1 through 6 of Jurisdiction and Venue as and for Paragraph 7 of this Facts Common to All Counts as though fully set forth herein.

8. Plaintiff, along with Gretchen and Lynn are siblings with the Plaintiff being the son of, and the Defendants being the daughters of Verla Kiehl Regnery ("Verla") and Frederick L. Regnery ("Frederick").

 

COUNT I FRAUD

 

In August of 2006 with sore swollen legs hips and ankles from Dementia. My mother was taken on a 7000 airline trip and ended up having a stroke and severe dementia.

 

 

9) My mother's living trust owned 635 shares of our families business (My shares) an eight year lawsuit began with the understanding if we prevailed the proceeds would be mine.My sisters were the trustees. They convinced my mother the lawsuit may not prevail and she may be counter sued. She sold the stock to them but no money exchanged hands just a signed note from my mother to the trustee that she sold the stock to my sisters. As it turns out this transaction took place after the court ruling establishing the value $500,000 at a later date they sent gifts to my children.I could never determine the percentage because of the taxes.

 

10)FLR and VKR trust 13 year releases Fred is trustee, in China not notified. Verla is represented by the trustees attorney, also signs a lifetime forgiveness document for all loans, advances and gifts and has no idea of what she is signing. Her sister was with her.

This was a fraudulent scheme between Letizia,Gretchen and Lynn against Verla and Fred. $5.0m

This was carefully planned and carried out.

 

 

11)FLR trust three trustees 18 years all three must sign.2000 letter from Gretchen and Lynn to Blair says only two must sign (reverts back to simple majority before codicil $2.0m)There seems to be a concern Fred did not open his mail. From 1982-2000 very few withdrawals. I did a great deal of oversees traveling.2000 after the change of trustees the volume of withdrawals went up at least four fold. Lynn and Gretchen knew for a fact I did not open my statements as when I was in China they were at my mothers. Five houses I lived in during that period and 30% of my time in China. For this to happen, Blair and my sisters would have to work together to defraud my mother and me.

 

12) VKR irrevocable trust taken from Alvin kiehl trustee,Verla's brother. while Verla is incapacitated. Alvin was forced off after 20 years of service.A forged signature became the new trustee. Then, $420,000 withdrawn by using four forgeries. Alvin and Verla deprived from buy back. clause. Letizia notarizes forged signature.

13) My mother was incapacitated for 15 months. During that time $1.0m was spent. Instead of $150,000 if she were living at home.. My mother owned a $3.4m irrevocable trust and a $2.5m 2003 living trust. In November of 2006 both trusts were rewritten while my mother was mentally incapacitated and I was in China. As a beneficiary I was to be notified,the irrevocable trust in writing.I was not.In January of 2007 my mother wanted to go home so I went to North Caroliana to get her..My sisters would not let her go.I asked both of them if there were any changed to my mothers trust in my absence and their answer was no.Had they not lied to me and concealed the changes of the trusts in November I would have take my mother home. Damages $850,000 from the difference spent by my sisters to the amount my mother living at home would have spent. $5.0m in principal depleated in 10 years no accounting.1997-2007., $700,000 loss in 2000 stock market.Trustees lost nothing as they sold their stoch before the market crash.

 

14) At the time the 2006 trust was drafted both sisters were very much awareof my mothers mental condition .The most telling part of the trust change was removing my mothers sister as successor trustee and taking her $1.000.00 per months guarantee away.

That clause is gone. Verla was 88 and unsophisticated as an investor. She trusted her daughters. She trusted the attorney. Each major revision,restatement,forgiveness or release was made in 2003 and 2006 I have a passport that will coincide with those dates.

 

15) There were four major documents or trusts that my mother was deceived or threatened into signing.Each time her son was in China. Each time she did not know the content of what she was signing.Each one they would not give her a copy of for her file for fear of me fnding it.

 

.The father was the grantor of a trust funded in 1966 an irrevocable trust From 1982 my sisters and I were its trustee.All activity in the trust must be signed off by the trustees. the grand slam was completed As impossible as it may seem working together with their attorney the daughters pulled off taking control of all three trusts by forgery,fraud,and elder abuse This was done with complete and utter silence and concealment and involved $7.5m.The mother had no idea of what she was signing and the son was 8000 away.

 

16)The mothers brother was removed after 20 years, a sister removed after 10 years and her son. My mother since 1980 relied on my advice before making any major financial decisions. It was very easy for someone to tell my mother one thing to get her to sign it when it really said something else.

 

17)While staying in Mill Vallley my sister did not want my mother to go home under any circumstance.$5.5m and two trust changes would have been discovered plus $1.0m in withdrawals.

 

18) Her son was on his way from China to pick up his mother in California My sister had hired an attorney at $400.00 per hour to keep me from taking my mother home.She has taken nearly 200,000 since to pay his legal bills He helps my sister end my mother's life and then pays himself from my mothers trust funds From 1989 to mothers death my sisters were sole trustees.Not because of their expertise or ability to pick the right people it was from undue influence and duress They hadn no investment skills.2 of 3 children and a large estate.On at least seven occasions my mother tried to remove them as trustees or neutralize them each failed.Beginning in 2002 my mother says nothing is done in the future without three signatures 2003 I am in China and four major changes take place.2006 I am in China and the the irrevocable trust forgery and fraud and 2006 trust incapacity take place $5.5m in total

The Father Frederick L. died in 1980.One of his assets was 803 (12%) shares of a family business which was in serious financial trouble and $12.0m in debt. The stock value was $500.00 per share. One year later I purchased 635 shares for the same price to remove the president. The per share price was $500.00. Five years later I was forced to sell the company for $7500 per share. I purchased a $3.0m life insurance policy with the proceeds from my stock and made my sisters 1/3 beneficiaries each which were my sole decision. In six years since my sister Lynn pushed to sell her stock for $500.00 or $130,000 my sisters each received a windfall of $3.0m and had no involvement with the company. In 1989, I temporarily allowed my sisters to become trustees a bank was to take their place over the years. At least seven attempts were made to have our trusts professionally managed.

 

20) Frederick died on May 17, 1980. Prior to his death, on or about August 11, 1955, Frederick executed his Last Will ("Will"). On or about February 2, 1966, Frederick executed a Codicil to same ("Codicil"). The Will and Codicil provided that, in the event Verla survived Frederick by a period of thirty days, Marital Trust A ("Trust A") was to be created for the benefit of Verla. A true and accurate copy of the Will and Codicil of Frederick L. Regnery are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A and Exhibit B respectively.

21) In or about 1982, Plaintiff and Defendants were named successor Trustees of Trust A. The Third and Fifth Articles of the Will and Codicil provide with respect to the creation and administration of Trust A:

"THIRD: (b) All of the income from Trust "A" from the date of my death shall be paid to my wife, VERLA REGNERY, in convenient installments, at least quarter-annually, so long as she shall live. In addition to the net income of Trust "A", the Trustees shall pay at any time and from time to time to my wife, VERLA REGNERY, so long as she shall live, such amounts from the principal of Trust "A" as the Trustees in their absolute and sole discretion shall deem necessary, appropriate or advisable.

 

(c) Upon the death of my wife, the assets then remaining in Trust "A", with the income accrued thereon, shall be distributed to such person or persons or to the estate of my wife, free of all trusts created hereunder, in such manner and in such proportions as my wife may designate and appoint in and by her Last Will. Such power of appointment hereby conferred upon my wife shall be exercisable by her exclusively and in all events.

 

(d) If for any reason upon the death of my wife any part or all of Trust "A", including the income accrued thereon, shall fail to pass under the previous provisions of this Article, the entire assets then remaining in Trust "A", with all income accrued thereon, shall be added to Trust "B" and thereafter be administered and distributed pursuant to the provisions of Trust "B"."

 

See, Exhibit A, p.2-4;

...........

"THIRD: (a) If my wife, VERLA REGNERY, shall survive me for a period of thirty (30) days, I give, devise and bequeath unto CHARLES H. G. KIMBALL, FRED C. GRIFFITHS, and my brother, HENRY REGNERY, as Trustees, as a separate trust fund designated as Trust "A", an amount equal to one-half (1/2) of the value of my adjusted gross estate as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes, less an amount equal to the value, as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes, of any property or interests in property passing or which have passed to or for the benefit of my wife other than pursuant to this my Last will and with respect to which a martial deduction is allowable for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death. The gift made by this Article shall be limited to and satisfied out of property included in my estate for which a martial deduction is allowable for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death. Each asset of my estate distributed in kind to the Trustees of Trust "A" pursuant to the above provisions of this Article shall be valued for purposes of the said distribution at its value as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death or at its cost if such asset of my estate was purchased subsequent to my death. Also, assets of my estate distributed to the Trustees of Trust "A" pursuant to the above provision of this Article shall have an aggregate fair market value at the time of distribution fairly representative of Trust "A" fund's proportionate share of the appreciation or depreciation in value of all property included in my estate then available for distribution to the Trustees of Trust "A" which has occurred after my death."

 

"FIFTH: (m) If for any reason the Trustee of either Trust "A" or Trust "B" shall not be able to agree unanimously with respect to the exercise of any power, authority, duty or discretion delegated to them pursuant to this, my Last will, then the act of the majority of said Trustees shall govern and control and shall be binding upon the beneficiaries of and all persons dealing with Trust "A" and Trust "B" and the dissenting Trustee shall execute such document or instrument and take such action as may be required of him by the majority of said Trustees as may be necessary or appropriate to enable the majority of said Trustees to exercise any power, authority, duty or discretion granted to the Trustees of trust "A" or Trust "B" pursuant to this, my Last Will

 

 

See, Exhibit B, pp.1, 3.

22) Under the terms governing Trust A, before any action could be taken by any two Trustees, all three of the Trustees would be required to confer and determine whether or not a unanimous decision could be reached and all three trustees must sign off agree or consent

23) The Will further provides that all of the income earned from the Trust AN accounts was to be paid to Verla during her lifetime in convenient installments. See, Exhibit A, pp.2-4.In addition, the Trustees were permitted to pay such amounts from the principal of the Trust accounts to Verla which they deemed necessary, appropriate or advisable. See, Exhibit A, pp.2-4. Between at least the years of 2000 through the present, there have been maintained by William Blair & Company ("Blair") at their Chicago Offices, the following Trust AN accounts: Nos. 409-75939-1-9-136, 409-75939-1-9-906, 452-75939-1-9-906, 150-75939-1-9-906 ("Trust A Accounts").

24) In direct breach of the Third and Fifth Article of the Will and Codicil, as cited above, Defendants have on numerous occasions, through Blair's Chicago Offices, taken action by telephoning, mailing and faxing to Blair various requests for the unilateral withdrawal and/or transfer of funds from the Trust A Accounts without first advising, conferring with, or notifying Plaintiff in anyway whatsoever:

a) January 2002: $310,000.00

b) April 2002: $150,000.00

c) June 2002: $551,706.58

d) March 2003: $150,000.00

e) April 2003: $300,000.00

f) May 2003: $276,650.00

g) September 2007: $50,000.00

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Use this and what you posted at 1:24 PM.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
So find what I sent to you and use that as the biody of the pleading just the one I sent you as the to of the pleading
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
That is correct.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

 

NOW COME the Plaintiffs, Frederick W. Regnery, ("Plaintiff"), Lindsay Regnery ("Lindsay"), Frederick L. Regnery, ("Fred"), and Geoffrey Regnery ("Geoff"), by and through their attorneys, Fuchs & Roselli, Ltd., and as and for their Verified Complaint against the Defendants, Gretchen Regnery Wallerich ("Gretchen") and Lynn Regnery ("Lynn"), and Juaine Broadbent, in her capacity as Executrix of the Estate of Verla K. Regnery ("Juaine"), (Gretchen and Lynn collectively referred to hereinafter as "Defendants"), Plaintiffs state as follows:

Jurisdiction and Venue

1. Plaintiff is an Illinois resident who resides within the Village of Westmont and within the County of DuPage.

2. Lindsay, Fred, and Geoff are Plaintiff's children who are named as necessary parties insofar as they are co-Trustees of the Frederick W. Regnery Trust.

3. Gretchen is an individual, who and at all times herein relevant, resides in the state of California.

4. Lynn is an individual, who at all times herein relevant, resides in the state of North Carolina.

5. Juaine is an Illinois resident, named as a Defendant solely in her capacity as the Executrix of the Estate of Verla K. Regnery.

6. Pursuant to Section 5/2-101 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, this Court situated in DuPage County is, by operation of the facts alleged herein, the proper venue for this action.

Facts Common to All Counts

7. Plaintiffs hereby restate and reallege Paragraphs 1 through 6 of Jurisdiction and Ray Sorry The last paragraaph is still a littconfusing

 

 

Venue as and for Paragraph 7 of this Facts Common to All Counts as though fully set forth herein.

8. Plaintiff, along with Gretchen and Lynn are siblings with the Plaintiff being the son of, and the Defendants being the daughters of Verla Kiehl Regnery ("Verla") and Frederick L. Regnery ("Frederick").

 

COUNT I FRAUD

 

In August of 2006 with sore swollen legs hips and ankles my mother was taken on a 7000 airline trip and ended up having a stroke and severe dementia.

 

 

9) My mother's living trust owned 635 shares of our families business (My shares) an eight year lawsuit began with the understanding if we prevailed the proceeds would be mine.
My sisters were the trustees. They convinced my mother the lawsuit may not prevail and she may be counter sued. She sold the stock to them but no money exchanged hands just a signed note from my mother to the trustee that she sold the stock to my sisters. As it turns out this transaction took place after the court ruling establishing the value $500,000 at a later date they sent gifts to my children.I could never determine the percentage because of the taxes.

 

10)FLR and VKR trust 13 year releases Fred is trustee, in China not notified. Verla is represented by the trustees attorney, also signs a lifetime forgiveness document for all loans, advances and gifts and has no idea of what she is signing. Her sister was with her.

This was a fraudulent scheme between Letizia,Gretchen and Lynn against Verla and Fred. $5.0m

This was carefully planned and carried out.

 

 

11)FLR trust three trustees 18 years all three must sign.2000 letter from Gretchen and Lynn to Blair says only two must sign (reverts back to simple majority before codicil $2.0m)
There seems to be a concern Fred did not open his mail. From 1982-2000 very few withdrawals. I did a great deal of oversees traveling.2000 after the change of trustees the volume of withdrawals went up at least four fold. Lynn and Gretchen knew for a fact I did not open my statements as when I was in China they were at my mothers. Five houses I lived in during that period and 30% of my time in China. For this to happen, Blair and my sisters would have to work together to defraud my mother and me.

 

12) VKR irrevocable trust taken from Alvin kiehl trustee,Verla's brother. while Verla is incapacitated. Alvin was forced off after 20 years of service.A forged signature became the new trustee. Then, $420,000 withdrawn by using four forgeries. Alvin and Verla deprived from buy back. clause. Letizia notarizes forged signature.

13) My mother was incapacitated for 15 months. During that time $1.0m was spent. Instead of $150,000 if she were living at home.. My mother owned a $3.4m irrevocable trust and a $2.5m 2003 living trust. In November of 2006 both trusts were rewritten while my mother was mentally incapacitated and I was in China. As a beneficiary I was to be notified,the irrevocable trust in writing.I was not.In January of 2007 my mother wanted to go home so I went to North Caroliana to get her..My sisters would not let her go.I asked both of them if there were any changed to my mothers trust in my absence and their answer was no.Had they not lied to me and concealed the changes of the trusts in November I would have take my mother home. Damages $850,000 from the difference spent by my sisters to the amount my mother living at home would have spent. $5.0m in principal depleated in 10 years no accounting.1997-2007., $700,000 loss in 2000 stock market.Trustees lost nothing as they sold their stoch before the market crash.

 

14) At the time the 2006 trust was drafted both sisters were very much awareof my mothers mental condition .The most telling part of the trust change was removing my mothers sister as successor trustee and taking her $1.000.00 per months guarantee away.

That clause is gone. Verla was 88 and unsophisticated as an investor. She trusted her daughters. She trusted the attorney. Each major revision,restatement,forgiveness or release was made in 2003 and 2006 I have a passport that will coincide with those dates.

 

15) There were four major documents or trusts that my mother was deceived or threatened into signing.Each time her son was in China. Each time she did not know the content of what she was signing.Each one they would not give her a copy of for her file for fear of me fnding it.

 

.The father was the grantor of a trust funded in 1966 an irrevocable trust From 1982 my sisters and I were its trustee.All activity in the trust must be signed off by the trustees. the grand slam was completed As impossible as it may seem working together with their attorney the daughters pulled off taking control of all three trusts by forgery,fraud,and elder abuse This was done with complete and utter silence and concealment and involved $7.5m.The mother had no idea of what she was signing and the son was 8000 away.

 

16)The mothers brother was removed after 20 years, a sister removed after 10 years and her son. My mother since 1980 relied on my advice before making any major financial decisions. It was very easy for someone to tell my mother one thing to get her to sign it when it really said something else.

 

17)While staying in Mill Vallley my sister did not want my mother to go home under any circumstance.$5.5m and two trust changes would have been discovered plus $1.0m in withdrawals.

 

18) Her son was on his way from China to pick up his mother in California My sister had hired an attorney at $400.00 per hour to keep me from taking my mother home.She has taken nearly 200,000 since to pay his legal bills He helps my sister end my mother's life and then pays himself from my mothers trust funds From 1989 to mothers death they were the sole trustees.No investment skills.2 of 3 children and a large estate.On at least seven occasions my mother tried to remove them as trustees or neutralize them each failed.Beginning in 2002 my mother says nothing is done in the future without three signatures 2003 I am in China and four major changes take place.2006 I am in China and the the irrevocable trust forgery and fraud and 2006 trust incapacity take place $5.5m in total

her died in 1980.One of his assets was 803 (12%) shares of a family business which was in serious financial trouble and $12.0m in debt. The value was $500.00 per share. One year later I purchased 635 shares for the same price to remove the president. The per share price was $500.00. Five years later I was forced to sell the company for $7500 per share. I purchased a $3.0m life insurance policy with the proceeds from my stock and made my sisters 1/3 beneficiaries each which were my sole decision. In six years since my sister Lynn pushed to sell her stock for $500.00 or $130,000 my sisters each received a windfall of $3.0m and had no involvement with the company. In 1989, I temporarily allowed my sisters to become trustees a bank was to take their place over the years. At least seven attempts were made to have our trusts professionally managed.

 

20) Frederick died on May 17, 1980. Prior to his death, on or about August 11, 1955, Frederick executed his Last Will ("Will"). On or about February 2, 1966, Frederick executed a Codicil to same ("Codicil"). The Will and Codicil provided that, in the event Verla survived Frederick by a period of thirty days, Marital Trust A ("Trust A") was to be created for the benefit of Verla. A true and accurate copy of the Will and Codicil of Frederick L. Regnery are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A and Exhibit B respectively.

21) In or about 1982, Plaintiff and Defendants were named successor Trustees of Trust A. The Third and Fifth Articles of the Will and Codicil provide with respect to the creation and administration of Trust A:

"THIRD: (b) All of the income from Trust "A" from the date of my death shall be paid to my wife, VERLA REGNERY, in convenient installments, at least quarter-annually, so long as she shall live. In addition to the net income of Trust "A", the Trustees shall pay at any time and from time to time to my wife, VERLA REGNERY, so long as she shall live, such amounts from the principal of Trust "A" as the Trustees in their absolute and sole discretion shall deem necessary, appropriate or advisable.

 

(c) Upon the death of my wife, the assets then remaining in Trust "A", with the income accrued thereon, shall be distributed to such person or persons or to the estate of my wife, free of all trusts created hereunder, in such manner and in such proportions as my wife may designate and appoint in and by her Last Will. Such power of appointment hereby conferred upon my wife shall be exercisable by her exclusively and in all events.

 

(d) If for any reason upon the death of my wife any part or all of Trust "A", including the income accrued thereon, shall fail to pass under the previous provisions of this Article, the entire assets then remaining in Trust "A", with all income accrued thereon, shall be added to Trust "B" and thereafter be administered and distributed pursuant to the provisions of Trust "B"."

 

See, Exhibit A, p.2-4;

...........

"THIRD: (a) If my wife, VERLA REGNERY, shall survive me for a period of thirty (30) days, I give, devise and bequeath unto CHARLES H. G. KIMBALL, FRED C. GRIFFITHS, and my brother, HENRY REGNERY, as Trustees, as a separate trust fund designated as Trust "A", an amount equal to one-half (1/2) of the value of my adjusted gross estate as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes, less an amount equal to the value, as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes, of any property or interests in property passing or which have passed to or for the benefit of my wife other than pursuant to this my Last will and with respect to which a martial deduction is allowable for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death. The gift made by this Article shall be limited to and satisfied out of property included in my estate for which a martial deduction is allowable for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death. Each asset of my estate distributed in kind to the Trustees of Trust "A" pursuant to the above provisions of this Article shall be valued for purposes of the said distribution at its value as finally determined for federal estate tax purposes in connection with my death or at its cost if such asset of my estate was purchased subsequent to my death. Also, assets of my estate distributed to the Trustees of Trust "A" pursuant to the above provision of this Article shall have an aggregate fair market value at the time of distribution fairly representative of Trust "A" fund's proportionate share of the appreciation or depreciation in value of all property included in my estate then available for distribution to the Trustees of Trust "A" which has occurred after my death."

 

"FIFTH: (m) If for any reason the Trustee of either Trust "A" or Trust "B" shall not be able to agree unanimously with respect to the exercise of any power, authority, duty or discretion delegated to them pursuant to this, my Last will, then the act of the majority of said Trustees shall govern and control and shall be binding upon the beneficiaries of and all persons dealing with Trust "A" and Trust "B" and the dissenting Trustee shall execute such document or instrument and take such action as may be required of him by the majority of said Trustees as may be necessary or appropriate to enable the majority of said Trustees to exercise any power, authority, duty or discretion granted to the Trustees of trust "A" or Trust "B" pursuant to this, my Last Will

 

 

See, Exhibit B, pp.1, 3.

22) Under the terms governing Trust A, before any action could be taken by any two Trustees, all three of the Trustees would be required to confer and determine whether or not a unanimous decision could be reached and all three trustees must sign off agree or consent

23) The Will further provides that all of the income earned from the Trust AN accounts was to be paid to Verla during her lifetime in convenient installments. See, Exhibit A, pp.2-4.In addition, the Trustees were permitted to pay such amounts from the principal of the Trust accounts to Verla which they deemed necessary, appropriate or advisable. See, Exhibit A, pp.2-4. Between at least the years of 2000 through the present, there have been maintained by William Blair & Company ("Blair") at their Chicago Offices, the following Trust AN accounts: Nos. 409-75939-1-9-136, 409-75939-1-9-906, 452-75939-1-9-906, 150-75939-1-9-906 ("Trust A Accounts").

24) In direct breach of the Third and Fifth Article of the Will and Codicil, as cited above, Defendants have on numerous occasions, through Blair's Chicago Offices, taken action by telephoning, mailing and faxing to Blair various requests for the unilateral withdrawal and/or transfer of funds from the Trust A Accounts without first advising, conferring with, or notifying Plaintiff in anyway whatsoever:

a) January 2002: $310,000.00

b) April 2002: $150,000.00

c) June 2002: $551,706.58

d) March 2003: $150,000.00

e) April 2003: $300,000.00

f) May 2003: $276,650.00

g) September 2007: $50,000.00

h) January 2008: $10,000.00

i) February 2008: $10,000.00

j) March 2008: $10,000.00

k) April 2008: $10,000.00

l) May 2008: $10,000.00

m) June 2008: $10,000.00

__________

Total 2002-2008: $1,848,356.50 This needs to be updated

 

25) In addition, Defendants made distributions, upon information and belief, that were in excess of the income earned on Trust A and did so without ever advising Plaintiff.

26) In breach of the clear terms of Trust A and in order to keep Plaintiff from learning of their conduct, on or about February 9, 2000, Defendants authored and delivered their letter to William Kasten at Blair's Chicago Offices proclaiming that all decisions, including any withdrawals or transfers, out of any Trust A Account must be agreed in writing by two of the three trustees. A true and accurate copy of the February 2000 letter to William Kasten is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit C.

27) In authoring and delivering Exhibit C, Defendants intentionally misrepresented and ignored those specific terms of Trust A which require all three Trustees (including Plaintiff) confer and determine whether there was a unanimous decision before the "majority rule" and all three trustees must sign off If there is no attempt to achieve unanimous consent majority rule does not apply.

28)Between at least the years 2000 to the present, Defendants engaged in a scheme through which they repeatedly directed that some or all of the $1,848,358.50 in funds be transferred from the Trust A Accounts -- as were then being maintained at Blair's Chicago Offices -- into checking/banking accounts at both Harris Bank and Wachovia Bank among others, from which accounts Defendants would then issue checks/withdrawals which were used by them for their own personal benefit and gain. In perpetrating their scheme, Defendants failed and refused to advise, notify, seek or obtain Plaintiff's consent all in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust duties to Verla and Plaintiff under the terms of Trust A.

29) As a result, the Trust A Accounts have been depleted from a starting value of $2,363,544.00 in January 2000 to $496,769.00 in June 2008 by the actions and conduct of Defendants taken at Blair's Chicago Offices and without Plaintiff's knowledge or consent.

30) On or about May 18, 1989, the Verla K. Regnery Trust was formed and executed in Hinsdale, Illinois. The Verla Trust along with its Restatements ("Verla Trust") was created for the primary benefit of Verla.

The 2002 trust marked a change and new standard for the future. All new trusts, amendments or trust related changes must be signed off by all three of Verla's children

 

31) On or about May 1, 2003, the Verla K. Regnery Trust was amended and restated in its entirety and was executed in Hinsdale, Illinois ("2003 Restatement"). A true and accurate copy of the 2003 Restatement is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit D .Fred was in China.His first knowledge of this trust was in January 2008. Undue influence and duress would force Verla to sign three multi million dollar changes without the presence of an attorney representing her.

32) The 2003 Restatement was again formed by Verla as Grantor with Gretchen and Lynn designated as Co-Trustees. Verla's sister Juaine was renamed as the co-trustee

33) The 2003 Restatement was amended to provide that the remainder of the trust estate shall be distributed into equal one-third (1/3) parts to each of the Grantor's three children, with Defendants to receive their portions outright and with Plaintiff to receive his portion in trust, the Frederick W. Regnery Trust of which Lindsay, Fred and Geoff were to serve as Co-Trustees. See, Exhibit D at Art. III, §3.

34) Therefore, as Co-Trustees of Plaintiff's Trust, Lindsay, Fred and Geoff are trust beneficiaries and thus, are owed certain fiduciary obligations under the Verla Trust.

35) The 2003 Restatement again provided that the Defendants acting as Co-Trustees, upon written request of a beneficiary were obligated "to render annual statements of the receipts and disbursements and of the financial condition of the trust to such beneficiary." See, Exhibit D at Art. VII, §1(v).

36) Despite Plaintiffs' repeated requests for annual accountings of the type required to be rendered under the 2002-2003 Restatements, the Defendants never once rendered a single accounting or supplied any annual accounting statements to them and instead intentionally concealed and withheld such information from them and Verla .

37) On May 1, 2003, Verla executed a Last Will and Testament of Verla K. Regnery ("Verla Will") that was admitted to probate in the Circuit Court of DuPage County, Illinois, on June 6, 2008.. A true and accurate copy of the Verla Will is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit E. True and accurate copies of the "Letters of Office" are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit F.

In Article III of the Verla Will, Verla appointed whatever property remained in Trust A to the Verla Trust as amended and restated.

See, Exhibit E at Art. III.

38) As part of their continuing scheme, in or about the summer of 2003, Defendants caused their attorneys, Thomas E. Swaney of the Chicago Law Firm of Sidley Austin Brown & Wood, LLP. ("Sidley"), to prepare blanket releases which were designed to insulate Defendants from liability for their many violations of their duties as Co-Trustees and fiduciaries including their failure to disclose or otherwise account for their spending and ongoing misappropriation of trust funds and assets as Co-Trustees. This was the first time the defendants used Sidley Austin.Their personal attorney Dan Letizia handled all previous trust matters for the trustees.

39) As part of the process of selling the family's Hinsdale home in 2003, Verla purchased (through her Trust) and took up residence in an undivided interest in a single family home located in Fairview Village (the "Fairview Village Home"), an assisted living facility in the Village of Downers Grove and within DuPage County. After selling the Hinsdale home, Verla took up residence in the Fairview Village Home which she thereafter maintained as her primary place of residence.

40) On or about September 2, 2003, Verla, at the urging and insistence of Defendants, was pressured to execute two separate "Approvals of Accounts and Release of Trustees" ("Releases") for both the Verla Trust and Trust A.Verla was not represented at the signing.Juaine Broadbent her sister accompiting her to Dan Letizia.Dan Letizia had been and still was Gretchen and Lynn's attorney since 1998 True and accurate copies of the Releases are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit G and Exhibit H respectively. Through these Releases prepared by Sidley, Verla was attributed with a statement, not of her own making: "I hereby approve any and all actions taken by the Trustees...through December 31, 2002, and hold the Trustees harmless against any and all liability to any person arising out of the trusteeship." See, Exhibit G at ¶5; Exhibit H at ¶6.

41) Not only had the Defendants failed to disclose, identify or account for their dissipation and misappropriation of trust assets anytime before having Verla sign the Releases, the tion way for Defendants to attempt to insulate themselves from and avoid any potential liability for their misappropriation and mishandling of the funds and assets belonging to both Verla's Trust and Trust A.

Neither Release was supported by any consideration and the preparation and execution of both was undertaken by Defendants who similarly failed to disclose, identify or account for their dissipation and misappropriation of trust assets anytime before having Verla sign the Releases.

Neither Release restricts Plaintiffs' rights and interests to obtain -- as beneficiaries and interested parties under the trusts - and Defendants duties and obligations to provide - as Co-Trustees and fiduciaries of the same trusts - accountings and to render annual statements (for every year in which they served as Co-Trustees) of the receipts and disbursements and of the financial condition of the trust to each such beneficiary. None of these rights or duties are abrogated in any way by the Releases - which aside from being ill-gotten and unenforceable as against Verla - are instruments to which none of the Plaintiffs agreed, knew of, or were made a party to and to which none are consequently bound. Fred was a trustee and benificiary.He was in China.He first became aware of this release in January of 2008

42) Moreover, in light of the fact that the Verla Trust specifically provides that the trustees could only distribute trust principal to Verla during her lifetime and could only distribute income to a party other than Verla only as Verla might "from time to time direct in writing," any principal distributions made by the trustees to parties other than Verla are arguably invalid as contrary to the provisions of the Verla Trust. In addition, those distributions of income could have been made only after prior written directives were issued by Verla, regardless of whether Verla approved the distributions through the Release issued after the distributions were made. As a continuation of their scheme and grand slam of 2003.My sisters withdrew

.

43) On or about February 7, 2005, while Verla was vacationing with Lynn in North Carolina, Lynn had Verla assessed by Memory Assessment and Research Services ("Mars") to establish a baseline of memory functioning. The 2005 Mars evaluation revealed that Verla had previously suffered two heart attacks, the last one being 8 years prior, and concluded that Verla's memory was impaired when compared to that of her peers and was significantly below the expected level of functioning but that her recall of visual material and working memory were intact. In or about July of 2006, Verla was taken from her home in Downers Grove not feeling well and first taken to a wedding and in total 6000 on an airplane.With her heart condition and severe edema Mrs Regnery should not have left.her home. On her way back from California, Verla traveled to Washington D.C., Maryland and North Carolina. At some point during this trip, Verla suffered a stroke or a series of strokes for which she was ultimately hospitalized in North Carolina.

44) On or about November 21, 2006, Lynn brought Verla into the same Mars facility in North Carolina for a second evaluation. The 2006 Mars report concluded that Verla displayed "significant decline... across all measures of memory functioning." A true and accurate copy of the 2006 Mars Report is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit I.

The 2006 Mars Report further found that Verla's "current cognitive test scores indicate clinically significant impairment in virtually all measured areas of cognitive functioning," and "represent a vascular dementia.

 

45) Only four (4) days before the Mars evaluation, on or about November 17, 2006, the Defendants caused the Verla Trust to be once again restated ("2006 Restatement"). A true and accurate copy of the 2006 Restatement is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit J.

46) The 2006 Restatement was prepared by an Oak Brook Terrace attorney, Dan Letizia, and names Verla as Grantor with Gretchen and Lynn designated as Co-Trustees with the remainder of the trust estate to be distributed as it was in the 2003 Restatement, equal one-third hen(1/3) parts to each of the Grantor's three children. It should be noted that Plaintiffs are contesting the 2006 Restatement. However, unlike the 2003 Restatement, the 2006 Restatement deleted those portions of the Trust which provided that upon Verla's death: (i) Defendants would cease to act as Co-Trustees; and (ii) that Juaine Broadbent (Verla's sister) would serve as successor Trustee. See, Exhibit D at Art. I, §2.

47)"Defendants undertook an active role in overseeing and insisting upon the changes in the 2006 Restatement, providing that Defendants would continue to serve as Co-Trustees even upon Verla's death. Defendants' actions in this regard -- undertaken at a time when Verla lacked the mental capacity to restate her Trust much less appreciate the legal meaning and significance of the 2006 Restatement - were initiated by Defendants as part of a continuing scheme of financial exploitation against Verla by removing her only living sister as successor Trustee in favor of Defendants. See, Exhibit J, at Art. I, §1.

48) At all times herein relevant, there were certain accounts maintained by Blair in the name of the Verla Trust: account numbers 409-75938-10 and 150-75940-16 ("Verla Trust Accounts").

49)Throughout the period they have served as Co-Trustees, Defendants have depleted the Verla Trust Accounts in violation of the terms of the Verla Trust and in breach of their fiduciary duties which activities they have attempted to conceal by failing and refusing to render to Plaintiffs a single annual statement of the receipts and disbursements or of the financial condition of the Verla Trust, despite their repeated demands and by using the trust owned funds and assets for their own personal purposes rather than towards the care, support and comfort of Verla.

50) Between at least 2002 and 2008, Gretchen and Lynn have used the funds and assets belonging to the Verla Trust Accounts for their own benefit and gain in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust obligations owed to Plaintiffs as Co-Trustees of the Verla Trust.

Upon information and belief, Gretchen and Lynn have repeatedly directed that funds be transferred from the Verla Trust Accounts into checking/banking accounts at both Harris Bank and Wachovia Bank among others, from which accounts Defendants would then issue checks/withdrawals which were used by them for their own personal benefit and gain. As part of this scheme, between at least 2002 and 2008 Defendants failed and refused to account to Plaintiffs despite their repeated demands, all in direct violation of their fiduciary and trust duties to Plaintiffs under the terms of Verla Trust and in violation of their duties to furnish annual accountings as required under Section 11(a) of the Illinois Trusts and Fiduciaries Act. 760 ILCS 5/11 (West 2007).

51)Between at least 2002 and 2008, Defendants have repeatedly authorized the transfer of funds from the Trust A Accounts into the Verla Trust Account for the intended purpose of gaining more complete control over these funds as Co-Trustees without the involvement of Plaintiff (who at all times remained a third Trustee of Trust A); some or all of these funds were used by Defendants for their own personal benefit and gain in violation of both Trust A and the Verla Trust as well as their fiduciary duties under each such trust.

52) At the time of her death, Verla was visiting with Gretchen and staying in the latter's California home where she died at age 88 on November 2, 2007.

53) At all times material, Verla maintained, through her Trust, ownership of the Fairview Village Home which she furnished and where she received her mail and housed her personal files, papers, jewelry, clothing, artwork, personal belongings and effects.

54)In or about June of 2007, Defendant-Lynn appeared at Verla's Fairview Village Home while Verla was visiting Defendant-Gretchen in California, and then and there gained entry into the home and removed and purloined substantially all of Verla's furnishings, personal files, papers, jewelry, clothing, artwork, personal belongings and effects, some of which belonged to Plaintiff - Fred

55)The actions of Lynn in emptying Verla's Fairview Village Home were undertaken purposefully and maliciously and with the prior knowledge, involvement and/or direction of Gretchen so as to remove from Verla the personal liberty, right and ability to return to her home.

56)Shortly after removing these items from Verla's Fairview Village Home, Defendant -Lynn then transported many of the items to the Village of Woodridge and sold substantially all of the furnishings and much of Verla's other personal belongings in a garage sale which was conducted by her at the home of the in-laws of her daughter Gretchen. Since the sale, Lynn has at no time accounted to Verla, Verla's Trust or Plaintiff for the items taken by her from Verla's Fairview Village Home. Lynn's daughter Gretchen was paid $2,000 from the VKR checking account by Lynn for her help with the removal and sale of Verla's personal belongings. Since Verla's death, Gretchen and Lynn have continued to withdraw and transfer funds from both the Trust A Accounts and the Verla Trust Accounts.Since this complaint was drafted $10,000 per month was withdrawn until March of 2009.An additional $100,000 was withdrawn in July of 2008.

 

57) In December 2007, a request for a formal accounting was made by Lindsay as to the Verla Trust Accounts. To date, Defendants have failed, despite acknowledgement from their counsel that they have a duty to do so, to issue a formal accounting. In doing so, Defendants have incredulously suggested that the costs to do so would be incurred by Plaintiff's Trust only. A true and accurate copy of the email from Lindsey to attorney Peter Flaxman dated December 26, 2007 is attached hereto as Exhibit K. A true and accurate copy of Flaxman's January 17, 2008 letter in response is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit L.

58)Most recently, another demand for an accounting was made by Plaintiff with respect to both the Trust A Accounts and the Verla Trust Accounts and Defendants have persisted in their refusal to render or supply any such accounting. True and accurate copies of the letters dated August 29, 2008 sent by Plaintiff to Sidley and Blair are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Group Exhibit M. The Verla Trust provides that the administration of the Trust shall be governed by the laws of the State of Illinois.

59)As Trustees of Trust A and the Verla Trust, Defendants owed a fiduciary duty to manage the trust assets in the best interest of the trust estate and beneficiaries of these trusts.

60) That duty included a duty of good faith and loyalty to act in Verla's best interest and not for the Defendants' own personal interests.

61) Pursuant to 5/ 4 et seq.; 4.14, 4.20 (West 2007), Defendants' fiduciary duty included, but was not limited to:

a) Not to take or use for their own personal use and benefit any trust property; and

b) To maintain and keep records of all trust expenditures and to prudently safeguard, invest and account for all trust property and assets and to refrain from exploiting or using any such property and assets for their own personal gain or benefit

 

 

62) Defendants must account for all the funds they have taken and withdrawn from the Verla Trust and Trust A, and a constructive trust must be imposed upon all of Defendants' funds, accounts or assets wherever found in amounts sufficient to reimburse and make whole the Verla Trust and the Trust A of all misappropriated, converted, unaccounted for funds or assets duly belonging to the Verla Trust and Trust A.

 

Count II Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT III MISREPRESENTATION

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT IV VIOLATION OF TRUST AND ABUSE OF TRUST PRINCIPAL

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

COUNT V DURESS

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

 

COUNT VI UNDUE INFLUENCE

Plaintiffs hereby restate and re-allege Paragraphs 9-62 of their Verified Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
This is exactly how your pleading should look.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Off to the writer?
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Send it off to the writer.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

 

The financial explotation,neglect,abuse and false imprisonment was denied in the federal court.Juaine is the plaintiff.It is back at the state court and the opposition mailed a 100 page motion to dismiss it.Scott wants to drop it as now he says I should have been the plaintiff.Juaine did not have much at stake and I am sure they made a big deal out of California.What do you Think?

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I think it is worth pursuing. You have more stake and would not be dismissed.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
So appeal the federal ruling or go to the state court
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Appeal the federal ruling. If lose and cannot file there, try and file in state court.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
The federal ruling was Juaine how can appeal it
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Juanie will have to appeal it. In the meantime, file in state court.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

I forgot,

It was filed in the state court by Juaine.We tried to interevene in the federal court and lost now it is back in the state court with 100 pages of oppositionCan a different plaintiff come in.I am sure the pleadings were terrible.How long do you usually have counting continuances until you go to trial

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
it up to the judge to give a continuance. There are no set number of continuances. A different plaintiff can file these same claims.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
So a completley new set of pleadings could be made
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.

The lawyer could use the pleadings we decided on today.

RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

One mistake so far was not one case.

 

No one an see the picture.

 

If there was a wealthy woman living in Peoria Illinois and her daughters took her on a trip the never should have,she fell down a rock pile fractured her skull and had dementia.She was also a heart patient for years.Her daughters started chnging trustees on her trusts and taking a lot more money than what they needed to.The kept in touch with the relatives but never letting them know how serious things were.This happned in Virginia so the daughter took her home with her the other lived in Georgia.They had a brother who was in the service in Afghananstan and all he knew is mom fell but was O.K.He comes home on leave senses something is very wrong and tells his sister he is coming to get his mother.The figure out an order of protection take her medications bring in hospice start opiates and eventually kill her.Now they have her money to buy off lawyers to protect her.Fortunatly the brother got the trust jurisdiction out of Gerorgia and back to Illinois.Then they run intro a real problem in the federal court politicts.Firsr round nothing goes their way.Where should this womans Jurisdiction be besides her trusts.She was taken from her home and never allowed to go home.This is America and their are civil and constitutional rights bedsides their daughters everyone that helped him violated those rights.So a life long resident of Illinois against her will never allowed to go home and is abused and neglected in two states does this woman and her family have the right to have whatever court procedures held in Illinois

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I do not understand how this case ended up the way it did. I do know it was mishandled. The pleadings we put together today should have been field in the beginning. You should have been the plaintiff. Your motion to intervene should not have been dismissed. There is jurisdiction in Illinois and you have standing.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

This just went to the three attorneys

 

A different view

There was a wealthy woman living in Peoria Illinois and her daughters took her on a trip trip that they never should have. The mother fell down on a rock pile and fractured her skull resulting in Dementia.She was also a heart patient for many years.Her daughters started changing trustees on the mothers removing brothers and sisters as trustees. The began withdrawing large sums of money.They kept in touch with the relatives but never letting them know how serious things were.This happned in Virginia so the one daughter took her home with her the other lived in Georgia.They had a brother who was in the service in Afghananstan and all he knew is mom fell but was O.K.He comes home on leave senses something is very wrong and tells his sister he is coming to get his mother to take her home..The sisters figure out an order of protection take the mothers medications bring in hospice and start opiates The mother eventually dies.Now they have her money to buy off lawyers to protect themselves.Fortunatly the brother was able to get the trust jurisdiction out of Gerorgia and back to Illinois.Then he runs intro a real problem in the federal court, politicts.Firsrt round nothing goes his way.Where should this womans Jurisdiction really be forgetting what states she was in which state she hit her head on the rock.This womans home for her entire life was Illinois she thought she was going on a one week trip with her daughters but she had other plans.Should the son have to go to Virginia or Georgia just because his mother was taken there. The mother was taken from her home and never allowed to back.This is America and their are civil and constitutional rights besides their daughters and everyone that helped them violated those rights.So a life long resident of Illinois against her will never allowed to go home and is abused and neglected in two states. Does this woman and her family have the right to
to have jurisdiction in Illinois for any and all suits.Is it fair to make them go back to the home state home town.Is it right is it fair for the mothers justice to be determined anywhere else but Illinois.

We made a mistake with my mothers case in treating it like a stepchild.If you really think hars each element of what happened to my mother strengthened the case.

Example,

Julie is fighting for an independant trustee.Nothing aboiut my mothers abuse forgeries fraud and trusts.The more we fragment this case the more we play into the opponents hands.They are looking at things right now that they can get my sisters out of all abuses and while doing so never discuss forgeries or fraud.Then the have their friend in the federal court.Sure they will have to give some back but peanuts compared what they should have.

With Bucklo we win every motion.With this guy we have to appeal every motion until he wakes up.

We have to replead my mothers case which I have most of,appeal Juaines decision,amenmd it to the trust suit through me ot go to the state court and argue what I just wrote.

Nothing goes as plans and it is the ones who can adjust to change that end up on top.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.

You make the right arguments. This is what I been trying to say all along. I hope your lawyers see it this way and act accordingly.

RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

We have a Judge that does not want to listen to abuse just money so why not stuff him with money where he cant hide

 

Verla Regnery became incapacitated after a 7000 mile trip which resulted in a stroke and a 2mm leison in her brain.This was 9/2006 and was gross negligence on her daughters part particularly without taking their mother to the doctor.Mrs Regnery had serious dementia.on 11/10 her brother after 20 years was removed by her daughter by fraud. This was a $3.4m irrevocable trust the Verla had a buy back provision The trustees attorney notarized the forged signature before sending it on to prudential.The person whose name they forged had no idea.On 11/18 the daughters attorney drafted a 2006 living trust removing Verla's sister as successor trustees and therefore control of the money,past accounting and litigation.Sometime later the sisters using five forgeries withdrew $420,000 from the irrevocable trust over the strenuous objection of their brother.To remove their money they were forced to forge their brothers name.After Verla moved to California the sisters withdrew $60,000 and said it was for gifts.They also tried to sell Verla's Illinois home so they could claim her as a California resident and move her trusts.Verla lived very comfortably next to jher sister in an assisted care facility in Downers Grove Illinois.Of the $8,000 per months her daughters were gracious enough her she lived very comfortably on the balance after giving here brothers and sisters $2,000 per month.The brother was told in October of 2006 that his mother would live for less than if she had been at home.During the 15 months my mother was incapacitated my sisters withdrew $900,000.The trust and state law allow for the well being of the grantor/sole beneficiary.Verla would have lived on$125.00 for the same 15 months. All of this was made possible by their gross maybe intentional 7000 airline flight which resulted in to a lesion on her brain.From there she couldn't move and her cries to go home were not heard.When 15 years of heart medications were withdrawn and she reached on the shelf to get them all she could do is pray and cry.When haldol valium and morphine were forced down her mouth and throat again all she could do is hope and cry.Unfortunately no one was there to hear the crying or help her from this terrible ending of her life d then give him a little human reality atr the end.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I like your idea for the judge. These facts should be made clear at trial.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
It is OK.Reject my aunt ann independant trust freezeCustomerasaa trust no clear answer on the deposition what do you want to say about this do you still want to coever for our opponents or play it straight
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Play it straight, do not cover for anyone. Get an answer on the deposition.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Ray Sorry I was talking for the judge
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
You know if you came up here we could win all of these and all you would have to be is the director
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Push the issue of the depositions. Tell the judge you are ready to start deposing witnesses. Tell him the sonner you start, the sooner you can go to trial.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

Can you give me a list in order of priority with any neded explination that I must convince these people next week

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
First, make sure you have the pleading we together today. This will help you explain claims. Argue from the pleadings. Second, you need to discuss that you have standing. Cite all the cases you have on the issue. Third, discuss jurisdiction. Discuss the idea of same nucleus of operative fact. Fourth, discuss deositions. Tell him you need to depose Letizia and anyone else associated with the trust. You also need to depose the treating doctors and the medical experts. Deposing all of these people will help prove your case is not frivolous.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

1.Should the slayer statute and abuse be plead as one

 

2.Should Juaine's wrongful death be the base

 

3.If we prevail the state court on jurisdiction does that mean they can go back to the federal with the unfriendly Judge and ask for seccond ruling

 

4.Did I ever send you the ruling of the interpleader.Its short want to mak sure in no way are my sisters and Letizia released.We have two verbal and one written confirmations.My only damage was $35,000 but my mother also lost her buy back provision.For that matter the $1.0m could have disappeared.

 

5.How would you catagorize it when when find my mother was incompetent and could not sign the 2006 trust also after 11/2/2007 when Juaine was to take over we have two plus years of stalling while I am pending a fortune

 

6.The $420,you classified as fraud forgery and misapproation.Those charges dont change after they forged my signature and sent it to computershares.Again monitarily I was not damaged.

 

 

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
The slayer statute and abuse should be two separate claims. Use Juanie's pleading to provide relevant facts and laws. Prevailing in state court does not mean you can prevail in federal court on the same thing. I think I saw the interpelader. You have a right to intervene because you have standing. I would categorize your mother's situation as undue influence and duress. The fraud, forgery, and misappropriation do not change.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

Since there is no law like the trust and trustee act zI am told this is the Illinois law.If you agree should we notify the judge just in case they are taking legal fees.I dont think us questioning the validity of them being valid trustees could possibly be considered protecting the trust.Of all my claims which one do you feel is the easies breach of fiduciary to prove.

 

 

In Grate v. Grzetich, 867 N.E.2d 577, 373 Ill.App.3d 228, 310 Ill.Dec. 886 (Ill.App. Dist.3 05/03/2007), the IL court of appeals states:

 

  • "It has long been held that "[t]he law is well settled that trustees cannot reimburse themselves from the trust estate for their attorney fees, unless those fees were incurred in the management and preservation of the trust estate." Ellis v. King, 336 Ill. App. 298, 307, 83 N.E.2d 367, 371 (1949). Furthermore, in Northern Trust Co. v. Heuer, 202 Ill. App. 3d 1066, 560 N.E.2d 961 (1990), the court unequivocally held that an award of attorney fees to a trustee who breached his fiduciary duty to a beneficiary "constituted an abuse of discretion." Northern Trust Co. v. Heuer, 202 Ill. App. 3d 1066, 1072, 560 N.E.2d 961, 965 (1990).

 

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.

Yo You are correct. The easiest breach of fiduciary to prove is the depletion of trust funds. Cite this case.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

 

My posts must no be getting thrpught to you.

 

The case I should site for breach of fiduciary is which one.If you are referring to trust

 

funds for litigation we have no knowledge of proof.

 

Can we get this to the Jude and nstead of embarrasing him just say they have used trust funds up to here and we hope you hold them to this.

 

The $420 and $3.0,m have many frauds and forgeries however how will a judge look at those in the way of damages to me.

 

Which do you think the easiest breach of fiduciary lies.

 

 

Here is my situation.I have spent 2-1/2 years working on this.The main case we will have to appeal every rluing.Juaine did not make i in the federal court and there is no assurance she will make it in the state court.

 

The slayer statute in my mind is the best but hardest claim wed have.I have asked many people if a California death can have Illinois jurisdiction.

 

Other than that their biggest crimes are the forgery and fraud of the $3.0m the 2006 trust and spending at least $800,000 during my motherss last 18 months.

 

So I am trying to think through given my limitations and go where the best opportunity is.

 

If someone commits criminal acts but there is no damage what does the Judge say.I will take part of that back they spent $800,000 of my moters money

 

Now on the $420,000 this one gives me a problem.I dont thingk you can forge someones name without their consent.Thy tried to get 2/3rds but thet would not give it to them.The fact that they forged my name b ecause the had to to get their money should not count as a gain for me.I wait until my mother they take it unuathorized while she is living.It that not financial exploitation.They can say no it wasnt because it was in an irrevocable trust however my mother had the buy back rights/

Customer: replied 4 years ago.
ff
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Cite Grate v. Grzetich, 867 N.E.2d 577, 373 Ill.App.3d 228, 310 Ill.Dec. 886 (Ill.App. Dist.3 05/03/2007). You have a claim for their depletion of trust funds and their use of trust funds for lawyer's fees. These claims would be breach of fiduciary duty. You can bring up use of trust funds and tell the judge to hold them to it. There are damages because of the 800,000 dollars. This is a strong claim for forgery and fraud. The forgery claim relating to the 420,000 dollars is strong as well. Both of these are the easiest breaches of fiduciary duty also. Keep pursuing the slayer statute claim.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

How about the fraud and forgery of the $1,000,000

 

I may have an easier one you tell me/FLRegnery trust 13 year write off.The third trust was not asked to confer sign or even verbally agree.The reason being If I hear about that neither trust gets written off.

 

My mother was the sole benificiary and I owe a duty to her.As the third trustee I should be watvching the third.This act damaged me as a trustee and my mother as a benificiary.I was told a long time ago this was a breach of fity fiduciary a breach of time.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
The fraud and forgery of 1,000,000 dollars should be a claim. Also, this claim of damaging you as a trustee is a good one. Ask your lawyer if you just argue it as breach of fiduciary duty or tortious interference with contract.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

 

When you boil it all down this is where it all ends up. $3.0m forgery and fraud, 2006 Trust, $800,000 during last 15 months, Brewery $500,000, $700,000 lost in the market, William Blair two signatures, 13 year right off and forgiveness letter, No accounting 18 years, abuse and death of my mother.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
This is true. Focus on these facts at trial and in discovery.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
The abuse case was filed in the State court.Then we filed to intervene and lost.So now the state court will decide jurisdiction I assume?.If the opposition loses can they go back to the federal court? and I assume of they lose the case the appeal would have to be in the state court? Back to the release.My three children and I are plaintiffs .Some things were left out like I was a trustee of one of the trusts.I am told that is a breach of fiduciary duthyy by my sisters alsp my mother would not have signed either if I was there to explain them.. We did not claim fraud or a partnewrship..We do have most of the reasons this does not meet the standards of a valid release. I have recalculated.I believe that was an $8.0m piece of paper Letizia had my mother sign in front of her sister. Here is where it gets a little confusing.If i am one of the plaintiffs in the existing suit and find out we can amend it can I file a second suit as a contingent remainderment benificiary or are they one in the same. I have a meeting with my attorneys tomorrow.If there are issues you think are most important please let me know. If I cant file a seperate suit can I force my attorneys to amend the response?Will the Judge allow it? Fred
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
If you file your abuse case in state court, a state court judge will decide jurisdiction. If the opposition loses, they may try to get the case transferred to federal court and then file a motion to dismiss it. If it remains in state court, they appeal in state court. Your existing suit should be enough to bring your claims as a beneficiary. Just make sure your pleadings have all the claims we discussed last week.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

We filed in state court.Then filed to intervene in the federal.case and lost.I was told maybe not right the opposition had to pick one court.When the case went back to Dupage the opposition had their choice just like in the very first case.Bring the case back to federal court based on diversity and argue dismissing or moving it back to California.Or they can do what they are doing now argue it in DuPage.How can the have it both ways.As soon as the order to intervene was made in my opinion the opposoitions had to make a decision.They could bring it to the federal court based on diversity or go to the state court but that is final unless they appeal it there.Otherwise someone could get a positive ruling in a federal court then on the same case get a negative ruling in the state court and then go back to the federal court on the same subject.Sounds crazy

 

Are you saying on the 13 years even though it may not have everything we should go with that.

 

The pleadings were 9-19 Right?I am having one of your writers make it look professional but it takes a long time.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Either party can dispute jurisdiction. File where you feel you will have a better chance of getting a fair hearing. You can bring the 13 years. That is 9 through 19.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

We were turned down on intervening.Now our case is where is started the state court.I am just trying to determine is if they lose it must be heard in the state court and the door at the federal court is closed.

 

When you say I can bring the 13 years it is already one of the 9-19.Are you saying as a contingent remainderment benificiary I can file it again and add to the first filing

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
That is exactly what I ma saying. If they lose in state court and you transfer it to federal court, they get another chance. Otherwise, the door is closed.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

We are mising each other a little

 

We filed in the state court and immeadiatly filed a motion to intervene in out federal court case.We lost the case but still are of record in the state court.They will now file in the state court however they have a choice.Just like the trust case they can file a motion because of diversity to bring our current action back to the federal court

 

Or they can litigate in the the state court.If they lose are you saying they can go back to the federal court after they passed up that opportunity?

 

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I am sorry for the misunderstanding. They cannot go back to federal court if the case is now in state court.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Thanks,

If I can amend or file a new response of the 13 years in my opinion the case is over.Right now 9-19 we dont have damages.If we prevail on13 release we get full accounting and be able to prove the claims.Then abuse and the slayer statute but I am very concerned regarding jurisdiction.The good news is I have spent my whole life in this county and know a few of the people.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I still think you can prove damages because of the depletion in trust money. Discuss this with your lawyer.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Hello from LargeFilesASAP,

You have a file or files called 03-05-10 Order.pdf: fromXXX@XXXXXX.XXX waiting for download.

You can click on the following link to retrieve your File. The link will expire in 3 Days .
Link: Download File

Message fromXXX@XXXXXX.XXX

The federal court is a difficult place especially if the Judge is against you.I have only sent one attatchment.The administrator I am sure we did not meet the standard but I am also sure we did not give it our best effort.Then we asked for a freeze Did the Judge speak to that.The attorney says yes.They now tell me we cant take the Mars deposition until discovery starts. There may be good news maybe you know.We filed the abuse case in the state court then tried to intervene in the federal court and lost.Now one of the attorneys is saying iwhen we go back to the state court the opposition has lost their chance to argue California as they did not when we first filed.Is this true? The F.W.Regnery trust can not be a plaintiff just the trustees.That does not mean much but if it is not a plaintiff but is entitled to 1/3rd does it have the right to demand payment. If you could help me with this it would be appreciated.My mother died 11/2/2007 The language in her trust states Upon the grantors death so much of the trust estate of the trust which shall not have been used for payment of debts,taxes,and expenses of the grantors estate pursuant hereto shall be distributed in accoordance this trust. What I cant find is anything in Illinois law that speaks to living trust distribution.My attorney thinks if we ask the Judge will turn its down.We are the plaintiff without claims against us and it has been 28 months.There must be something we can do. They did not do a good job on answering the 13 year accounting release.I have given them everything.Since I was a contingent remainderment benificiary with the right to sue even though that is one of our claims can I file a seperate suit on the 13 year alone or will the court allow us to amend? I have a court document dated 8/2009 oppositions of plaintiffs in oppositions to petition of defendants to approve accounting.At that time the court turned down the last three years of their accounting but did not rule on the 13 years.Our answer is terrible I just sent my attorney what he should have written.My question is will the federal court all us to go in now and amend this/
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
The fact that the court ruled you cannot take the MARS deposition until discovery starts is something to be expected. The good news is your lawyer has time to prepare everyone for their depositions. I agree they will lose the chance to argue California jurisdiction, if they did not do so earlier. I think you can bring the 13 years by amending the pleadings. I think the court will allow you to amend.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Thanks Ray,

 

How about the payout of the living trust.My mother passed away 11/2/2007.You have the language in the trust.They dont want to pay and the court dosent seem to care.Can a court just sit there with no trust freeze,administrator and not compel a payout.Should I combine the slayer statute with the abuse explotation as one.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You should try and combine all the claims into one lawsuit if you can. The court should have ordered a payout on the trust. This should be part of the breach of fiduciary duty claim.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
The federal court would not lets us intervene.You must mean at the state court combine the abuse and slayer statute
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I am sorry for the misunderstanding. That is exactly what I meant. File these claims in state court.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

I have an idea tell me if it will work.The federal court Judge is on the wrong team.We will have to appeal every motion but when you do you had better make sure you havee an expert pleader.The last two they cited case law and on appeal the independant trustee based on our pleadings would be upheld.Here is my thought.We filed pleadings from August of 2008.I think you have seen them,accounting,William Blair,did the grantor sign off but not much else.I must be the plaintiff I think on the abuse,explotation and slayer statute.Juaine was a mistake.Since we have not pleaded many of our 15 points ion the federal court could we incorporate those in the state court to get away from the federal court Judge.I dont know if they could say that all trust related claims must be heardd under our filing in the federal court but who is to say the two forgeries,five frauds $420,000 and $1.0m does not belong to the new suit in Du Page county? Are we sure if a DuPage Judge will hear the case the opponents are finished in bringing it back to California.

 

Also on he William Blair F.L. Regnery trust without my knowledge or consent,my mother without representation or knowledge did my sisters breach their fiduciary duty to me as a co-trustee and maybe my mother as sole benificiary.My mother probably thought I agreed with this so she just went along.They were to confer with me and arguably all three sign off.I am told by a well respected trust attorney in Chicago they breached their fiduciary duties to me and maybe my mother.They put me in the position of great personal liability

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Your idea is excellent. Suggest it to your lawyer. I think he will agree to do it. This way, the case will be in DuPage County. The Chicago lawyer is correct on the breach of fiduciary duty.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
O.K. Now I must find an independant attorney who is excellent in pleading and can take what I have,Juaine-wrongful death,my very very lengthy slayer statute letter ending with both doctors and whatever from the 15 claims that can be added and put it in a very professional form. ready to file.If you know of anyone please let me know I have the information oplus a lot more
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.

I do not know anyone in your area. However, I saw the websites of two firms. The first one can be contacted at 1-877-585-7311. They do personal injury trials. The managing partner is Stephen Lane. Another name isXXXXX does business and tort litigation. His number is(NNN) NNN-NNNN I think one of them may have someone who is good at drafting pleadings.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Thanks, Isn't forgery and fraud an immeadiate way to have an independant trustee appointed

 

 

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.

Fraud and forgery are grounds to have an independent trustee appointed. Bring this to your lawyers attention.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Hi Ray, I have always felt the 13 year accounting issue was one of the keys to our case along with the 2006 trust.I have tried many times to have my attorney modify his pleading but so far he has not.Ifeel there should be a dollar figure or at least a range as it would have an impact.Juaine was with my mother and heard nothing about any release.I was a trustee and a beneficiary they breached their duty to me.Nothing said.She keeps referring to 10 years of payments.I told her they have had several years to make sure they are not damaging.She claims her case law is very strong.I don't understand case law.What is below her pleading is a well known trust and estate attorney who wrote an article regarding releases.I have sent this to my attorney in the past.This could almost be out pleading and my sisters violated every category.The question is am I being too sensitive over this issue as it is very unusual.It just does not seem like this girl put much effort into this and to miss Juaine,me and an approximate amount in my opinion is very careless.I am sure with her facts what she left out and this attorneys letter it would be pretty easy to create a new document.The pregnant question is will the Judge allow us to amend We did not know about Juaine recall until very late in the game.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/nydetdxzjab/_to_the_petition_of_Ds%27_approve_accounting_for_the_Verla_K._Regnery_trust__abd_tge_MOD_to_approve_final_accounting_for_F._Regnery_marital_trust_A_08-26-09.pdf On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 7:21 AM, Fred Regnery <XXXXX@XXXXXX.XXX> wrote:

III. RELEASES.

In addition to requesting a receipt for property, a fiduciary may also be

inclined to request a release from the beneficiary.

A. What is a release?

A release is defined as "A written discharge, acquittance,

or receipt; specif., a writing -- either under seal or supported by sufficient consideration -- stating

that one or more of the [releasor's] contractual or compensatory rights are discharged (Jones

signed the release before accepting the cash from Hawkins). Beneficiaries of an estate are

routinely required to sign a release discharging the estate from further liability before the

executor or administrator distributes the property."

34 A release is also defined as "the

relinquishment of a right or claim to the person against whom it may be exercised or enforced,

expressed or implied, by agreement or act of the parties by way of an instrument of release or a

covenant not to sue."

35 Thus, we can summarize that an effective release surrenders legal rights

5

or obligations, extinguishes claims or courses of action, and represents an absolute bar to any

right of action on released matters.

B. Effectiveness of a Release

. In order to be effective, a release must arise as a

result of a meeting of a minds of the parties.

36 In addition, the party signing a release must do so

with full knowledge of what he or she is signing, and with the intention to discharge the other

party from liability.

37 Even if the releasing party failed to read the release, it will be enforceable,

provided that the releasing party knew the contents of the release, was competent when it was

signed, acted without compulsion and was not fraudulently induced to sign the release.

38

According to the Illinois Supreme Court, no special form of words is necessary to constitute a

valid release, provided the instrument distinctly declares the beneficiary's intention to release the

fiduciary.

39 "If the instrument necessarily has such effect it will operate as a release even though

the purpose is not expressly declared."

40

C. Fiduciary Obligations

. A release that is signed by a beneficiary at the

request of a fiduciary must be evaluated in the context of the fiduciary relationship.

41 Such

agreements, like all transactions arising out of a fiduciary relationship are subject to the closest

scrutiny by the courts.

42 According to Professor Bogert, "Not only do the rules applicable to all

releases with respect to form, consideration, and other matters apply here, but in the case of a

release of a fiduciary special requirements are set by the courts."

43 Any direct dealing between a

fiduciary and the person whom he represents is viewed with suspicion.

44 In order for a release

signed by the beneficiary in favor of a fiduciary to be upheld, the fiduciary has the burden of

proving the fairness of the arrangement.

45

D. Grounds for invalidating a release.

In order for a release to be valid, the

fiduciary must provide the beneficiary with full disclosure of the facts of the situation.

46 In

addition, the fiduciary must apprise the beneficiary of his or her legal rights, or afford the

beneficiary the opportunity to seek legal counsel.

47 The release must also be supported by

adequate consideration.

48 Finally, the release must be obtained in the absence of fraud or

misrepresentation

49 concealment,50 duress or undue influence,51 or by other unfairness.52 A

release is not binding on the releasing party if he or she did not agree to the terms of the release

after thoughtful consideration.

53 A long line of cases has also held that a release is not effective

if the releasing party suffered from a mental

54 or physical impairment.55

(1) Fraud.

As indicated above, a release can be invalidated if it was

procured through fraud,

56 including fraud in the execution,57 or fraud in the inducement.58 In

order to set aside a release on the basis of fraud, the releasing party must prove that the party

requesting the release made a false representation and that such representation was made without

the knowledge of its falsity on the part of the party making it, or was recklessly uttered without

regard to, or knowledge of, the truth, or would, by the exercise of ordinary diligence, have been

known to be false.

59 In addition, the it must also be shown that the releasing party suffered

damage or injury as a result of the fraud or false representations.

60

"Fraud in the execution" occurs when a person is induced to sign a release

under the mistaken belief that it is a different document.

61 "Fraud in the inducement" transpires

when a person knows that he or she is executing a release, but is induced to do so by false

6

representations by the other party as to matters other than character of instrument.

62 In order to

invalidate a release on the basis of "fraudulent inducement" the releasing party needs to establish

by clear and convincing evidence that (i) the other party made a false statement of a material fact

which was known or believed to be false by the person who made the statement; (ii) that the

statement was made with the intent to induce the other party to act; (iii) that the other party acted

in reliance on the truth of the statement; and (iv) that the other party was damaged as a result of

the reliance.

63 In addition, the omission or concealment of a material fact also amounts to a

fraudulent misrepresentation if the person has the opportunity and duty to disclose the material

fact.

64 However, if the releasing party has independent knowledge that a fact has been

misrepresented, the releasing party cannot rely on that representation.

65

The Illinois case of

Obermaier v. Obermaier,66 provides a good example

of a release obtained through fraudulent inducement. In that case, a dispute arose between two

brothers who were equal owners of the stock of the family corporation, although a small number

of shares was held by one of the brothers as trustee for other's benefit. Under their stock purchase

agreement, one of the brothers sold his shares and the other brother, as trustee for the first

brother sold the trust shares to the corporation. Shortly thereafter, the brother who served as

trustee sold the entire corporation to a third party for a substantially increased amount. He had

concealed the fact that he had been negotiating with prospective purchasers to arrange a better

deal for himself than for his brother. The trustee had represented that he would not look for

another buyer for about one year after execution of the stock purchase agreement and

disregarded the requests of other brother's attorney for information on prospective purchasers.

Because the trustee's fraudulent conduct misled his brother into selling his shares to the

corporation, the court held that the release in which the brother exonerated the trustee from all

claims arising out of a future sale was void, and awarded the brother one-half of the additional

consideration that the trustee received from the third party, in addition to punitive damages.

67

(2) Duress.

A release may also be avoided if it was obtained under

duress.

68 Under Illinois law, in order to set aside a release on this basis, the releasing party must

prove that the duress left him or her devoid of the quality of mind essential to enter into an

enforceable contract.

69 In other words, duress is a condition that forces a party to act against his

or her own free will. Duress is not present if the releasing party had an option or free choice in

the matter.

70 Action or threats alone do not constitute duress unless they are wrongful.71 This

rule, however, is not limited to criminal, tortious, or contractual violations, but extends to acts

that are wrongful in a moral sense.

72

(3) Mutual Mistake.

A release can also be set aside if it arose out of a

mutual mistake of fact by the parties.

73 A mistake in law, such as having received erroneous

advice from an attorney, is not a sufficient ground for invalidating a release.

74 Although a

unilateral mistake has been held to be sufficient to set aside a release,

75 the general rule is that a

unilateral or self-induced mistake is not a valid ground to invalidate a clear and unambiguous

release.

76 A mistake will not be considered self-induced if the releasing party acted reasonably

under all the circumstances of the case.

77 In order to set aside a clear and unambiguous release,

the parties must have made a mutual mistake that was material to the transaction and affected its

substance.

78 Courts do not necessarily give full effect to the broad all-inclusive language of

7

releases,

79 and all the facts including those which become known after the release has been

signed must be considered.

80

(4) Lack of Valuable Consideration.

Generally, a release must be

supported by a valuable consideration,

81 and a release can be invalidated by a court of equity on

the basis of lack of consideration alone without any showing of duress, undue influence or

fraud.

82 Many fiduciaries will routinely request a release from a beneficiary as a matter of

course. However, Illinois courts have held that an agreement to do that which one is already

under existing legal obligation to do does not constitute adequate consideration for release of

obligation.

83 Furthermore, a partial payment to a beneficiary does qualify as a valid consideration

for a release.

84 In other words, a release given without consideration is void and part payment of

an amount indisputably due does not constitute consideration.

85

E. Appropriate Situations to Request a Release.

In the event the trustee is

accused of a breach of trust, the beneficiaries affected by the alleged breach can provide a release

of liability. In order for the release to be effective, the trustee must either furnish the beneficiary

with substituted benefits,

86 provide some other financial arrangement,87 or deliver the trust

property to the beneficiary.

88 According to Professor Bogert, "The efficacy of such a release will

be judged by the adequacy of the consideration, the extent of disclosure given by the trustee to

the beneficiary, the competence of the beneficiary, and any other features which affect the

fairness of the transaction."

89

F. Over reaching.

A fiduciary has a duty of full and fair disclosure in dealing

with the beneficiaries, as a requisite to obtaining a release from them.

90 In addition, a fiduciary is

obligated to provide the beneficiaries with "complete and accurate information as to the nature

and amounts of trust property."

91 Even if a release were a proper item to request from the

beneficiaries, the release would be incapable of being enforced and would be of no value to the

fiduciary, unless the fiduciary makes a full and complete accounting to the beneficiary. "[T]he

rights of a legatee are not foreclosed by the execution of a receipt for a distributive share of the

estate, combined with a release, where the executor withheld from the legatee vital information

on the management and disposal of the estate assets."

92 Accordingly, fiduciaries and their

counsel should proceed with caution and only request releases in proper situations after full and

complete disclosure of all relevant facts to the beneficiaries.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Show this to your lawyer. This will make him bring in the 13 years.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

I dont follow

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
What you just posted has case law and a basis for each of your claims. This will hopefully convince your lawyer to file the type of pleadings we want.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray I am still a little confused.What I sent you with the case law that you down loaded.What I sent in text did not have case law with it but 15 pages afterwards.

 

This was sent by me to the lawyers two weeks before they filed a pleading.Are you suggesting we should stay with what we filed as it it good enough or make a new pleading using our facts and his receital of the law.Do we know for sure the Judge willl let usThis is the heart of our case maybe $8.0m.I just dont know what the Judge will or will not allow

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I am sorry for the confusion. I did not realize the purpose of the documents. File the new pleading with your facts. However, you need to use the case law in the documents you sent me. This document has most of the claims and facts we put in your new pleading. The only difference is that ours is more complete.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

O.K. but I want to make sure I am 100% certain.

 

Unfile what is in the court now

 

Take our facts and combine them with what I just sent you the text of and use that case law.

 

Two more problems the lawyer and Judge.I just wrote the attorney a hard letter .This is the most importantr part of the case.I track down the best mind for our issues and send it to my attorney two weeks before the pleadings were due.

 

So what if he refuses?

 

Will the Judge let us amend.What are the normail reasons you must cover to amend

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.

Take the pleading we put together. Add the case law from what you sent me. The judge should allow you to amend. All you need to show that you are acting in good faith and the claims you seek to add have merit. You have facts to prove the claims are with merit. You are acting good faith.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

http://www.mediafire.com/?oyojcmowzir

http://www.mediafire.com/?qzejuzbd3zz

http://www.mediafire.com/?himmy3hyeen

 

Hi Ray, Theses are shortanswers from the new Judge.For three months no one heard from him.I knew we were in trouble. 1.The good honest judge recused herself after three months after telling both sides she officed with my attorney 25 years ago.My prior attorney who was a nightmere financially and with the interpleader without thinking I mentioned that to him.Things we kind of going our way and out of no where she asked the opposing attorney but before he could ask his partners she recused herself.You knoe the selection oproess better than I however there are exceptions especially in Chicago.At 79 and a senior Judge they work very little and pick and choose their cases.WEhat would a federal Judge want with a stupid family trust case.Then three months then these.The moral is i need a way ourt otherwise this 79 years old man doing someone a favor could wash 2-1/2 years and some great cases down the drain. For example we asked for a new trustee.OK maybe that is too tough or our pleadings were not strong enough.At the same time in the alternative we asked for an asset freeze and a mars deposition.Funny he diod not answer either. Now my trust cant be a plaintiff and we have 28 days to replace it with my children as trustees.But I am the benificiary of that trust why dont I have standing Any ideas Fred Can I sue Letizia and Blair in the federal court and break diversity?

 

One more thing.At the interpleader my attorney forced a settlement with the Magistrate.That is when I wrote him twwo letters that he did not follow his own rules.They were nice polite letters.

 

I was told he is obligated and has no choice than to copy the attorneyys on both sides. Not long ago I called one of the clerks to see if our case showed up.She said no the only piece of information was a letter to the Judge from my sister.We never were notified we never got a copy.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I read the documents you sent. I do not agree with the ruling. The judge should have ruled in your favor. You had claims that were meritorious and you would experience irreparable harm, because of the depletion of trust money. Ruling in your favor would not cause delay or hardship. There were common issues of fact, so you should have been allowed to intervene. Juanie should have been allowed to intervene as well. As a beneficiary, you have standing. File the amneded pleadings.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
http://www.mediafire.com/?jo5jzy5yn5m This is not good but I think an appelate court would think it ties in.Didn't this Judge hesar of nuculus or supplimental jurisdiction Ray
You have been around the block and am sure seen most of what our legal system is the good and the bad.There has to be a remidy when three people walk into the court in street clothes one a Judge,a client and a lawyer.One is not better than the other they are all people there with different roles but the are the same. I have worked for 2-1/2 years on a worthy cause my mothers unfortunate death and 18 years of my sisters concealing everything and anything in the trusts.After Marin County all I was hoping for was a level playing field and I received it.For three months and then she recused herself because she officed 25 years ago with my attorney.All we heard them say is Marowitz.A senior Judge picks his cases and when he works. My mind starts to work overtime as I knew from the beginning..Why would a federal court senior Judge want to screw around with a family trust case.Then it is three months and no one hears from him not good for the plaintiff. I call one day downstairs to see if anything is scheduled and there is not and without knowing it the girl said there is a letter in the box for the Judge from my sister.I went through this at the interpleader myself if you send any type of corospondance the Judge is compelled and it is manditory to copy the attorney on each side.This Judge did not. Then we ask for an independant trustee or in the alternative a trust freez and taking a deposition at the neurological clinic my mother had her testing.>The Judge turned down the independant trustee but did not comment on the trust freeze or deposition.My aunt tried to intervene for false imprisonment,abuse and neglect and financial expoltation.He denied it saying we did not show the tie in to the existing case.He then said even if you did I would deny it because there would have to be 20 docrors and health care workers deposed and my mother had lived out her life out there.None of that was in any of our pleading and my mother did not end up living the rest of her life there.Those words came from the defendants. An impartial Judge is unquestioned part of our due process.I dont have an impartial Judge and I knew about it from the beginning.What are my remedies.Can I ask him to recuse himself?He has already taken at least 1/2 my case and thrown it in the garbage.Do you yhink after turning down my aunt and making the statement about my mothers case he would give it the time of day.If our pleading did not make it that is the end but to go one about still not allowing it and using the words of the defendants I think tat is a little much. They may hold me in contempt 1.My trust has no standing only the trustees but I am a benificiary 2.Juaine is out no tie in with our case.Attatched is a not so good pleading but I think there is an absolute tie.Now he should have shut up.E"Even if both of the qualifications was were I would turn down.20-30 depositions with doctors health care providers in California where Verla Regnery spent her last years.100% of that came from the defendants.He has no right to write that in his order without cross examing us.When the DuPage Judge reads what a Federal court wrote do you think it will help us.Judy's pleadings missed the boat they did not talk about money.However the Judge knew enough on the accounting and our allegations to freeze.Think about it who is it damaging? All we are saying is you have to ask the Judge.Still no.2006-2007-2008 $193,000 withdrawn or $640,000 per yearor $46,000 per month from a 88 sole benificiaries trust.Prior to my mothers incacity she lived on $8,000 per month.Nothing can come out of an incapacitarted person's trust except for their health and welfare.Maybe now he would be foced to freeze it or answer to the appellate court. So, Three months absence,refuse an independant trustee,not coment of the deposition or trust freeze,denied Juaines intervention without cause and the intentionally damaged the case with his comments about California.I understand I can go to the court and fill out a recusal form.The Judge will want to meet with you which would be a pleasure.He has heard all of their story from someone and he is in the same mind set as the defendants.He wants to make it as difficult as he can for me to avenge my mothers death at least in Chicago.I dont think there is any other was.Objecrt to every ruling for six months and spend two years in the appelate court.Why cant I break diversity with the William Blair and Letizia suit?.
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
This document you would tie everything in because it discusses the idea of supplemental jurisdiction and diversity jurisdiction. It also sets out some of the claims. I do not see how someone could read it and not see a common nucleus of operative fact. You can ask your lawyer to file motion to have this judge removed from the case. I think that might be your best option. Mistakes were made as to every ruling so far. Whether you break diversity and go forward with suits against Blair and Letizia, is up to you. The claims against them are worth pursuing. You need to make sure your lawyer is interested in pursuing them.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

Sometimes you need to tale a risk especially when you know you can back it up.This Judge has no idea that I know my sister sent him a letter.You know what he mudst do but he didnt.That is my lead in with theis he wont know how I found out but if he repremands me how about my sister.

 

Dear Judge Marovich, I felt it was appropiate to write to you since my sister Lynn Regnery did apparently without my attorney being notified. I did not have a good feeling after it took three months to hear from you. Your rulings I respectfully XXXXX XXXXX to.First the statement of six children fighting after their mothers money could not be further from the trust.There is very little left to fight over.In 1980 upon my fathers death, whom you may know from your banking days, his estate was valued at $2.5m. I took over a near bankrupt family business and in 1986 the majority forced a sale.My immediate family received $10.0m.I then bought with my money a $3.0m life insurance policy and made ,without obligation,my sisters equal beneficiaries. Atfter 10 marriages they needed someone to blame for their unhappiness and failures.Unfortunately it was someone who grew up with nothing and did not want a dime but she did, my mother.For the next 20 years she endured the worst duress and undue influence imaginable.Foolishly in 1979 to try and keep peace I allowed my sisters to become trustees but only for a short while then a bank.A short while and $13.0m of expenditures became 20 years and the death of my mother and when I say death I mean intentional and unjustifiable and I can prove it.Your court should be hearing that case but from what I have read our opposition has convinced you otherwise.I need no witnesses I have doctors and medical records.How many witnesses do the need to see my sister withhold my mothers life sustaining medications and replace them with opiates.My mother was not terminally ill as four hospital records will attest to.There is also a hospital record where my sister would not allow them to treat a non terminally ill patient. Needless to say you have been a good Judge for a long while.It suprised me when a senior Judge would pick up a family trust case in the federal court. In your years as a Judge or Judges you talk to have you every heard anything like this in a family trust issue.The parents are grantors of three three trusts their children are the beneficiaries.One parent dies.Over a five year period two of the three children through manipulation,forgery and fraud take control of all three trusts two while the mother is incapacitated.The needed partners and found them a lawyer and a broker. The son spent great amounts of his time in China.He was never notified of any change which could be construed as fraud in and by itself. He sunrises his sisters when the go against their word to the mother to put their mother in a nursing home.On 5/28/2007 I wrote a letter to my sister I was coming home to get my mother.An order of protection was planned,spitting out heart medications was their excuse and then Hospice with their opiates.Ask any physician you know if you withdraw someones heart medications and replace them with opiates without medical cause what they would think.In two words intentional death.Their plan worked and I stayed at a motel six paying lawyers to do nothing while my mother was suffering.She died by an overdose of morphine and Valium.I called 911 three times and three times they refused to dispatch an ambulance.My sister and a doctor told them not to.I had an autopsy scheduled but somehow the body disappeared went to a private pathologist was cremated but also the only meaningful test was toxicology test it was not given.Months before when my mother was hopeful of going home my sister broke into the house,emptied it and sold the contents.My mothers extended family was waiting for the funeral sometime in November of 2007 on a Wednesday.On the prior Monday my sisters and their family snuck into town and buried my mother not notifying anyone in the family. Your court has Jurisdiction over my sisters,my Aunts intervention is glued to our case but yet it gets dismissed.This case is about money,the money and the trusts are in Chicago and have been forever.Your court with the core of this case and everything I have read or have been told should take Jurisdiction over any issues surrounding my mother.Her money,abuse and death.I have talked to a few retired Judges for advise and they completely agree. To not remove my sisters as trustees is one thing and maybe the pleadings were not quite right.I could give you a letter and you would remove them the same day.Not freezing the trust in my opinion is almost illegal.18 years of no accounting,$2.5m taken from an incapacitated sole beneficiaries trust in three years.My mother lived including gifting on $100,000 per year.There is one hell of a lot of money my sisters owe back.. Two and one half years of my life has gone into seeking justice for my mother.Excuse my candor your honor but I don't believe you care about Justice you want to end this and make it as painless as you can for my sisters. I feel very strongly that you should recuse yourself from our case.I do not think you can look at it objectively.When a Judge comes into a new case and has already made up his or her mind it destroys the civil and unconditional rights we have as citizens.It is not due process. I cant speak for my sisters although I know but what this is all about to me is retribution for my mother.My mother died owing my $3.4m from the sale of the company in 1986.If money was my goal I would have pushed my mother to the wall and the trust I opened to deposit the money would have been mine.My mother had two open heart surgeries,she had two explosive daughters one is very dangerous.She did not want to totally lose her relationship with her daughters. I know who why and hope Judge Bucklo recused herself.This is why you have the case today.The scale has been tipped since the very beginning.When you are quoting out of the defendants pleadings as if the were your own words it is scary.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Ray , do you not think breaking diversity is an option.Is it a guarantee if hwe brought Letezia and Blair into the federal court.Dosent the federal court know what you are doing and say forget it sue Blair and Letiza in the state court.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

Did you read the pleading.This attorney did what he could.Do you think the Judge had grounds to dismiss it

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I read the pleading. It should not have been dismissed by the judge. You can add Blair and Letizia and create diversity. They are defendants. I do not see how the judge can object.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

Could you please take a look at this particuarlly the names and reasonms theis and anything else is a Chicago case

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

Could you please take a look at this particuarlly the names and reasonms theis and anything else is a Chicago case

 

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

 

 

 

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I have taken a look at this and the pleadings. You make all the right arguments. You would be damaged if the trust assets were not frozen. If they are not frozen, your sisters could spend the money. You as a beneficiary, would have less money. I do not understand why the judge does not see this point. Also, there is DuPage County venue and jurisdiction. All defendants knew the trust was created in Illinois. Your mother spent many years in Illinois. The defendants benefited from the estate and the trust, all of which where created through Illinois law and Illinois banks. Your sisters convinced your mother that their lawyer was her lawyer. This is fraud and breach of fiduciary duty. It happened in Illinois. Every fact quoted in the pleading we put together, stem out of your sister's scheme of development. The events needed to enact the scheme took place in Illinois. Thus, there is a common nucleus of operative fact. You are a named beneficiary. You are owed a fiduciary duty and any depletion in trust funds harms you. Thus, you have standing.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

I would like to give this to the judge

 

Ray,

 

You are the first to take the test.I think even out 79 year old Judge could understand

 

 

 

A legal question

 

An 88 year old Illinois resident is taken on a 7000 airline trip by her daughters.She has a stroke and serious dementia.

 

She is falsley imprisoned in North Carolina,abused and neglected and her trusts and money are stolen

 

She goes to California the same thing happens to her except one more step, her death

 

A law suit is filed against the guilty parties in Illinois.

 

The court took Jurisdiction as the non residents were trustees of an Illinois trust.

 

The deceased was ruled domiciled in Illinois at her death.

 

The son demands fair justice to avenge his mothers death and have returned all of the ill gotten money.

 

Where should Jurisdiction be for this whole case?

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Jurisdiction is in Illinois. Take this post to your lawyer.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Grounds for recusal

 

Three months before starting

 

Letter from my sister not circulated (at my interpleader they told me this is manditory if the judge received a letter to give it to both sides)

 

Rulings

 

New administerator or in the alternative a trust freeze and Mars deposition The administrator was turned down as we did not show cause,I dont know enough to comment on that

 

Apparently the freeze was also denied but they did not come out and say that.

 

The freeze did not disadvantage anyone.All the bills and taxes were paid and in Illinois the trustee can not use trust funds to defend themselves

 

This denial is another blatant showing of bias by the Judge. 2-1/2 years since the grantors death.No viable reason of no distribution.

 

One unprotected benificiary that I thought the court had some obligation to protect

 

This is on the edge

 

Mars deposition nothing.It is an insult to here we can start when discovery starts, we dont need the courts permission on that..I dont know how this was messed up.All that I heard from someone is talk to the magistrate.

 

Now it is Juaine all crimes against my mother including financial and all I heard was we did not show the reason for intervention.

 

Then the best (worst) even if Juaine qualified the Judge would turn her intervention down.

 

He says 20 or more depositions of doctors health care providers in California.Thay my mother went there to live out her life.no way.

 

 

None of this was in our pleadings but all of it is in the oppositions.with no cross examining us this Judge made a statement on the record that he has no basis for or to know if it is true.

 

When the next Judge reads these comments maybe he believes this Judge. I need a game plan.First my attorney may resign if I ask him to recuse.

 

Then I really am in a bind as I have lost the contingency.

 

Du Page Juaines suit is on file..What could be added? If we have Jurisdiction in a federal court does it apply to a state court? If many of our counts have not been plead can we plead them in Dupage.Or do we go through the agony of seeing this guys rulings every day and then appeal.Do you have to wait until a case is over.Or for instance the payout can that be appealed now?

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
The judge's rulings are wrong. You have standing and you have jurisdiction. The trust needs to be frozen and their needs to be an administrator. If not, the funds will be depleted and that constitutes harm to you. If you have jurisdiction in Illinois state court, you have jurisdiction in Illinois federal court and vice versa. You need to try and at least discuss with your lawyer, recusing the judge. Take Juanie's pleading and add fraud and breach of fiduciary duty from the one put together.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

2.5 years no distribution and continuation of depleation.I have no remidy./The federal court said no.I cant appeal one ruling I dont think. How about this writ of mandamus or mandamus

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
The best thing to do is appeal the ruling. Another option is if you file state court, try to bring these claims.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Although traditionally writs of mandamus are rare, they have been issued in a growing number of situations. They have been issued by federal courts when a trial judge refused to dismiss a case even though it lacked jurisdiction; refused to reassign a case despite a conflict of interest; stopped a trial for Arbitration or an administrative remedy; denied a party the opportunity to intervene, to file a cross-claim, or to amend a Pleading; denied a Class Action; denied or allowed the consolidation or severance of two trials; refused to permit depositions; or entered an order limiting or denying discovery of evidence

 

The Court also noted that mandamus is available only in exceptional cases because it is so disruptive of the judicial process, creating disorder and delay in the trial. The writ would have been appropriate, opined the Court, if the trial court had wrongly decided an issue, if failure to reverse that decision would irreparably injure a party, and if there was no other method for relief.

 

 

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
The writ of mandamus would be appropriate. However, you can still pursue an appeal. If your motion to appeal is denied, you can pursue mandamus. This is just an idea. Make sure your lawyer pursues the appeal. If he is not successful, make sure he pursues the mandamus.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
When do you appeal?
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
As soon as possible. I think you have 10 days to appeal a ruling on a motion and 30 days to appeal a verdict on a case. I do not recall the date of the ruling. If this deadline has passed, ask your lawyer to file mandamus.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

The orders were entered on 3/5.Is thjis malpractice?

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
It is malpractice if your lawyer knew you wanted to appeal and failed to file the appeal on time.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
I believe onSOL's it is the attorneys duty to keep the client informed.
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.

It is his duty to keep you informed. However, he could argue that it was not worth appealing. He could also argue that there were no plans to appeal. I still think the lawyer should have kept you informed or filed the appeal just in case .

Customer: replied 4 years ago.
A client does not know what a statute of limitation even is.The client may not know the law and without guidance and advise from him attorney may not have the slightest idea if an appeal makes sense unless his attorney says so.With the importance of these rulings I am told attorneys even fil\ing without a clients concent. Take me for an example if any lay person should know it should be me.Until you told me tonight I thouht you had to wait until the hearing was over.I sent emails apeal recuse many times in the past 10 days.I dont think he can not blame me at all for not knowing the law.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
The district court may extend the time for appeal not exceeding thirty days ...
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You are correct, the lawyer has to know and advise about deadlines and statutes of limitations. He should have filed without telling you. However, he may argue that the appeal was not meritorious. This argument would fail. I just wanted to show you your lawyer's arguments, so you would be ready. I get the impression that your lawyer is type to argue with a client. See if you can get an extension to file the appeal. Your lawyer will have to make a motion to the court for an extension. He will only need to ask for a few days. It should only take him a couple hours to draft and file a notice of appeal.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Ray cant find anything where you can appeal a speciific order before the trial is oner
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Ray I cant find anything where you can appeal a specific issue without waiting until the case is over
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
If the issue was part of a motion and the motion was denied, you can appeal the motion.It appears that this was the case in the order.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Ray, I have not talked to my attorney since the three rulings were handed down.Many emails and I will meet with him Thursday.At this point other than Mars I don't know what the point is and expense for discovery.This Judge is in someones back pocket and my mother is paying for it.I spoke with a childhood friend today who has some connections and will try to exploit them.I can not sit back and watch one person you cant even see as everything is done by a computer destroy what is right and make it wrong.He talks about children fighting over there parents money as someone told him it would upset me.Every ruling proves what he is going to do.to deny my mothers sister from intervening,after 2-1/2 years no accounting,payout or asset freeze.He says my trust has no standing .I am not sure of that however I think as a beneficiary of my trust I do have standing.I belief he wants to put all of the burden on my children If it has not been done 18 years of accounting needs to be filed.The 13 year accounting release needs to be modified to show breech of fiduciary by my sisters for leaving me out as a trustee(please confirm) this is the three person trust.I think after the Mars deposition we file for an emergency motion to replace my sisters as trustees.Everything should be emergency motions,appeals and macamendus and at the same time try to recuse him.Can you direct me to find how many trust cases this Judge has heard in the last 10 years.The federal court only hears a few a 79 year old senior Judge who rejects 2/3rds of the cases he sees now takes a family trust.This is a big question mark. The pleading you and I did should that be filed in the state court or amended in the federal course.or file a writ of mandamus The clerk today said during the trial or after the tl there is a 30 day appeal process.Does that sound right? Between tonight and tomorow I have to come up with a step by step game plan for the state and Federal court to give to my attorney and say unless you have a better idea this is the plan. Fred
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You are correct ,you have standing. There should be an independent trustee and a freeze on the trust account. Try to file the amended leading in federal court. If you lose the case at trial, you have 30 days to file an appeal. If you lose on a motion, you have 10 days from the date of the ruling on the motion. If you lose an appeal or miss the deadline to file an appeal, then file for a writ of mandamus. Since your pleading will have several claims, some may be dismissed by the federal judge. If they are, you may want to re-file the dismissed claims in state court. You can find the judges cases by going to the courthouse and looking through the files. Talk to your lawyer about this course of action.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Omn 3/5 I sent you three rulings on motions.Juaine,freeze,inependant trustee,Customer trust.We lost all.Are you sayoing theat because my attorney failed to appreal those by 3/10 we have lost our right?If so how do we get abuse, financial explotation,independant trustee and fereezing the trust back?
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You could still try mandamus. You could also petition the court for an extension of time to file an appeal. You could also use these rulings on the motions as a basis for appealing the case as a whole, after trial. Another option is to re-file these claims in state court. Discuss these options with your lawyer.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

I dont know what happens to my posts.Are you sure about 10 days?

1987 irrevocable trust.Fraud to remove uncle forgery to create ner trusrtee,notary of a known forger.

Language

 

A trustee can deal directly with the grantor to receive gifts or bequests or additional property as set forth an obligation to sell a life insurance policy $3.4m contributed by me back to me upon the direction of a person having such power.This was a year before my mothers death.Removing the brother removed my mothers ability to by back the policy as her brother was gone.I view this as an revocable/irrevocable trust and until the day the grantor dies the beniificiaries are nothing as they can be changed.Take a recovable trust,three children uncle trustee,children afraid,force by fraud uncle to resign there by removing the mothers ability to make changes.I think my sisters not only committed, fraud,forgery,embezzlement.Now my mother died and they can say well were were getting this 2/3rds anyway.Not necessarily if you mothjer bought back the policy that you blocked by removing her brother.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You can double check with your lawyer, but the last time I checked you had to file within 10 days if you are appealing a motion. You are correct about the trust.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

You replied

Wed, Mar 24, 2010 12:00 AM EST

I dont know what happens to my posts.Are you sure about 10 days?

1987 irrevocable trust.Fraud to remove uncle forgery to create ner trusrtee,notary of a known forger.

Language

 

A trustee can deal directly with the grantor to receive gifts or bequests or additional property as set forth an obligation to sell a life insurance policy $3.4m contributed by me back to me upon the direction of a person having such power.This was a year before my mothers death.Removing the brother removed my mothers ability to by back the policy as her brother was gone.I view this as an revocable/irrevocable trust and until the day the grantor dies the beniificiaries are nothing as they can be changed.Take a recovable trust,three children uncle trustee,children afraid,force by fraud uncle to resign there by removing the mothers ability to make changes.I think my sisters not only committed, fraud,forgery,embezzlement.Now my mother died and they can say well were were getting this 2/3rds anyway.Not necessarily if you mothjer bought back the policy that you blocked by removing her brother.

 

Ray,

My attorneys secretary seems to think he will do a recusal if I want.I would like to give him a list.I wll put down what I think I know. of priorities and which court or courts to file in

 

1.Recusal

 

2.Appeal 3/5 rulings or if the refuse Mandamus

 

3.amend pleadings for 13 years an attornery told me some time ago my sisters breached their fiducuiary to me.Can you explain.I was in China and did not find out for 7 years same with 2003 trust

 

4.Amended pleadings for trust file them where? If our trust case was sent to the Federal court where is the fine line of filing anything else in Dupage.?

 

5.Appeal everything in the federal court at the time the ruling is made

 

6.Freeze,payout,administer appeal or mandamus

 

7.I think we should try and force the Judge to clarify his statement about Californis my mother and 20 depositions.That was for one reason DuPage will read that and think it is true.I dont believe a Judge can make ruling soley bases on one sides pleadings.

 

8.I am sure there are more. Maybe since there is only a few we could take a crack at actually coming up with the basis of the recusal and the language.Can you use mandamus to recuse a Judge.That shouls be an easy decision it does not predjuice either side

 

 

 

 

 

 

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Carry out all of these plans. Double with your lawyer about the 10 days. You usually have 10 days to appeal a motion and 30 days to appeal a trial verdict. Either way, appeal or file a writ of mandamus. File a motion to recuse the judge. File the amended pleading in federal court.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

I have called the federal court three times last time I spoke with the Judges deputy.All say 30 days on a motion appeal.When I said are you sure she said to convince yourself go to rules of civil procedure.If right that is great news.

 

I must turn the heat up on this attorney since April nothing has happened except a Judge that was ruling with us all the recused herself because they officed together.

 

We ask for a freeze and an administer but only talk about Mars and accounting no money,lawyers visa cards $1.0m in 15 months.Stupid.The problem I forsee is the Judge has law clerks he know dam well he will be appealed so everty pleading this associate turns in will be scrutinized so that exchange could hurt us in the appeal process.

 

I dont think this is coming through for some reason

 

You replied

Wed, Mar 24, 2010 12:00 AM EST

I dont know what happens to my posts.Are you sure about 10 days?

1987 irrevocable trust.Fraud to remove uncle forgery to create ner trusrtee,notary of a known forger.

Language

 

A trustee can deal directly with the grantor to receive gifts or bequests or additional property as set forth an obligation to sell a life insurance policy $3.4m contributed by me back to me upon the direction of a person having such power.This was a year before my mothers death.Removing the brother removed my mothers ability to by back the policy as her brother was gone.I view this as an revocable/irrevocable trust and until the day the grantor dies the beniificiaries are nothing as they can be changed.Take a recovable trust,three children uncle trustee,children afraid,force by fraud uncle to resign there by removing the mothers ability to make changes.I think my sisters not only committed, fraud,forgery,embezzlement.Now my mother died and they can say well were were getting this 2/3rds anyway.Not necessarily if you mothjer bought back the policy that you blocked by removing her brother

 

 

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I am sorry for the misunderstanding. I have done some research and in federal court it is 30 days. Pursue this appeal and file a motion to recuse the judge. If you lose at trial, the whole case can and will be appealed due to the incorrect rulings on the administrator and the freeze. Tell this to the lawyer and the judge. Hopefully, this will get the somebody to take action.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

If we lose on appeal cant we use the writ of mandamas.How do we take advantage of DuPage.You could make a compelling argument that from the time my mother became incapacitated it should be included along with the slayer statute.I have posted three times the 1987 trust is it not coming through.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You could try mandamus if you lost the appeal. You could file the slayer statute and the 1987 trust in DuPage. You are correct about the argument about including everything from the time your mother became incapacitated along with these claims.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

So we have jurisdiction with my sisters only on two trusts.So in the state court we would have to argue it again? Since most of the money cane from the two trusts would that not allow us to keep jurisdiction?They will fight and scream agout Juaines and the slayer statute so wouldnt we have a prove a different Jurisdiction?

 

I just sent this to the lawyer

 

Dear XXXXX and Julie,


This will be the Judges downfall.We have enough evidence now to prove incapacity.The Mars report and 10 witnesses.How many cases of incapacity only have witnesses.

The Judge knows this and has the Mars report.The Judge knows how long it takes to settle a trust case and disburse the funds.This was the motive of the 2006 trust change.

The Judge knows my mother died on 11/2/2007,taxes,lawyers,all expenses there cant be any more.No one is injured from a freeze or new trustee.He could not come up with one single viable excuse regarding his ruling.Not one.Then to tell a benificiary when his money is sitting there that there are other remedies for him to get paid.That is absurd he is off the case.He has the case now and it might as well be Peter Flaxman calling the shots.

Law on attorney fees for trustees is the appellate court ruling.Why cant we introduce that into evidence.If he lets them continue he just get deeper into trouble.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I think you will have jurisdiction in state court. I do not think you will have to argue this issue. All of the relevant events happened in Illinois. The fact that the money came from trusts created in Illinois would help give jurisdiction. The letter looks good.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
If we add William Blair and Letezia in the federal court case dont we break diversity and go to a state court
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You would break diversity. Yo You can bring all the other claims against the other defendants, in federal court and then sue Blair and Letizia in state court. If you fee feel the state court judges are going to better to you, add them and file the whole thing in state court.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
I am not sure I understand. There are now three states and two defendants.To break diversity wouldnt we have to sue Blair and Letizia in the federal court and then everything goes to the stsate court?
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You would have to sue all the Illinois defendants in state court. Since you are an Illinois resident, the out of state defendants would be sued in federal court based on diversity.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Ray, Today was not so good.They said we dont have a basis to recuse the Judge.They said the administrator and asset freeze are non apealable.We have to rule 16 before we can start discovery.I dont think the want to use the federal court for abuse and explotation the want to go to the state court.This gut and his gild seem to want to be straight trust and seem positive about it.Accounting and breach of fiduciary.Letizia and Blair they say will be sued I have heard that for months.I guess we will fight their four inches of dismissal of out three counts in the state court.The slayer statute could be part of it or take it to California.They believe working with the magistrate bring in hard evidence the Judge will see.I dont think the feel he is crooked he just happened at random to get this case.I dont buy it. I have to figure out a way after 248 months everything paid how I can freeze before they spend what is left which the Judge just opened the door fore.If the trust estate is satisfied monitarily,Illinois does not allow trustees trust funds to defend themself I dont get it.Dont I have any way to protect my assets. Fred
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.

I still think you need to try and recuse the judge. Try to talk anyone who has any information about him. The idea is to show his bias against you. If you can prove bias, you ca get him recused. You are a fiduciary as a beneficiary. This gives you standing. It also can be used to get the assets returned. In the pleading we drafted, you need to ask the court for a return of all trust assets used by the defendants for legal fees. You need to get your lawyer to file a motion to get an injunction to prohibit the defendants from accessing the trust until the trial is over. The motion should also ask for accounting of how much of the trust has spent on your sisters' legal fees. You need to bring abuse and exploitation claims.

RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Ray I forgot if my sisters wth the 206 trust are cinvicted if fraudulant concealment what is there penalty from 11/2/2007
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
They could pay a fine or go to jail.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

I am getting close to forgetting the federal court.You can not fight a corrupt Judge on the opponents side.

 

He wont even ppoint an independant trustee or freeze the assets.I an not going to sit back and watchm my sisters steal my money

 

So I have come up with an idea.Every attorney said to a man there is no way around the Judges ruling

 

 

How about this $3.4m by forgery and fraud 2006 trust froged concealenment $420,000 five forgeries.Lets say all three of us received the same amount.You saw the interpleader I did not release them

 

How can two people who say the are trustees stay in that position if the have committed fraud and forgery even if we all received an exact amount.Isnt the Judge forgced to replace them.I have the documents all I need is my brother in law.My attorneys never talk about the insurance trust or the forgery

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
If forgetting federal court will get this resolved more efficiently, then forget federal court. You are right, they have to get rid of trustees who commit fraud or forgery. They also breached their fiduciary duty and engaged in self-dealing. They should be removed immediately. Hopefully, the state court judge will realize these things.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray Getting rid of the federal court is not so east the will be accounting and breach of duty.What is we withdraw our action in the federal court?

Back to the insurance trust fraud by taking it from my uncle.Fogery of husbands name false notary and $420,000 with five forgeries.We can prove.Isnt a federal Judge forced to remove them? We did have the interpleader and I released the innocent party but not my sisters.and the money was split three ways but I did not sign a waiver.With a trust you have three years to sue.We have two admissions to my brother in law and an email from Wallerich.Am I over selling this?To me it seems automatic even if the can show I received the exact amount as I did.Could it be done on an emergency basis?

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You can withdraw form federal court and still bring the accounting and the breach of fiduciary duty claims in state court. The federal judge should have removed them as trustees because of the forgery. However, judges do not always do what they are supposed to do. This could be grounds for appealing the case as a whole, if you lose. The best thing to do, is to take up this matter in state court. You can file a motion there, that asks to remove them. I do not see any other options.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
No one brought the forgery and fraud up.We have never seen the Judge just electronic mail do we amend our complaint to add the insurance fraud,do we ask for an emergency motion as the judge turned down the freeze and I am extremley worried.If we take them to the state court cant they through diversity take us back to the federal court?We do have the abuse pending there and so far they have not questioned jurisdiction
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Amend the complaint to include insurance fraud, forgery, and other other things that were not brought up earlier. If they have not questioned jurisdiction, then will not later. It is too late bring it up know, as this is something to bring up when you first answer the plaintiff's initial complaint.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

You know there is nothing in our current complaint regarding the insurance trust. So you are saying remove the case from the federal court amend with everything including the slayer statute but based on diversity and where the case is now cant they take it back to the federal court.Also on the abuse and explotation they are making a huge deal including supreme court rulings that our suit has to be thrown out as it took 18 weeks to serve.I am sure the two sherriffs had a lot to do with it.

 

In the worst case cant we amend the insuirance fraud into the federal court pleadings to get rid of my sisters as trustees?Judicial econonies.One case in the federal court and one with the same plaintiff and defendants in the state court.My sisters and the Judge must go.Otherwise my 1/3rd will be gone and my attorney does not seem to concerned about it.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Ray,We first filed our case in the state court and the opposition moved it to the federal court based on diversity.Which court has pendant jurisdiction?
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You can amend the current pleadings and keep the case in federal court. You can then file the slayer statute and abuse claims in state court. Both state and federal court have jurisdiction if the case is in federal court based on diversity. The other side can have the case removed to the federal court if it is in state court or from state court to federal court. However, if their lawyer feels comfortable in that particular court, they will not try to remove it. Changing from state to federal court, is always a strategic tactic.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Amend to our revision?Even though the federal court denied our intervener motion the opposition can still move it back there if the state court takes the case.

 

The insurance trust was settled and signed in 10/2008.I released the trustee and the money.I did not release my sisters or letezia.Since it is not in our current pleadings we would have to get permission to amend in? The forgery we found out about after the signing.This Judge is in their back pocket could he nort deny our amendment?The trrust also had a buyback provision which had to be activated by the trustee when the grantor requested it.I just look at it as one grantor three trusts FLR becomes VKR at my mothers death.Insurance polict forgery and fraud.Even thought it is settled I do not think the Judge can ignore it because it is forgery and fraud to take $3.4m if I dont convince prudential maybe my 1/3rd is gone

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
The best option would be to amend the revision. The opposition could remove the case as a whole from state to federal court. However, they may decide not to take this option. Yo You can get permission to amend. The judge could deny permission.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

I am not sure about this.Is amending the revision mean the trust case or the abuse case in the state court.So the Judge could denyour motion to amend our original filing?

 

The forgery.I have been told you must have found out after filing.If so after the interpleader I wanted everyone to thin I knew Wallerich's signature was forged but had no proof.The attorney my sister and others.We filed 1/2009 probably seven months later eddie finally got wallerich to put it in writing.That is the first time there was proof.Would that be considered by the court as a reason for not having this in the complaint and allow us to amend?It was all my mothers money.The insurance she could have bought back.So the fact we settled a trust that at this time is not in our pleadings should not matter???? $the $420,000 with four forgeries was money out of the insurance trust.Could the Judge possibly ignore these and simply say the case is closed? In a trust case which this is you have three years to sue unless you sign a release.I just want to make sure because of all the emails that Wallerich's was a forged signature mean nothing until I could prove it which was recently.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.

Amending does mean adding these trust and abuse cases in state court. A judge has the power to deny the motion to amend, but they usually allow parties to amend. You can still add the forgery because you really did not have proof until later. The judge could say you cannot bring it. However, he would be wrong. You have the right to bring it due to reasons of proof.

RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Should I ask my attorney to try and amend the insurance trust with the trust case.?

 

I keep seeing these legacy trust assertions by the oppositions.The purpose is that would ties us to the probate rules of six months which we missed by one week.Under 755ILCS-(a) and (f) are the sections that fall under probate a testimentasre trust and a legacy.

 

My mother had a living trust with three benificiaries that is it.She bought two houses in 2003 and to get her sister to move there she said it would be rent free for the rest of her life.This is at least four times I have seen these in his documents.Previously I was told

dont worry it is not a legact trust.

 

We are really only contesting the trustees not the trust so I do not think the qualifys as a trust contest.If the charge is fradulant concealment would that not change things.But legacy or not is the monst important for now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The court no one knows how serious this is with the Judge and I knew it from the beginning.When I saw his first ruling that was it.Now we cant get rid of him.He lets them use trust funds and gives them the rulings.Isnt there a way to write pleading anticipating a negative ruling and leave the door open for an appeal.

 

How long should it take to start discovery

The Judges ruling was 3/5 and discovery was tro be set up.We still dont have a date.

.

 

Is there any way to find out if there is any possible way my mothers trust could be considered a legacy.

 

 

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I think you could try and argue your mother's trust is a legacy. If you can show it did not go to your generation, but the next one. If you can prove that this house or the trust proceeds were used or intended for the use of your kids or your sisters' kids, you can say ti is a legacy. Get your lawyer to try and amend the insurance trust with the trust case. It should not take this long to get discovery started. Ask your lawyer what is going on the other side. You have a lot of people to depose. They should at least get started.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

all of the assets go to the three of us when my aunt and uncle die the proceeds of the house go to us.Of course there is per sterpes which would give my children my share should I die but their is nothing that says this goes to my grandchildren.I think even if money goes on to the grandchildren it still does not qualify..I think it has to perpetuatre for a long whi;le.Everything I have read say they are Rockafeller generation skipping trust.I really dont think they are meant to transfer wealth from generation to generation they are something used to carry on the name and tradition of the grantor.Our insurance and my fathers trust left money to the nexx generation but I have never heard them called a legact trust just an irrevocable trust.Just to easre my mind a little I have the will and the trust here.They say a declaration of trust to which a legact is providedin the settlors will.

 

If you wouldnt mind legacy is provided in the settlors will.Page 35 of the trust talks about the defition of the liniage but no money.Juaine is in the beginning

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?xtzztjvtj2w http://www.mediafire.com/?zlyz2mnrnmj

 

 

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
The will talks about a legatee. This means someone is to inherit or is an heir. I do not think this is a legacy. However, the trust document spells out duties of trustees. The defendants have breached these duties.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

LEGATEE

Also known as a beneficiary. Person named in a will to receive property. A legatee is a person to whom a legacy is given by a last will and testament

 

The will was my sisters and I as benificiaries and Juaine could live in the house.The Mars deposition has had these people crazy for months.Anyhing they can do the do to get around it.I dont think legacy will fly.If you see anything in the will to the contrary please let me know.

 

Here are just a few things my sisters did to violate the trust.Accounting of course,money spent while grantor is incapacitated,no written consent for them to withdraw principal,distribution after death.

 

All of there are clear cut as it the 13 year release,Mars,insurance trust and 13 million in 18 years and the death of my mother.Unfortunatly our firsr Judge was fair.She saw right through what they had done.Then the new Judge no one met 3 monhs before he started then bias rulings.If I cant get away from him I am afraid a lot of time and effort might be wasted.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You are correct in your definition of legatee and in your assessment of your sisters' liability. This was not a legacy. You need to find a way to get this judge off your case. Talk to your lawyer about getting him recused. Also, ask him about getting the case changed to another county due to the bias of the judges in this one. Such a change is not always allowed, but it is worth exploring.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

So for sure it is not a legacy trust? The proplem is my sisters moved from Chicago in 1965 however in your circle as you know all you need to know is one.I know who he is and have done a lot of work for me that was profitable.So this guy Scott Hodes to 73 has been a lawyer in Chicago ever since.He may not know the judge but he knows someone who finally does.

 

All this guy has to say this is tradjic what has happened to this family,the son has crazy thoughts that they killed his mother and will drag them through the court system until they are broke.So the Judge wants to destroy my case all cases.I am thinking of sitting in the rear of his court room and maybe at the end he may ask what I want.We live in America where people are supposed to have equal rights and opportunity.One 79 year old Judge is in a position to ruin my case and there is not one thing I can do about it.

 

How about this.Interpleader.It was a set up to push things through.My attorney would not return my call.Because the Judge had boken the rules I sent him a letter.I received a phone call,fax and ltter that per the court rules that letter must be sharred with both sides Maybe three weeks ago I called one of the general clerk to see if there was anything scheduled for Judge Markowitz and us.She said no just a letter from Lynn Regnery.We never got a copy.Unless the Judge wants to give it up or my sisters I am stuck.

 

What would happen if we withdrew our case without predjuice

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I am sure it is not a legacy. If you withdrew your case, you could have problems re-filing due to statute of limitations. In situations such as this one, it is better to transfer from state to federal or federal to state court. You could try an interpleader.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

An action to set aside or contest the validity of a inter vivos trust agreement or declaration of trust to which a legacy is provided in the settlors will which is admitted to probate will have a six month contest clause.

 

In the will Juaines use of my mothers house is not even mentioned just in the trust.The statute says provided in the settlors trust.

 

I have read the will several times which is where the statute says it must be provided for "Legacy provided in settlors will" There must be something there that they plan to use to say ours is a legacy trust but I cant find it

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I reviewed the will and the trust. I do not see anything that would allow them to win on this argument.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

have good news and bad news.The slayer statute the death must be in Illinois.So I went to zCalifornis and was amazed at what constitutes their equivelant of our slayer statutes.However theire is by clear and convincing evidence.I cant find the SOL would you please try.If it is passed what we can do to extend it.Concealment of the Mars report,telling me it was the caregiving hospice without medication,telling my mother she was taking her heart medications when in fact they were opiates

 

I also have to prove each claim which should not be hard.Attorneys should be easier to come by and it would be in the Federal court.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Socrateaser,

I have only looked at Illinois law on the slayer statute.Now I must go to the state where my mother died.Please look at Californiasws perameters for disinheritance.

 

 

\

As an alternitive.Instead on intentional and justifiable death for disinheritance it is in blue below.I also happen to know the best in the west Schwartz and Schwartz.He probably wont talk to Scott or I as we didnt call him back.San Francisco is not a bad city.


I never looked at this before as I always thought itcould be heard in Illinois.I believe the slayer statute has to be tried where the death occurred.If so look at this and trying it in the San Francisco court.If there is a statute problem we can come up with many ways to extend it.e could get thebest cardiologist in San Francisco.This truely would be easy to prove,

California Probate Code § 259. Predeceasing a decedent
(a) Any person shall be deemed to have predeceased a decedent to the extent provided in subdivision (c) where all of the following apply:
It has been proven by clear and convincing evidence that the person is liable for physical abuse, neglect, or fiduciary abuse of the decedent, who was an elder or dependent adult.

 

(2) The person is found to have acted in bad faith.

(3) The person has been found to have been reckless, oppressive, fraudulent, or malicious in the commission of any of these acts upon the decedent.

(4) The decedent, at the time those acts occurred and thereafter until the time of his or her death, has been found to have been substantially unable to manage his or her financial resources or to resist fraud or undue influence.
(b) Any person shall be deemed to have predeceased a decedent to the extent provided in subdivision (c) if that person has been convicted of a violation of Section 236 of the Penal Code or any offense described in Section 368 of the Penal Code.

(c) Any person found liable under subdivision (a) or convicted under subdivision (b) shall not (1) receive any property, damages, or costs that are awarded to the decedent's estate in an action described in subdivision (a) or (b), whether that person's entitlement is under a will, a trust, or the laws of intestacy; or (2) serve as a fiduciary as defined in Section 39, if the instrument nominating or appointing that person was executed during the period when the decedent was substantially unable to manage his or her financial resources or resist fraud or undue influence. This section shall not apply to a decedent who, at any time following the act or acts described in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), or the act or acts described in subdivision (b), was substantially able to manage his or her financial resources and to resist fraud or undue influence within the meaning of subdivision (b) of Section 1801 of the Probate Code and subdivision (b) of Section 39 of the Civil Code.

(d) * * *

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.

There is no statute of limitations for the Illinois slayer statute claim. You can file it at your convenience. I found something on California disinheritance clauses. For more information, go on http://www.californiaestatelawyerblog.com/wills/disinheritance/e. Under this law, your sisters cannot inherit. However, this may have to be argued in a California court.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray probate code 259 they can not inherrit and all of the acts will be easy yto prove excewpt at a higher level.My mothers two year aniversity was 11/2/2009

 

That is my biggest concern

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You may be able to get permission to file late based on the fact that it has taken time to investigate the facts.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Ray ,The site you gaave me I could not find any abuse or wrongful death.The primary doctor has not turned over his records or certain papers.Isnt there enough with everything that went on ,all the lies cthe house she was never suooosed to have lived in the orders at the hospital that did not surface for seven months.But as a whole how do you think it matches up against the slayer statute
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You have the facts to prove this claim. Just bring in all the facts about hospice, the plane trip, and the abuse. They match up with the claim.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
I understand it will be easy but if I cant get around the statute of limitations I am no where.Do I call a California attorney> Is there one on JA I could make a random list of everything I know and let an attorney look at it.I guess however you dont know until the judge rules
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You will need a local lawyer. I do know of anyone, you will have to contact the local bar.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

How about this.We asked many many times but the first time we were given a balance in the trust was May of 2009.Explotation was a big part of our suit but they would not reveal wwhat was in the trust.Is that grounds for aan extention of the POA.The ER report from the hospital showing Gretchen telling them not to treat here was June 2008,Hospice the same way.The had a lock on the documents.Stealing my mohers body no toxicology test even my restraining order was fraud.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
This is a good argument.Give it a try.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Hi Ray,

It has been some time.I have been doing nothing byt tax issues and I have been working with one person on taes.Last week the filed a motion that no one has standing to get accounting.

 

I will be back

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You need to fight this motion. You have standing.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

30 days began 3/5 for appeal of theCustomertrust.I think the court made a mistake in that there are many instances where it is not an individual who sues.

So yuou think like me.F W R egnery trust was dead untill my mother died now it controls 1/3,because I am the sole benificiary ofCustomerI have standing for anything.How could the opposition be so stupid to not see this and spend all of the time and effort for nothing.Nothing is fool proof but is there some person that would be able to verify this?

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
This is just a delay tactic on the part of the opposition. The only person who could verify that you have standing is a trust lawyer.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
This brings up one other point.If my trust cant sue and from 203-datemy children and I had no standingHow do we sue,From 1989-2003 I was the actual trustee.Have I preserved those right to sue for those years as myself
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
As long as you are a named plaintiff in the lawsuit, you have preserved that right to sue.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

One month ago it was non stop as they were trying to dismiss the suit because we werre not income benificiaries during my mothers life.

 

Then a JA supreme cour runing contingent remainderment benificiaries can sue during the grantors lifetime so they had standing.From 2003-now who had standing in our case?

 

 

 

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You and all beneficiaries have standing.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
I am the only one my children are trustees so they have no standing does that mean absolutly positivey I must be a plaintiff.Do I have to be a benificiary in the lawsuit to have standing or just a benificiary.
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You have to be in this lawsuit. All you need is to be a beneficiary to have standing.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
I do or do not have to be in it
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I am sorry or the misunderstanding. You have to be in it.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Hi Ray Thanks but a problem

 

We had 28 days from 3/5 to amend the plaintiffs.It is now my three children.I just called the attorneys office and he is gone and anyone else that could do it/Today is the 28th. day so I dont go in.Can this be added next week?

 

Fred

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
Try to add it today. If you add it next week, you will need permission from the court.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

If a trust does not have stranding to sue or demand an accounting then their has to be someone behind them that does has standing.A trust is a piece of paper it dosent make decisions

 

If the trust and trustee act says annual accounting to the benificiary then my mother was to get it.

 

After her death the benificiaries have a right to review all of the accountings as well as ones that have not been completed.The purpose of a trust is to protect.Protect the owner not the peopletrying to take it.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You are correct. Beneficiaries have standing and can ask for an accounting. Anyone who has a claim to trust assets has standing to case or an accounting. You can use the lack of accounting as part of a breach of fiduciary duty claim and you can use the lack of accounting to remove a trustee who refuses to give an accounting.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

For four months in March 2003 I was in China.My sisters drafted the 2003 trust and created on their own the F.W.R Regnery trust. I found out in May 2008.Their partner Letizia probably told them it would make it more difficult to sue.

 

For 18 years two people desperately hung onto control of the trust by controlling their mother against her own son and common sense.Your duress and undue influence on every claim was right on.

 

My estimate ifs those desperate people spent about $13.0M during the 18 years swearing they never took a dime.

 

It is a shame that I did not stick to my conviction one case 1980-2007

 

Not one attorney would do it all said we will amend in later.

 

I am thinking now that slayer statute cant be tried here as my mother did not die here.I may be wrong but I may have to go the federal court of San Francisco.

 

Back to the trust back to three children and two spending $13.0M without a receipt.Someone told me we are a court of equity.If so all of the fluff these people are coming up with on accounting and standing to sue a judge will cut through all of these and say this is right this is fair.I don't know if courts work that way but somehow if it is a fair and honest Judge he can craft the case to get where he wants to go.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
A court of equity will give an accounting if you win. That is fine. However, you want a trial court that will give you monetary damages. You have jurisdiction in Illinois, for the slayer statute claim. File in the court that will have a judge who is more favorable to you. Also, Illinois' slayer statute is broader in wording. This means you have a better chance of winning.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
One more good note.The attorney read through all of the documents relating to the $3.4M insurance fraud.He believes we can prove my sisters removed my nuncle to control the buy back.The buy back nmeant there were no benificiaries until the day she died.That money incapacitated or not was heres until the day she died.The settlement and money coming out make it a little harder but you have three years to sue after distribution of the trust.They committed fraud,forgery,elder abuse and this had more to do with my mothers death than any single act.Isnt a trial court and court of equity the same thing.If you say I have jurisdiction I woill start the suit tomorrow.What type of attorney would I want.
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.

Courts of equity are for those seeking equitable relief such as orders to compel someone to do something or an injunction. Trail courts are for those seeking monetary damages as well. You will need someone who practices elder law or personal injury law, for the slayer statute.

RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

If this is too much let me know

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?tiym2w2k2nw

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.

I could not access this document. Try to send it as a Word file or just cut and paste it into your next post.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.
I just pasted it on the long narrow center browser and it wotrked.The problem is it is adobe.I think it will work for you now
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
If three people are to get 1/3rd and one of those people has no idea what his 1/3rd is the Judge is not going to say tough luck.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

The federal court would not let us intervene.We are back in the state court.The opposition is using late service,the case has already been tried in California and foolishly it is a legacy trust.This is false imprisonment,abuse and neglect and financial explotation.

 

All last night I worked on financial abuse,$3.4 insurance policy,money spent over and above my mother needs.This could be a claim by me against my sisters.Any money they spent of my mothers during that time that was nto just for her is financial abuse.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You are correct your arguments. If a person does not know what they are owed, they will not be able to prove anything before a judge. As a result, they will lose. I still could not access your document. Try to have the site e-mail it to me, if possible.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray, This came in this morning.

 

 

The FWR trust must sue in the name of the trustee, because if the trust is beneficiary, then the trustee is the representative of that beneficial interest -- not the beneficiary of the FWR trust.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I reviewed the document you posted earlier. They argue that you are owed no duty and that why you have no standing. They say this is because the trust was not to benefit you and you were not a beneficiary. Sue in the name of the trustee. If you can prove you were to benefit in any way from the trust, you personally have standing.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

My 1/3rd goes into the Regnert trust which then is irrevocable.I am the income benificiary.From 2003-my mothers death my sisters convinced her to give out many large gifts.I was a benifactor of 1/3rd.The trust was me plain and simple.It just gave tax and creditior protection.It had the same powers as I did but had nothing until my mother died and it was funded

 

So you think mthe trustee angle will work.Did you see any thing else in their document of concern

Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Also my trust benifited the same as Lynn and Gretchen did as individual benificiaries
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I do not see anything else of concern. You need to make your argument that you are an income beneficiary.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
My sisters got away with A for 18 years. So they breached their duty.The trust document calls for an annual accounting. (a) Every trustee at least annually shall furnish to the beneficiaries then entitled to receive or receiving the income from the trust estate, or if none, then those beneficiaries eligible to have the benefit of the income from the trust estate a current account showing the receipts, disbursements and inventory of the trust estate. A current account shall be binding on the beneficiaries receiving the account and on such beneficiaries' heirs and assigns unless an action against the trustee is instituted by the beneficiary or such beneficiary's heirs and assigns within 3 years from the date the current account is furnished.

This is what they are fighting over now.I suddenly woke up and said this is the law like it or not.Standing,falling, trust or individual, benificiary it does not matter.They dont have a choice either does the court.You have a son and his three children and 1/3rd of the trust and someone thinks they can wind their around a this obligation.

Lets say I died with no children just a wife.She would have the right to go back as the family estate was closing and even if she was not a trustee or benifiiary just my wife that I left my assets to.If accounting wasnt done 20 years earlier and we were not married she would have the right to request for past accountings.

What you read last night my attorneys should take B paste it on their copy and send it back to my sisters attorneys.

They signed a document 18 years ago which is a legal contract.How can they or the court let them out of it.
(b) Every trustee shall on termination of the trust furnish to the beneficiaries then entitled to distribution of the trust estate a final account for the period from the date of the last current account to the date of distribution showing the inventory of the trust estate, the receipts, disbursements and distributions and shall make available to such beneficiaries copies of prior accounts not theretofore furnished. Such final accounting shall be binding on the beneficiaries receiving the same and all persons claiming by or through them, unless an action against the trustee is instituted by the beneficiary or person claiming by or through him or her within 3 years from the date the final account is furnished.
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You make two correct arguments. Show these quotes to your lawyer. This proves breach of fiduciary duty and standing.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ray,

My children and I are the only people involved with my trust.Why cant I dissolve it?Would that change the picture or would the just use my mothers date of Death

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I think you could dissolve it, if it states that the beneficiaries can dissolve it. I do not think it will change the statute of limitations.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

modify,revoke,amend

 

revoke terminate.

 

I have very broad powers.I am sure while my mother was alive she would have been the onlt one who could have changed it.

 

So this after noon I revoke and terminate does that mean anything.and could I do it in the middle of a lawsuit

 

This was done by fraud in May of 2003 I was in China for four months.I never knew this was drafter and the first I knew of it was May of 2008.My mother would not have done this if they were honest with her.She would have waited until she came home.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.

Since the document contains these words, you had the power to dissolve it. This all strengthens the fraud claim.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

No What I need to know is could I terminate it todat become the sole trustee of the VKR trust and settle all of the issues.I dont know if they will allow me o unmind and get back to a benificiary.

 

But lets say I had revoked the day my mother died and sued my sisters.Would I have standing.I still am entitled to 1/3rd of the trust.Could you petition the court.2003-2008 that is a long time to not know you are no longer a benificiary and a forgiveness clause had been added.

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
I think this can be done. You would still have standing if you revoked. Tell your lawyer this is what you want to do.
RJ, Professor
Satisfied Customers: 3070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
RJ and 8 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Hey Rich,

Four plaintiffs none with standing.So they say I did not know it did not make sense but I did not hear anything coming from my attorney.Then JA and I think the problem is solved.My trust could not sue and that created the problem.

Then the solution is very simple, amend the petition so that the plaintiffs are suing not only in their individual capacities but also as trustee of the Regnery Trust -- very simple. And the court has already established that it would have jurisdiction beyond that point -- because a representative of a trust can sue on its behalf and all of the parties in the case are diverse (satisfying the court's diversity of citizenship jurisdictional requirements).

So the guy from the state court called today and he needs help.My attorney said he would help him I will see.Surprisingly the California people did not challenge jurisdiction so it is too late now.

How do I do this?The abuse case and slayer statute need to b e developed.Do they get tried together?Do I try to take any claims that you and I developed to put with them.There is only one hurdle to get over in the slayer statute.That is an attorney that can convince a Jury that a person 88 years old has the same right to life as any one else.The only defense is that my mother was dying and they were trying to keep her as comfortable as possible.

I have too much evidence and the timing kills them.Did my mother suddenly become terminally ill when my sister received my email.After 15 years of heart medications my mother spit them out but then swallowed morphine haldol and Valium.All of that took place within 48 hours of my email including Hospice,


I assume based upon my mothers age I will have to pay by the hour.Is there any way to estimate what the cost could be or a range?



.


Then the solution is very simple, amend the petition so that the plaintiffs are suing not only in their individual capacities but also as trustee of the Regnery Trust -- very simple. And the court has already established that it would have jurisdiction beyond that point -- because a representative of a trust can sue on its behalf and all of the parties in the case are diverse (satisfying the court's diversity of citizenship jurisdictional requirements).
Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
You are correct about amending to sue as trustees of the Regnery Trust. you can bring the slayer statute and abuse cases together. You have jurisdiction in Illinois, if that is where you want to file.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

They are trying to get out of the accounting.What they say is the trustee only has onre master the benificiary.They claim the trustees have no standing or either do I to demand an accounting.Is what this gentleman is saying is the trustees sue on behalf of the trust to get the accounting? They also continue to bring up not being income benificiary..I thought we had an answer to that when we found the contingent remainderment benificiary could sue so they had standing during my life.But not that benificiary the trust was ruled it cant sue.Could this mean the trustees could sue for the my trust during my mothers lifetime? therefore giving it standing?

 

You mention Illinois if that is where i want to file.Do you think I should file elsewhere?

Expert:  RJ replied 4 years ago.
File in Illinois. You have standing. The trustees are the trust's masters. If you were t o get income form the trust, at any point. you are an income beneficiary. The trustees can sue for the trust during your mother's lifetime. You are entitled to an accounting.