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 CA Lawyer Your Own Question
CA Lawyer
CA Lawyer, Attorney
Category: Estate Law
Satisfied Customers: 1655
Experience:  California Attorney
Type Your Estate Law Question Here...
CA Lawyer is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Hello,You have given me the best answers in two years of JA.I

Resolved Question:

Hello,You have given me the best answers in two years of JA.I am still at it.A new attorney tomorrow.I have three cases,trust,abuse explotation and the insurance trust.My past attorneys in the beginning placate me but do nothing.
There is a trust suit pending,just the start to get 18 years of accounting and hopefully an independant trustee,it was filed in the state court then moved by them to the federal court because of diversity.Innitially I thought the explotation claims should be filed with the trust because they are so inter related.Apparently my past attorneys want to seperate them from the trust.Nothing has changed in the abuse case however discovery will show more money taken from trust during my mothers incapacity.The insurance trust bothers me and I would like your professional input.Forgery,fraud and embezzlement.The supposed trustees nsignature was forged,.He did not know.The withdrawal with the four forgeries,mine included,he signed with the medallion stamp but at that time my uncles name was not on the first page as trustee.That got substituted laater.My sisters $420,000 as benificiaries and through forgery should be a problem.Yes they sent me 1/3 but without my knowledge and by forgery.When I found out I tried to put it back but the account was closed.It stayed there until long after my mother died and it was legally mine.The brother in laws forged signature is new evidence on the acceptance document.I am having a hand writing expert analyze it now.The question is do I use that to try and vacate both judgements or forget it and just sue my sisters and attorney as they were to guilty parties.I have the settlements if you want to see them but I think they just released the trustee.If so we have jurisdiction and the facts my sisters were not released in our Illinois case.My mothers abuse and financial explotation is no different however I am concerned about getting a criminal conviction as this is very small to an Illinois D.A. what civil charges could I bring for this crime.Please let me know your time on this issue and if you need any documents please tell me where to send them.
Submitted: 8 years ago.
Category: Estate Law
Expert:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
Can you post the settlements here.

Customer: replied 8 years ago.
I am sorry,
I don't know how to do that.Something is not right.The handwriting expert says in her judgment the signature is from the new trustee.It does not look like any of his signatures.Furthermore he told my other brother in law he did not sign it and did not find out about it for several months.If she is right it may take my ability away to reopen the cases.There is still the $420,000 forgery including mine but I have been talking about that for one year so it would be hard to say that is new evidence.You idea on jurisdiction should work.He moved one year earlier.They said administration was in Mill Valley however you can not delegate administration.There is nothing in the trust agreement allowing the change of anything except situs but only if the situs is moved.The trust agreement says only independent trustee and written notice must be mailed to the beneficiaries.If jurisdiction does not work we still have the argument that my sisters were not released.If the girl is right I cant get them for forging the trustees appointment.They would still be guilty of forging my uncles name on the three withdrawals after the husband medallion stamped them.Exploration now gets a little worrisome.My mother is incapacitated and technically she is the only one who can change trustees.The trust agreement says the trustee can resign and appoint someone else.They will say my uncle willingly resigned when asked as he is now deceased and appointed the husband.That never would have happened if my mother was O.K. and even if she was not A my uncle would not have resigned on his own and B even if he did he would have appointed his brother or sister no a fourth husband 2,000 miles away.My sister did however put the husband up to it and she and my other sister then had control.

One thing concerns me.The new attorney said if there are breaches of fiduciary and damages they go into the estate and then divided up.To me it seems impossible.The trustee criminal has no risk or penalty to steal money.If the don't get caught they keep it.If they do get caught there is no penalty other than getting the original percentage the trust called for.This is insane.I am a trustee getting 1/3rd.of the trust.I begin stealing money at a certain date.I end up with $1.0m when the grantor dies.Mayube I get caught maybe not.If not I have $1.0m, $666,000 more than the trust calls for.If I do get caught,I dont go to jail,no criminal charges my $1.0m goes back into the estate and I still get $333,000.This is the original amount the grantor gave me.If this is true you are telling a trustee they must steal.In the worst case you end up getting what the grantor had in their will.Am I missing something.

There is another case.$2.0m taken from my fathers trust three trustees.It is unclear if all three have to sign but for 14 years we did.It says we should try for unanimous consent and it says if not the dissenter must follow and sign but I am not sure it applies to withdrawals.My sisters sent a letter to the brokers two of three must sign.The broker bought it.As the third trustee and trying for unanimous consent have they not breached their fiduciary to me?If none of the $2.0m was stolen is that breach worth anything to me?Another new evidence.In 1997 from a lawsuit I filed eight years earlier my mothers trust with my sisters as trustees was to get $500,000.My sisters decided not to put it in the trust and they split it.I found out while I was in China.They said dont worry we will pay the taxes and send the net amount of your share to your children.They probably doubled the taxes.No gift taxes were paid from my mothers trust.They paid nothing or next to nothing but not until the settlement was a done deal.Then there was an appeal and they took the money from my mothers trust even though she had given the stock to my sisters.How would this play out in court?The issues are should I leave the courts alone on the insurance issue and use jurisdiction and my sisters not being released.Can this $3,0m still be used as part of the explotation? On the abuse it sound like criminal charges are very difficult due to the D.A. workload.Can I bring a civil suit?If they stole money in the last 18 years including $750,000 minus my mothers expenses in the last 15 years of her life whatever those amounts total that they must put back is there any way from keeping them from getting 2/3rds.I keep hearing a trustee/benificiary relationship is the most sacred relashionship there is and the trustee if he does not act properly can be in serious problems.I am not seeing that,no criminal charges and if you get caught you still get what the trust agreement calls for.This sounds like a license to steal not something sacred.
Customer: replied 8 years ago.
Hello again, I wanted to know if in your opinion this is fraud

Statement of material fact was made

11/10/2006 trust forgery of a new trustee.I am a benificiary and the trust agreement reads written notification of a new trustee must be sent to the benificiaries.None sent

11/18 A living trust restated in its entirity without grantors knowledge.Benificiary not notified or given a copy of the new trust

1/25/2007 both people who made the changes(trustees of one trust) I asked if any trust changes were made in my six month absence.The answer was a definitively no.There was a witness

Defendants knew they were false

Defendants knew their statements were false

Plaintiff had a right to rely or were justified in relying on those statements

I had the right to rely on those statements as my mother was incapacatated and the grantor so it was impossible for her to have made those changes

Statements were made for purpose of inducing plaintiff to act or rely on them

Statements were made to keep me from taking my mother home from my sisters and going to court

Plaintiffs were damaged as a result of their reliance on said statements

Because the mother did not come home she stayed with the sisters and the son went back to China.In his absence they began withdrawing the equivelant of $50,000 per month from the thre trusts and abused there mother physically and mentally until she died in November of 2007.

Expert:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
The elements of fraud are:
1. A material misrepresentation;
2. Made with knowledge of the falsity or reckless disregard as to the truth;
3. Intent to induce reliance;
4. Actually induced plaintiff's justifiable reliance;
5. Pecuniary (monetary) damages to the plaintiff.

It sounds like all of the elements are there. The problem I see is that in this type of situation, it becomes a question of who the representation was made to, and who the harm was done to. If they represented there were no changes to the plaintiff, and the $50,000 that was being withdrawn harmed the plaintiff (as a beneficiary of the trust), then it seems like there would be a cause of action for fraud.

A cause of action for fraud doesn't accrue until you learn of the fraud or reasonably should have discovered the fraud. That means that the statute of limitations doesn't start to run until that time.

If this information was helpful, please click
ACCEPT to give me credit for answering. Bonuses and positive feedback are appreciated if deserved. If you have any related follow up questions or need clarification, just ask!
CA Lawyer and other Estate Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 8 years ago.
When both trusts were changed I was to be notified in writing on one and the other was restated in it entirity as as a benificiary I was to be notified.I was not.

I went to N.C. to pick up my mother.She lives at home on $10,000 per month.My sisters have a habit of changing documents when I am out of the country.I asked them directly in front of a witness if either trusts had been changed.The answer was definantly not.

If I knew my mother definantly would have come home with me and I would have had them removed as trustees.

I had no reason in disbelieving them as only the grantor can make changes.

Because of this fraud I allowed my mother to go to California for three months while I went back to China.From 1/2007 until my mothers death 11/2/2007 and until 3/1/2009 an average of $50,000 per month was withdrawn from her trust.

With caregivers taxes etc. my mothers number would have gone to $15,000 per month.More importantly my mother was confined and isolated for 15 months while her heart medications were withdrawn.

All of this would have been prevented if they 1.Notified me as a beniciciary the trusts had been changed,one by forgery. or 2.They did not lie to me when I asked them directly if any changes were made.
Customer: replied 8 years ago.
Financial abuse jurisdiction.Illinois resident money is here.Two trusts changed while in North Carolina heart medications withdrawn in California,died in California.15 months of isolation keeping her from coming home.I have federal court jurisdiction over the two defendants but so far only as it relates to their rolls as Trustees.Money was withdrawn from both trusts during the 15 months.Can I get Illinois jurisdiction for the financial abuse claim.
Expert:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
I seem to remember there being a probate case previously in California, is that correct?

Customer: replied 8 years ago.
Probate is open here.California May 12 2008 was a default Judgement that approved the trustee and his past acts for the insurance trust.You told me I could probably have it set aside if in Illinois if I could show California lacked Jurisdiction
Expert:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
What ever happened with the set aside motion?
Customer: replied 8 years ago.
We have not ben there in court as of yet.Our innitial pleadings are trust related.Once we get into the forgery and fraud of the insurance trust and the object because of the California ruling we will use it.

Customer: replied 8 years ago.
Unfortunately very few attorneys understand or want to deal with the elderly at least the ones I have debt with.Will states enforce these laws.If I can prove each allegation is that enough.Each attorney I have had in the beginning talk as if they are very interested in the elder abuse case as well as the trust case.As time passes their interest moves to the trust.Do they know something that I don't know or is it abuse is not their practice.To try to split the cases in two is crazy.They are too intertwined.Please let me know your thoughts.

Does my mother qualify?


After a neglectful airline flight that lead to a stroke and mental incapacity here is what took place.

1.A trust $3.0m she appointed her brother as trustee 20 years ago was taken by forgery by the abusers

2.A trust that she appointed her sister as successor trustee of was rewritten and the abusers became successor trustees of $3.0m

3.A nursing home became a place for punishment

4.Physical and mental abuse became common occurrences

5.It is time to put a pillow over her face.She must die in 2007 before Bush leaves office

6.A $35,000 truck was bought with wheel chair access but my mother did not need a wheel chair

7.Fraud was committed when I came to take my mother home.Not only was I not informed about the trust changes when I asked directly they were denied.Instead of coming home I agreed to three months in California

8.$60,000 of gifts

9.$420,000 forged from the insurance trust

10.The house on the street became the house from hell.100 steps,hardwood floors,a sewing room as a bedroom and no phone.This imprisonment went on for 10 months in spite of my mothers cries to go home

11.As I announce one month earlier than expected I was coming home her demise began

12.48 hours later after withdrawing her heart medications Hospice is there with her doctor falsely pronouncing my mother as terminally ill.

13.After her cries for help from me from Beijing 18 hours later I find her comatose

14.5 days to get her to the hospital to find haldol the cause and my sister refuses to let them treat her.

15.No nursing home and medications back to isolation

16.A corrupt Judge and lawyer keep me from seeing my mother for three years.Another corrupt lawyer sabotages a conservator hearing and the corrupt one scares my Chicago attorney from a Guardianship motion

17.A trip to see a happy walking talking mother turns into a drug induced coma.After death the proof of an toxicology test is turned into ashes

18.To keep my mother from coming home the second daughter ransacks her home and sells every last thing.

19.2006,2007,2008 averages $50,000 per month by the abusers versus $15,000 including caregivers if my mother is home.


Do these crimes reach the level of the below Illinois law?


On January 1, 2004, a new probate statute entitled "Financial Exploitation, Abuse, or Neglect of an Elderly Person or a Person with a Disability" takes effect. The new law prevents any person convicted of financial exploitation, abuse, or neglect of an elderly person from receiving "any property, benefit, or other interest by reason of the death of that elderly person" . . . "whether as heir, legatee, beneficiary, survivor . . . or in any other capacity."7 The law also covers the financial exploitation, abuse, or neglect of disabled persons.8 The new law can be circumvented only if the convicted person demonstrates "by clear and convincing evidence" that the victim knew about the conviction and still wanted to transfer property to the abuser.9 Since abusers are usually relatives of the elderly victim and, as such, are the persons most likely to become the elderly victim's heirs, using the probate code to address elder abuse seems commonsensical. However, other than California, no other state has yet taken the radical step of penalizing elder abusers in this fashion.10

The definitions in the new statute are derived from Illinois criminal statutes relating to elder abuse. "Financial exploitation" occurs when a person "in a position of trust or confidence" knowingly obtains control over an elderly person's property by means of deception or intimidation.11 "Abuse" includes not only overt acts of physical abuse, harassment or intimidation, but also acts that endanger the elderly person's life or injure his or her health, acts of abandonment, and omissions of acts that the caregiver "knows or reasonably should know are necessary" to preserve the elderly person's life or health. For omissions to constitute abuse, the elderly person's life or health must actually be affected by the caregivers failure to perform.12 "Neglect," which constitutes more passive conduct than abuse, occurs when a caregiver negligently fails "to provide adequate medical care or maintenance" and this failure causes physical or mental injury or deterioration.13

Expert:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
The whole situation seems to be intertwined to me.

I'm not sure it would necessarily be appropriate to split the two cases, but it might be necessary because the plaintiffs are likely different entities.

The problem I see with the elder abuse lawsuit (as a civil lawsuit) is who files the action? In order to file the lawsuit you would generally have to be the person that was harmed. If not, perhaps her estate (probate) representative could file the lawsuit. It may be necessary to open an ancillary administration of her and have someone appointed in order to do this. Then the proceeds of the lawsuit would benefit the beneficiaries of the estate. As far as a criminal action, unfortunately you can't force the DA's hand, although if they did pursue it, then they could also get a victim restitution order in the criminal case.

As far as the trust action, any interested party (such as a beneficiary) of the trust would be the appropriate party. So the difference between the two is that in the elder abuse action the estate would be the plaintiff and in the trust/fraud matter the beneficiary would be the plaintiff.

As far as the Illinois statute . . . . it would seem that there was both a fiduciary and familial relationship and that the mother "may" have been exploited financially. The difficulty is obtaining a full accounting of everything that was spent, determining if it was for her benefit or if they were secreting funds, and dealing with res judicata, collateral estoppel, and waiver issues arising out of the previous cases and settlement agreements.

If this information was helpful, please click
ACCEPT to give me credit for answering. Bonuses and positive feedback are appreciated if deserved. If you have any related follow up questions or need clarification, just ask!

Remember, this is for entertainment and educational discussion only and is not intended as legal advice and that no attorney client relationship is formed.
CA Lawyer and other Estate Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 8 years ago.




Hello,I has been awhile.My mothers attorney was partners with my sisters.My sisters go to one attorney to draw up the release my mother goes to the trust attorney to sign it.Below is an article by a very prominent trust attorney.The attatchement is the release


Could you please look at one of tJD, Attached is what I consider to be fraud but the opposition is hanging their hat on it.My mother 85,beginning of dementia was called into the lawyers office and took her sister.It gets hazy from there except she signed a 14 year blanket release for both trusts maybe covering $7.0m of withdrawals.I was a beneficiary of one trust and a trustee of the other.I found out about this 6 years later.In Illinois even if you leave an accounting provision out of your trust public policy states you still must account.My mother is saying she received brokers statements for 14 years and that was acceptable even in the future.She was set up and so was I as I was in China. What is your opinion.

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 79 (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:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
For some reason the download link does not work for me.
Customer: replied 8 years ago.

Also of the two trust that my sisters attorney prepared the releases for I was a trustee of one and a benificiary of two.I found out six years later
Expert:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
Initially, some of these letters look like they were attorney client privileged.

Secondly, It does not appear to me from the letters that the mother's attorney was a current partner of the sisters' attorney. Is there somewhere else that information was obtained from?

As far as the release, I think the issue would be whether the mother was informed and had capacity to sign the release or, whether she was being subjected to fraud or undue influence. The key to cases like that (which would make the release invalid) is medical evidence or testimony that she suffered from dementia at the time it was signed. Testimony from her regular physician, if he is friendly, is what is typically used to establish this type of proof.

Also, if the trustees were hiding something about the background accounting and that type of information, it could be that the release was invalid because it was fraudulently induced.

Also, it is correct that any time a fiduciary enters into a transaction with its principal that transaction is inherently suspect and must, basically, be fair. These agreements seem fairly one-sided.

Finally, it seems to me like there might be a complete lack of new consideration to support a release. Even without that, however, the mother's approval might be persuasive evidence that the daughters' acts weren't wrongful or improper.

If this information was helpful, please click
ACCEPT to give me credit for answering. Bonuses and positive feedback are appreciated if deserved. If you have any related follow up questions or need clarification, just ask!

Remember, this is for entertainment and educational discussion only and is not intended as legal advice and that no attorney client relationship is formed.
CA Lawyer and other Estate Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 8 years ago.
The sisters attorney prepared the release.The mothers attorney has been a partner of my sisters since 2000 in my opinion.I dont believe this was explained to my mother.Last one of the two trusts she signed releases on I was a trustee of.This is a three person trust and all three trustees before majority rules must try for unanimouis consent.I found out six years later.If I am asaked neither release would have been signed,.As far as I am concerned my mothers attorney allowing her to sign this $6.0m to $7.0 release on two trusts she was sole benificiary of is something that any other attorney would not allow.This severley impacts me and my children.My mother would never ever have done that
Expert:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
Is the mother's attorney a defendant? Perhaps he should be... Or a special administration could be opened to sue him.

Is there any evidence of the sister essentially partnering with this attorney or him having aconflict of interest?

As far as the three trustees issue and unanimous consent being required, I don't think that affects the obtaining of a release. Rather it should affect the actions taken by the trustees under the terms of the trust. The release is kind of like a separate issue. It is the particular co-trustee's, in their personal capacities, being absolved of responsibility for actions they took under the terms of the trust. Does that make sense? It wouldn't necessarily be the same as, for example, selling a trust asset.
Expert:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
Another issue that I see with this whole thing is that... while they have this "alleged" release from the mother... what about the other beneficiaries?

The trustees duty isn't just to the person who created the trust, but to all beneficiaries. The release doesn't say anything about the other beneficiaries releasing them from any sort of liability for failure to account.

Customer: replied 8 years ago.
If my mother because it is a living trust and while alive is the sole benificiary I guess because I am first in line at her death I am also considerede a benificiary but I am not sure it could be contingent.Does that count
Expert:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
Was it a revocable living trust or irrevocable? Did it have any language re: distributions upon death, or was there just a power of appointment?

If power of appointment, had she executed it?
Customer: replied 8 years ago.
Revocable.There was power of appointment as in 2003 she appointed my fathers trust to go into hers at her death
Expert:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
Well... without seeing all of the documents and knowing all of the history it is hard to say.

Even if there was a contingent beneficiary, I think they would be able to make a claim that THEY never provided any release. It seems the contingency is now resolved anyways.

Further, if the mother wasn't properly informed about everything or lacked capacity in any way, a release would be ineffective. It could even be further evidence of undue influence and/or fraud.

Customer: replied 8 years ago.
But what about me being a trustee of a three person trust that was not simple majority.My sister had a fiduciary obligation to discuss this release with me first
Expert:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
The trustee doesn't really have a fiduciary obligation to their co-trustee's. The obligation is to the beneficiary.

The terms of the trust could provide that any such decisions have to be unanimous, but ... I think the release is different than an action taken under the terms of the trust and isn't necessarily something that had to be discussed (at least in the capacity as a trustee). The accounting itself, on the other hand, would have needed to have been discussed.

Customer: replied 8 years ago.
If they were operating two trusts exclusively the third trustee is a watchdog.Since theese releases were to the majority of trustees only does that change anything

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
Expert:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
I think the releases aren't "any power, authority, duty or discretion delegated to them pursuant to this."

The releases are basically a separate agreement outside of the powers/duties under the trust.

The idea that only two of the trustees were released, means just that the third trustee wasn't released. That seems to be all it means.

Asking for a release from the beneficiary isn't an power or duty under the trust. The powers and duties under the trust relate to dealing with the trust assets. The release is a separate agreement saying that the mother, basically, won't hold those two particular trustees liable for how they accounted (or seemingly didn't account) as trustees.
CA Lawyer and other Estate Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 8 years ago.
I am a little buit confused.She was the grantor and the sole benificiary during her life.Her daughters run to her on both trusts as they are worried about getting sued by me.Her attorney is onmy sisters side and tells the daughters to go to a new lawyer to draw them up.I am told the lawyer probably had an obligation to me and my sisters certainlt do.They were stealing money from the trusts from mine they were the majority so it is no different than my mothers where they were sole trustees.The release goes to my mothers attorney and my aunt goes with herMy aunt remembers nothing about accounting or valuable consideration or faid for both parties

In 2000 three person without my knowledge they send a letter to the broker simple majority.Someone at the brokerage firm makes a huge mistake and goes along with it.7 years and $1.8 later I find out.We file a fraud charge but probably wwill reduce it because I recceived statements but did not open.I only opened if I signed which I did for 18 years.Now in 2003 they ddo the same thing with the same trust.I am not told.If they stole from my 1/3 share is it right that my mother can release them

2006 my mother is mentally incapacitated same lawyer restates trust in its entirity and my sisters force my mother to sign it making them successor trustees a huge deal

The botXXXXX XXXXXne is what do I tell my attorney and the Judge that my mothers release is either null and void or does not apply to me and my children.All three of these events are scaams with the intent to defraud me and my family
Expert:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
As I've always said, I always make every argument I can that has a reasonable basis.

1. The release is invalid because it was induced by fraud.
2. The release is invalid because of undue influence.
3. The release is invalid because the mother lacked capacity (ie. dementia diagnosis).
4. The release is invalid because it wasn't supported by any new consideration.
5. You never made a release and neither did any of other post-death beneficiaries.

I don't know if you remember that case i told you about where I asked the other party "Show me where my client released you for this... you can't... they released you for _____, but never released this claim."

If this information was helpful, please click ACCEPT to give me credit for answering. Bonuses and positive feedback are appreciated if deserved. If you have any related follow up questions or need clarification, just ask!
Customer: replied 8 years ago.
I would like to get your input on dissecting my case so my attorney after four months gets moving.To me there are two key elements starting out.The other side moved to dismiss based on lack of jurisdiction and lost.Now they only give us three years of accounting as they are hanging their hat on the 2003 release.The accounting isn't even close to being up to a reasonable standard without receipts cancelled checks or anything.

2006 my mother is mentally incapacitated in N.C. I am in China again we have the neurological evaluation and 10 witnesses over time plus the content of the change.Since my sisters have had free reign over the trusts since then 11/15/2006 until now.I am told since my sister knew of her incapacity,related it to the neurologist,did not tell the drafting attorney we can contend fraud.My aunt would have become trustee in 11/07 told my sisters to put the money back and account for 18 years.Meanwhile my sisters continue to spend trust funds and I have spent more than I want to admit.Also at the same time the 2006 trust cam to being my mothers insurance trust changed hands through forgery.I am told I had no damages so I can not really do anything.

2000 cutting me out as a trustee

2003 same thing

2006 insurance trust specifically states new trustee must notify beneficiaries in writing.There seems to be a patters as well as with the attorney.
Customer: replied 8 years ago.
One more thing induced by fraud please explain
Expert:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
Induced by fraud - Where someone either told the person the document was something other than what it actually was, or defrauded them into signing it by telling them false background facts. Either would be a reason to invalidate the document.
Customer: replied 8 years ago.
Let me ask you.This was not one event.Before I left for mhina my mother and I had reached a $2.0m settlement on our debe.While gone my attorney memorialized it unfortunatly my sisters intercepted it.They went to the attorney wrote a 2003 tryst.Two changes a trust contest and release of all loans,advances or gifts.Both after 18 years of being trustees 100% to their benifit.They withdrew $150,000 and opened an account and called it litigation account,the write off and they sold the house my mother,children and I lived in.All because of my letter.Does the influence the Judges thinking?

Expert:  CA Lawyer replied 8 years ago.
Any time that there is a substantial history of similar events, it will help influence the trier of fact so long as there is testimony and other evidence of its occurence.

I have found that judges are smart guys for the most part. Most of the time, they make pretty good inferences and figure out what is going on.

The key to presentation at trial is telling a story. If there are just a bunch of random facts it doesn't reach anyone. If there is a clearly laid out story of events that makes a logical progression that will stick in their mind.

If this information was helpful, please click ACCEPT to give me credit for answering. Bonuses and positive feedback are appreciated if deserved. If you have any related follow up questions or need clarification, just ask!
Customer: replied 8 years ago.

Things are getting clearer.I have a potential dilemma.I paid an attorney $40,000 the baklance 1/3 contingency.My pleadings on file are maybe 20 % of the case.They need to be amended and financial explotation and elder abuse added.How far can I go with this attorney.How hard can I push.I cant start over for the sixth time wbut this is what we agreed to when I engaged him in April.Dont take this wrong but most attorneys have inflated ego's and you dont know where their limit is.I cant give up one part of my case.Please read my simplifoication.Please let me know if I have a solid fraud claim.

2006 trust fraud.Could be punitive damages


I believe the actual damages from this are over $1.0m


Fraud must be proved by showing that the defendant's actions involved five separate elements: (1) a false statement of a material fact,(2) knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue, (3) intent on the part of the defendant to deceive the alleged victim, (4) justifiable reliance by the alleged victim on the statement, and (5) injury to the alleged victim as a result.


1/25/2007 in North Carolina,Gretchen,Lynn,my mother,Eddie and I were present.I just returned home from six months in China and asked my sisters if there had been any trust changes in my absence.Their answer was absolutly not.


These elements contain nuances that are not all easily proved. First, not all false statements are fraudulent. To be fraudulent, a false statement must relate to a material fact. It should also substantially affect a person's decision to enter into a contract or pursue a certain course of action. A false statement of fact that does not bear on the disputed transaction will not be considered fraudulent.


My sisters forged the 1987 trust signature and signed as witnesses the 2006 trust in my absence


Second, the defendant must know that the statement is untrue. A statement of fact that is simply mistaken is not fraudulent. To be fraudulent, a false statement must be made with intent to deceive the victim. This is perhaps the easiest element to prove, once falsity and materiality are proved, because most material false statements are designed to mislead.


My legal right was to go to court and file a charge for forgery and rewriting my mothers trust while she was mentally incapacitated


Third, the false statement must be made with the intent to deprive the victim of some legal right.



-I believe an incapacitated grantor and two trustees that say there were no trust changes that me relying on that was reasonable.


Fourth, the victim's reliance on the false statement must be reasonable. Reliance on a patently absurd false statement generally will not give rise to fraud; however, people who are especially gullible, superstitious, or ignorant or who are illiterate may recover damages for fraud if the defendant knew and took advantage of their condition.


The false statement removed my aunt as successor trustee.It gave my sisters the opportunity to continue to misuse my mothers money and after her death divert funds to their mutual benifit,hold back on all legal and financial documents and cause me to spend $250,000

If I know of these two changes my mother is home with her medications and from then to now maybe $1.5-$2.0 is saved.


Finally, the false statement must cause the victim some injury that leaves her or him in a worse position than she or he was in before the fraud.


A statement need not be affirmative to be fraudulent. When a person has a duty to speak, silence may be treated as a false statement. This can arise if a party who has knowledge of a fact fails to disclose it to another party who is justified in assuming its nonexistence. For example, if a real estate agent fails to disclose that a home is built on a toxic waste dump, the omission may be regarded as a fraudulent statement. Even if the agent does not know of the dump, the omission may be considered fraudulent. This is constructive fraud, and it is usually inferred when a party is a fiduciary and has a duty to know of, and disclose, particular facts.

Damages from Fraud 2006 trust

Many people knew when my mother passed away I would sue my sister.They knew this.This was the motivating factor between Letizia and my sisters to rewrite the trust.

1.The trust allowed them to continue to spend my mothers money indiscriminately and to engage several attorneys to prepare for the inevitable.Over $200,000 and I think $80,000 more that is hidden

2.Once my mother died my access to and legal documents was denied.Not just for a month or two but until today.I could not find out how much money they took,the terminally diagnosis,the status of the autopsy,the creation of the 2006 trust,12 year write off the 2003 trust,$150,000 withdrawal or any other pertinent information I needed to even contemplate a lawsuit.

3.This cost me well over $250,000.If not for Eddie I would have nothing.

4.As you know from several other attorneys prior to meeting you and some independent research I believe this entire ordeal was fraudulent.It definitely was a well thought out plan.Letizia even sent the original will to California in an effort to prevent Juaine from opening a probate estate.

5.I do not think my sisters would have withdrawn $1.9m in the last 36 months of my mothers life if Juaine was trustee.There would have been an immediate lawsuit,freezing of the trust and all of the documents necessary to prosecute financial exploitation and elder abuse would have been readily available.

6.If ever there was cause to access punitive damages I believe this was it.

7.After my mothers death until 12/31/2008 an additional $1.2m was withdrawn.Questionable taxes and a great deal of additional legal fees.

8.My brother in law Eddie Keith has been preaching to me since my mother died that this is our case and to file it alone to start the lawsuit.I agree with him.

9.I also do not think the insurance forgeries would have happened

10.By now my sisters legal fees would be staggering and mine would be non existent.

11.Peter Flaxman worked over time to convince my attorneys this was a nothing claim when in fact it was his biggest fear.

12,I can not even to begin to add up the damages.

13.I have been told that forcing an incapacitated grantor to change their will or changing it for them is a very serious crime.My sisters committed it.

14.Where is the whole accounting issue if Juaine and her council working with us were in charge.

15.Not only do you have the legitimate trustee but also a witness,sister and power of attorney for property.

16.The Judge knows nothing about this or many other critical aspects of the case.I cant even imagine why Ruffalo and Murphy only submitted what many call discovery pleadings and left out the last 15 months of my mothers life,the forgeries and fraud.

17.This,adding three signatures on my fathers trust,the $700,000 stock loss,$500,000 trust diversion,break in of my mothers house,undo influence,duress, defying my mother on several trustee changes as examples need to be added claims to our current filing.

18.From 8/1/2006 my mothers trip until her death is not even touched on.

We can win this case across all fronts but if all they have to defend is my name not being signed because I was in China and no accounting because their mother relieved them of that we have a very weak vulnerable case that will never show the Judge the true picture of their crimes.

I have known since June of 2007 when I first discovered my mothers abuse and the next four months until her death and Eddie Keith married to my sister at the time this along with the 2006 fraudulent trust are the two biggest concerns of my sisters and Flaxman.


Eddie Keith says the second maybe equal is the trust change.

2005 my sister took my mother to Mars.The deterioration had begun.

2006 with only my sisters input the evaluation said my mother was mentally incapacitated

This is damming.My sister can't say she did not know

To call an attorney and tell him to restate a trust as a trustee knowing the grantor is not able to understand it is again some form of fraud.She must tell the attorney about her mothers condition

The nature of the change was impossible.My mother put her sister in that position as she wanted to diffuse the conflict with her children.To have 2 of 3 children as trustees for 18 years and then have them continue as successors is an accident waiting to happen

To prove my point my sisters spent $50,000 per month from that day on.If my aunt were successor and took over on 11/2/2007 would they have spent that amount.

My aunt would have demanded 18 years of accounting and the return of money not related to my mothers health care

My aunt would not have spent $1.1m since my mothers death

I would not have had to spend one dime as the trust would have paid the legal fees.Instead I have spent $250,000

All of this comes back and maybe punitive damages when my sisters are removed for fraud.

This is something we have to do without question and is the most important element in our case

Please talk to Don and figure out a date as I have to arrange several people to attend as well as two doctors

The case

This is my view.

1.The $10,000,000 coming into the estate 1986

2.My sisters becoming temporary trustees but then 20 years later still are.

3.Approximately $6.0m in principal being withdrawn

4.10 trust amendments and numerous personal letters all caused by undue influence and duress

5.$700,000 lost in the market

6.$500,000 diverted from the trust

7. FLR trust my removal

8.Partnership with Letizia

9.Three written and several verbal trustee changes initiated by my mother but ignored with Letizia's help

10.2006 trip stroke loss of capacity

11.1987 trust converted by forgery including Letizia

12.2006 trust created and I believe it was fraud. This was the beginning of the end with no turning back.My sisters had everything and my mother became an unnecessary liability.

13.15 months of confinement and isolation in N.C. and California

14 $420,000 removed by forgery They forge my signature because they cant just take out 2/3 rds.

15.Life sustaining medication withdrawn and withheld in North Carolina and California

16.Being confined to a home in California which is elder abuse in itself.

17.As I notify my sister I can coming home the beginning of the end starts for my mother.

17.A pre-planned order of protection,removing heart medications using the flimsy excuse of spitting out,Hospice arrives,falsified terminally ill documents,toxic pain killers begin,comatose when I arrive and an ill fated trip to the hospital where treatment is refused.

18.The rest is a very sad ending to my mothers life caused by a second overdose and coma.

I believe this presented to the court and two women married 10 times,five unemployed children and are not happy with $4.5 each for doing nothing and they do what they did to their family and their mothers family the Judge will have no mercy on them

I want to make sure we are still on the same wave length so I can continue my work.Please let me know if in your mind if anything has changed and if so we can sit down and discuss it.

2005 North Carolina my sister takes my mother to a neurological clinic for testing.Dementia but not debilitating.

2006 My mother has a stroke and back to the clinic.My sister gives them all of the input over the two months after my mothers stroke.It is apparent my sister knows at this point my mother can not read an comprehend a 45 page legal document.

The clinic determines my mother is basically mentally incapacitated in Early November but my sister knew much earlier.11/10/2007 as I explained 11/10 was the insurance trust forgery.11/18 after my sister spent several calls with the Chicago trust attorney he redrafted in its entirity the 2006 trust.

My mothers sister is removed as successor trustee and replaced by my sisters.

My mothers role in all of this in front of a credible witness was a few yes no's on the phone.

My sisters now control entirily both trusts $6.0m

The magnitude of this is when my mother dies instead of my aunt demanding 18 years of accounting and any monies taken from the trust while my mother was incapacited be returned.This was 11/2/2007.Since I have spent $250,000 in legal fees that my aunt and my mothers trust would have picked up.
Customer: replied 8 years ago.
1955 a grantor establishes a trust.Three brothers are trustees simple majority.One brother dies the second resigns.The grantors attorney suggests a codicil to insure all three trustees must approve every trust transaction.The grantor dies in 1980.For the next 30 years four different brokerage houses require and get three signatures.In 2000 two dishonest trustees and their attorney take a flyer and send a letter to the broker saying simple majority rules.The broker does not look at the 20 year old file they just agree.In the next nine years $2.0m is withdrawn without the knowledge or consent of the third trustee.Because the dissenters signature is a little ambiguous in the codicil some don't agree it takes three signatures.After a great deal of research and council I disagree.
If two of the trustees are dishonest and the third signature is not required the codicil is inoperative as it is back to simple majority.The reason for this is they do not tell the third trustee and the payor does not know.This was not the grantors intent and 30 years of history.

What do you think?


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
Customer: replied 7 years ago.
Sir,This is not for the average attorney so I was hoping you could answer it for me.

1. A grantor establishes an irrevocable trust

2. The trust will purchase a life insurance policy but the grantor wants the right to buy back during her lifetime

3. Grantor appoints her brother as the sole trustee of the trust; trust is beneficiary of the life insurance policy

4. Grantor becomes incapacitated

5.2 of the 3 ultimate beneficiaries become quite concerned, grantor owes third beneficiary $3.4m, current trustee is aware of that, this is the only trust that could be used to pay third beneficiary as remainder beneficiaries control two other trusts

6. While mother is incapacitated and son is in China daughters tell uncle (current trustee) all of the family wants to change trustees because of his age and health. If he does not agree a judge with the three beneficiaries consent will change

7. Uncle reluctantly agrees. Problem daughters do not have a trustee that qualifies under the terms of the trust. They decide to appoint someone who not only doesn’t qualify but also does not know so they forge his signature. Their attorney knowingly notarizes a forged signature

8. Manditory written notification of new trustee is ignored so brother won’t find out

9...Daughters want $420,000 worth of stock in the trust brother in China won’t agree. They try to take 2/3rds but find out they can’t so they forge brother’s name. They also find out uncle is still trustee of the stock portion of the stock so they forge his name. Stock is deposited into three separate accounts.

10. Mother dies, false trustee sisters ex-husband comes to life, sisters attorney becomes his attorney, they push insurance company for $3.0m, third trustee pushes for interpleader, interpleader granted.

11. Third beneficiary is made many settlement offers. Hearing. Although brother does not want to settle the Judge and his lawyer do and he is railroaded into settling as long as it does not release the guilty parties (sisters and their attorney) it does not.

By forgery and fraud the sisters prevented their uncle and mother from exercising the buy back option to pay the son, give it to her brothers and sisters or anything else she wants to do with it. Until her death that was her money if she wanted it.

So now there is one lawsuit by the son and his children in the federal court for 18 years of no accounting and $4.0m of principal depleation.There is a second suit by the executor in the state court for financial exploitation, abuse and neglect and False imprisonment. Without the false imprisonment it would have been impossible for the sisters to pull this off as the mother’s brother and sisters are neighbors of hers in Chicago. The sisters would not have been able to divide and conquer and keep them from talking to each other.

A grantor of an irrevocable trust with a trust provision that the grantor can buy back any life insurance policy the trust may own

a grantor appointed sole trustee/owner/sole beneficiary

Purchase of a life insurance policy owned by the trust. Trust is beneficiary then three children

Grantor becomes incapacitated prior to exercising buy back

Trustee is removed by deception of two beneficiaries, forged signature of person who does not qualify as trustee

Withdrawal by two beneficiary using forgery of original trustees name

Grantor dies

distribution of proceeds through interpleader, forged trustees release

first evidence of trustees forged name

What is third beneficiaries cause of action $150,000 spent in legal fees, what is executors cause of action

Original trustee was owner, grantor had right to buy back, right extinguished by removal of trustee and replacement of legitimate trustee forgery of $420,000

It seems to me that without the removal of the original trustee and the forgery of an illegitimate trustee the grantors rights to buy back the $3.0m insurance policy until her death are preserved, does the forgery of a new trustee and removal of the illegitimate trustee and the subsequent withdrawal of $420,000 and forgeries constitute fraud? Does the distribution of the funds to the beneficiaries and the sign off at the time was thought to be the legitimate trustee means anything that can’t be reversed by the third beneficiary or the executor.

Is there a cause of action against the sisters? For example, before he resigns the uncle and Aunt Visit to sister and find out everything they have been told by the daughters are lies and the mother was being abused and kept from going home. The three of them decided that the mother would exercise her buy back right. The three ultimate beneficiaries are out of luck. The two daughters could sue for incompetency but I doubt they would as the abuse, financial exploitation and False imprisonment charges would be brought by the family.