Personal Injury Law

Personal Injury Law Question? Ask Personal Injury Lawyers.

Ask a Lawyer,
Get an Answer ASAP!

Personal Injury Law

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

Customer Question
RJ, I cant post anything here...
RJ,
I cant post anything here or on the second screen .I will wait for a new one.
Submitted: 7 years ago.Category: Personal Injury Law
Show More
Show Less
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Answered in 3 minutes by:
3/12/2010
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
Post your questions here as a reply.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 years ago

Ray,

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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

 

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
This is forgery, fraud, and breach of fiduciary duty.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.

Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
This is excellent. Show this to your lawyer.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 years ago
The have them on JA what should I tell them I want them do
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
Use what you just posted earlier today. I think that is the best one.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
Use this and what you posted at 1:24 PM.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
That is correct.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
This is exactly how your pleading should look.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
Off to the writer?
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
Send it off to the writer.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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?

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
I think it is worth pursuing. You have more stake and would not be dismissed.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
So appeal the federal ruling or go to the state court
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
Appeal the federal ruling. If lose and cannot file there, try and file in state court.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
The federal ruling was Juaine how can appeal it
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
Juanie will have to appeal it. In the meantime, file in state court.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
So a completley new set of pleadings could be made
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago

The lawyer could use the pleadings we decided on today.

RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
I like your idea for the judge. These facts should be made clear at trial.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
Play it straight, do not cover for anyone. Get an answer on the deposition.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
Ray Sorry I was talking for the judge
Customer reply replied 7 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
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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.

 

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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).

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago

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

Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 years ago
ff
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
This is true. Focus on these facts at trial and in discovery.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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?

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
I am sorry for the misunderstanding. They cannot go back to federal court if the case is now in state court.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
I still think you can prove damages because of the depletion in trust money. Discuss this with your lawyer.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Hello from LargeFilesASAP,

You have a file or files called 03-05-10 Order.pdf: [email protected] 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 [email protected]

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/
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
The federal court would not lets us intervene.You must mean at the state court combine the abuse and slayer statute
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
I am sorry for the misunderstanding. That is exactly what I meant. File these claims in state court.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.

Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

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

 

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago

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

Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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 <[email protected]> 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
Show this to your lawyer. This will make him bring in the 13 years.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Ray,

I dont follow

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.

Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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?.
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 years ago

Ray,

Did you read the pleading.This attorney did what he could.Do you think the Judge had grounds to dismiss it

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 years ago

 

 

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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?

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
Jurisdiction is in Illinois. Take this post to your lawyer.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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?

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
The best thing to do is appeal the ruling. Another option is if you file state court, try to bring these claims.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.

 

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
When do you appeal?
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Ray,

The orders were entered on 3/5.Is thjis malpractice?

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
It is malpractice if your lawyer knew you wanted to appeal and failed to file the appeal on time.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
I believe onSOL's it is the attorneys duty to keep the client informed.
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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 .

Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 years ago
The district court may extend the time for appeal not exceeding thirty days ...
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
Ray cant find anything where you can appeal a speciific order before the trial is oner
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
Ray I cant find anything where you can appeal a specific issue without waiting until the case is over
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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?
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

 

 

 

 

 

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

 

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
If we add William Blair and Letezia in the federal court case dont we break diversity and go to a state court
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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?
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
They could pay a fine or go to jail.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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?

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 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?
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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.

 

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

 

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
I reviewed the will and the trust. I do not see anything that would allow them to win on this argument.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 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) * * *

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.

Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
You will need a local lawyer. I do know of anyone, you will have to contact the local bar.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
This is a good argument.Give it a try.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
You need to fight this motion. You have standing.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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?

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
As long as you are a named plaintiff in the lawsuit, you have preserved that right to sue.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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?

 

 

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
You and all beneficiaries have standing.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
You have to be in this lawsuit. All you need is to be a beneficiary to have standing.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
I do or do not have to be in it
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
I am sorry or the misunderstanding. You have to be in it.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
Try to add it today. If you add it next week, you will need permission from the court.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Ray,

If this is too much let me know

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?tiym2w2k2nw

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.

Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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 reply replied 7 years ago
Also my trust benifited the same as Lynn and Gretchen did as individual benificiaries
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
I do not see anything else of concern. You need to make your argument that you are an income beneficiary.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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.
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
You make two correct arguments. Show these quotes to your lawyer. This proves breach of fiduciary duty and standing.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago

Since the document contains these words, you had the power to dissolve it. This all strengthens the fraud claim.

Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 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).
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 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?

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 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.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Ray,

My trust is the benificiary of my mothers trust.The trust and trustee act and my mothers trust say the benificiary is to get an annual statement and any that were not donne the benificiary has a right to them.What was decided in court was my trust could not sue them.I say they signed a contract and there is a state trust law that they are violating.Why should we have to sue the? Why cant we make the court enforce their legal obligation?

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
You can sue or you can file a motion asking the court to compel an accounting.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
Hi Ray, I have been working with another attorney who is doing a lot of research regarding the best way to go about the suit.He has something in mind I just dont know what.So I have been working on my own with several trust related attorneys and it seems the best course is this.Leave the trust where is .My children on their own and on behalf of the trust sue my sisters.The trust was a contngent beniciciary which is not as bad as it sounds and we have found good case law.There was a good statement from a Judge in texas.If your name was put in the trust you should be able to sue if necessary. Then it is the attorneys no change maybe worse.Ruffalo's pleadings none of the crimes my sisters have done and I cant get them motivated.The state court issue the are to take over but so far nothing.I would like to have someone take the Juaine Wrongful death and make it better and then using my write up add the slayer statute.All that is missising is the same thing that has been missing for the last 2-1/2 years,an attorney.
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
This all sounds like a good plan. Make sure you get someone to take the wrongful death pleading and refine it. They should add the slayer statute claim to it. Have your children sue on their own.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Hi Ray,

 

More information is coming in.The judgement on the oleadings has me concerned.Although there is cases both way a contingent benificiary dosent have an easy go.I dont know when the date is on the Judgement or Mars but wouldnt Mars if successful knock out their motion?I am also wondering if the pleadings have any thing to do with the courts ruling.Now there are three counts with Ruffalo ours has many.I am named in the trust and am my mothers son I dont know how much weight that brings.

 

Would fraud and forgery have any berring on their decision?Can we still amend? How does it work paper documents.We send ours they send theres and a ruling is made electronically.I hope not?

\

I have read up on several cases of pleading on the judgement.There was not one even similar to ours.

 

I would think 13 years of no accouinting then a signed release by the grantor at 85 would carry some weight.Do you know if we are allowed to respomf yo yheir motion?I also have the Judge too contend with.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
The MARS ruling is separate. The evidence from MARS could be helpful in defeating their motion. You are allowed to file a brief to persuade the judge to deny their motion.Your lawyer should do this for you. I think that the fact you are the son and the fact that there was no accounting, will strengthen your case.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Should we not ask for a continuance on the decision of the judgement of the pleadings until the deposition is done.I cant get a hold of my attorney for at least the last week the most critical aspect of the case.I do not know if my =children are suing indiviually and as trustees.If the get the mother to sign a piece of paper by fraud and then a court to say we dont have standing we need to take another look at the trust and trustee act.

 

Upon my mothers death I become a vested benificiary.Dosent that count for anything?

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago

Your vested beneficiary status counts. You should ask for a continuance. Do it as soon as possible.

Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Hi Ray,

 

Apparently the opposition filing to dismiss is pretty coommon.We have already found 3 or 4 cases that support us and apparently there is one right here in the 7th district.Their motion is pretty much that no one has standing.We arew going to try and get a 28 day extension next week.Is there any merrit to try and amend or pleadings?

 

Now we have the state court.The attatched was the filing just so we did not miiss the deadline.You have Juaine wrongful death and my very long slayer statute ending with two doctors letters.The opposition has already filed arguing everything,SOL Juaine not allowed Prudential interpleader already finalized.My guy ids limited and we are going to meet down town early next week.I am not sure how interested the are but probably O.K. Most attorneys most people in general could care less about the elderly.It is too bad.

 

Should I go outside to an elder abuse attorney to do the pleadings?The abuse and slayer statute should be together? They have a write up that Marin county has already been tried and its over.Very general as it would have to be.I wrote back times, dates,

people for the entire time frame.

 

What I would like you to think about is the pieces we need to make this thing work including living pieces..I think there could be substantial recovery on the abuse,financial explotation amnd false imprisonment.The opposition says the $3.4m is over and done with but the dont address the forgery,fraud a notary stamo or the buy back.With the buy back I would argue there are no real benificiaries until my mothers deah.She had the right at any time to take the money and do what she wished.

 

Anyway if you could work with me on this until we get someonre in place and with the right information I would appreciate it.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
You need your lawyer to file a brief in opposition to their motion. This will help you argue why your case has merit and why you have standing. Get an elder abuse lawyer for the slayer statute and abuse, if you find one who is competent. File them together. You have everything you need, I can help you put it together.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
RJ, If you have time thats great if not dont worry I am working on the abuse explotation and slayer statute.One of the problems I just ran into is where one ends end the second one starts.The SPL in California is one year.I dont know if we could use Illinois or maybe it could be covered by abuse.It is difficult to otherstand that the attorneys I have sent the Oregon case to have have not responded.It isnt even close to our case.Eddie will give me more.I ended this just before my mother went for the pace maker.I just am not sure where one ends and one begins

There is no legacy trust

?

My stay in Marin will be quite easy.especially with two court transcrips and eddie's testimony on the TRO

?

The false imprisonment statute from California I dont know if it is appropiate if so we will pick another one.

?

Financial explotation is where we should focus as it will get the Judges attention.

?

After a 7,000 flight my mother ended up with up with dementia.The Mars clinic did an evaluation to confirm incapacity.That was the last time anyone saw the Mars report until my mothers death.Thre were two prescriptions my mother was to talk for her dementia but my sisters ignored them

?

The insurance trust forged signature and fraud

?

The 2006 fradulant concealment,

?

$60,000

?

$420,000 forgery

?

$500,000 in excess of what she would have needed

?

Then there is the irrecovavle/revocable trust.The insurance trust did not have benificiaries until the day my mother died.The buy back

?

Provision meant it was her money and my sisters embezzled it.On financial Explotation we can go back 10 years.That means $5.0m assets

?

You will have to verify the SOL

?

Lynns house 9/1/2006 1/31/2007

?

Lynn was abusive to her mother as she has been her entire life.zMy mother needed help getting out of a chair once standing Lynn did not have the patience so she would pull her by the arm(Eddie) mey motjher lived in fear not? knowing when the next out burst would come.Several times in the bathroom in full view of relatives Lynn would get angry and pull up my mothers diapers to the point she would statr crying.Lynns response was to yell at her 88 year old helpless mother.

?

My mother was promised never to be put in a nursing home.She was dfor five months in spite of Lynn's big new ranch house for my mother

?

My mother was to exercise every morning.Many time she could not.Her puninshment was to go back to the nursing home for 2 or 3 days.Gretcchen ,Lynn and their ons were always plotting on how to get my mothers money

?

It was over heard by Eddie that Lynn said to her son John she must die before Bush leaves office

?

On a second occassion she told severall people it was time to oput the pillow over my mothers face (Eddie)

?

On yet another ovccassion Gretchen and Lynn were going to put up $100,000 to have me murdered.Their offer was made from Lynn's husband

?

In February against my better judgement I allowed my mother to go to California

?

The house she lived in was not what was agreed upon.It was 100 steps up from the ttreet and my mother lived in a sewing room without a phone




I believe the Mars report is one of the key elements in our case and cuts both ways.We will use it to show my sisters commited fraud.My
sisters concealed the report from 11/22/2006 on.The two medications they prescribed but did not give her is one more sign of their intent to deterrioratate my mother physically and mentally.Why would someone be dumb enough to take their mother for a neurological evaluation four days after the fraudulant trust was signed.Lynn and Gretchen knew my mother was incapacitated.Sign the trust then Mars then their brother cant change it back.In California the health care providers and courts were never told about the Mars report.This enabled my sisters to keep my mother and her money instead of having her conserved.



2006-2008 which needs to be updated as I did this some time ago (Attatchment)



Can this be our opening or closing statement

"the punctilio of an honor the most sensitive", as Judge Cardozo wrote and which is quoted all across the country in every court. As such, they can't personally take advantage of any situation whatsoever. Too, they have to account for each and every penny - they are to have kept complete and accurate records of everything they have done - it wouldn't matter that the bank no longer keeps the records - they are to have the records themselves If they don't have the records - the presumption arises against them and they have to reimburse the trust themselves

On 6/6 2007 my sisters POA was revoked.She and the health care providers ignored it
Illinois law says she should be facing man slaughter charges.

Site establihing law where trustees can not use trust assets in a lawsuit.The second one is even tougher

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:

The venue is proper and the acts and omissions referred to in this complaint,assets of the deceased and resulting damages took place in Du Page county.Mrs Regnery was taken from her home and never allowed to return.
Jurisdiction is proper because all the parties regularly have regular contacts and engage in busniess in Illinois. Venue is proper because the acts and omissions referred to in this Complaint, the assets of the decedent's estate, and the resulting damages took place in,ocurred in, or were managed in Cook County, Illinois
Nucleus of operating fact, Please look at the language on the first four pages of California document from Mournier PDF, supplimental pleadings.

All should keep all cases in the federal court of Chicago




Slayer statute.


Son leaves for China May 2006, mother goes to a wedding in California. August 2006, severe edema


1.Airplane 6000 miles,stroke, gross negligence, abuse at Lynn's for five months,two trust changes, Mother is at Lynn's scared to death because of her abuse over the years.Lynn buys a sprawling ranch house for her and her husband and my mother but then takes out a room in the nursing home for 5 months and uses it if my mother does not obey her.Lynn is heard by five different witnesses to say it is time to put the pillow over her face.Also she must die before Bush gets out of office in 2007.Mars proves incapacity but the report is buried and the medications are not given.

,2.Gretchen takes $480K by forgery,two good doctor appointments but two weeks later my mother becomes terminally ill according to Gretchen as I am coming to pick my mother up..Gretchen in one day goes from 15 years of heart medications to five opiates and Hospice comes in,signs terminally ill document and starts opiates but my mother had no pain Mother had four hospital and doctor appointments before and after Hospice all said she was not terminally ill..Gretchen denies treatment at the hospital.Mother is living in a 9'x5'bedroom in a house 100 steps down to the street for 10 months

4.She has her own home in Chicago and for 15 months that is all she was asking for.The death was very suspicious as in two days she went from walking and talking to comatose as her son arrived.When he arrived on 6/1 he found her in the same condition.Her doctor and her stopped 911 from dispatching an ambulance.Prior to death the son filled out an autopsy report .Money, no heart medications and toxic drugs were the cause of death.Somehow the body disappears and is cremated but an autopsy was preformed but not a toxicology test.Gretchen killed her because my daughter and wife could have taken my mother out of the home in a wheel chair and never came back.No one could have stopped them.$1.0m is withdrawn during my mothers 15 months of incapacity.

As my mothers family is waiting for the burial my sisters sneak into town two days before and bury her without telling anyone.



1. The right to know.

Informed consent means that the patient, after being provided adequate information about their condition and proposed treatment, knowingly and intelligently, without duress or coercion, clearly and explicitly give their consent to the proposed treatment. Cobbs v. Grant, 8 Cal. 3d 229, 502 P.2d 1, 104 Cal. Rptr. 505 (1972).old consent to medical treatment is well established in California. This right is grounded in the constitutional right to privacy and in the common law. Cobbs v. Grant, 8 Cal. 3d 229, 502 P.2d 1, 104 Cal. Rptr. 505 (1972). Cobbs held that a person may bring an action for battery in absence of informed consent. Furthermore, the California Supreme Court recently reaffirmed the basic and "fundamental right" even when a refusal of the proposed medical treatment may cause or hasten death. Thor v. Superior Court, 5 Cal. 4th 725, 855 P.2d 375, 21 Cal. Rptr. 2d 357 (1993) (dealing with a quadriplegic prisoner could refuse gastrostomy tube for feeding and medication). Likewise, persons committed for involuntary psychiatric treatment under the LPS Act have the same legal rights and responsibilities guaranteed all other persons by the Federal Constitution and laws and the Constitution and laws of the State of California, including the fundamental right to determine the scope of one's own medical treatment. (Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code 5325.1).ve take effect?


Never once in six months and 1000 pages of medical records was my mother ask to consent.On 6/31 clearly she told me to come and get her she was being hurt and poisoned .Then she was comatose until the hospital.In my presence twice in two hours she help out her hand and asked for her medications because they made her feel beter.Georgina used to talk to my mother reguarly.The hospital said she was oriented and could explain what happened with her fall.I suspect my mother talked reguarly when guests were not there to hear her otherwise it was haldol




Swallowing,this was a major issue between Flaxman and my sister from before I got home. Their message was my mother cant swallow any longer.The day after arriving I fed my mother three helpings of scrambled eggs and bacon no problem.I then used vitamins to prove to my sister my mother could swallow.Marin General did a swallow evaluation and it was fine.If you read the court transcripts my mother would die if you gave her a pill.Furthermore there are four ways to administer medications without swallowing.

 



Regnery Timeline from Period July 15, 2006 - November 2007
Date Description Documents/Witnesses
July 15, 2006

Verla is suffering from severe edema at her home in Chicago. Her sister, sister-in-laws and Fred's son tell her she can't go to California to attend a wedding. Without seeing a doctor her daughters take her anyway.


Verla K. Regnery attends the wedding in California. On her way back from California, Verla traveled to Washington D.C., Maryland and North Carolina, a trip of 6,000 miles. At some point during this trip, Verla suffered a stroke or a series of strokes for which she was ultimately hospitalized in North Carolina. Various
family members
9/30/2007-
1/30/2008 Lynn leases a room in a nursing home in spite of the fact she has a large one story house with four bedrooms and two people living there.

The nursing home was used when Lynn was at dog shows or Verla did not obey her, i.e., exercises every morning. Most times Verla could not do them. Every time she could not Lynn took her to the nursing home.

Lynn cursed, pulled, and twisted Verla when "helping" Verla off the toilet at Lynn's NC home. Lynn knew that Verla was extremely arthritic. Verla was seen by witnesses to be crying. Lynn then began yelling at Verla. The bathroom door was open during the entire event in full view of five witnesses. Lynn and other family members
9/30/2006 - 1/30/2007 On several occasions Lynn was observed intentionally hurting Verla while ostensibly helping Verla to walk which was taking advantage of Verla's extreme arthritis.

Per Eddie Keith Lynn's husband. Five times to five witnesses Lynn said it is time to put the pillow over her face. Once in the kitchen with her son Lynn says she must die in 2007 before Bush leaves office. Lynn, Eddie Keith and other family members
1/30/2008 The abuse was too great Verla calls Fred and he comes to pick her up.After four days in the in a hotel with his mother all arrangements have been made.Suddenly Gretchen after flying 3000 miles and Lynn get paraniod and start using my aunt as an excuse for my mother not going home.I could not believe how insistant they were.Finally I decided while was in China for the next three months that Gretchen's in California would be a safer place for my mother.

Gretchen's e-mail conceding that when Verla arrives in Marin, she would have to have an elevator installed or place Verla in a residence at street level. It was common knowledge in the family that Verla could not do stairs. Gretchen put Verla in a small sewing room at Gretchen's home in Mill Valley. To get to the street Verla, with extreme" arthritis had to negotiate over 100 stairs.
Copy of e-mail
11/10/2006 Alvin Kiehl (Verla's brother) forced to resign a sole trustee of the Verla K. Regnery Irrevocable Trust. $3.0 Tom Wallerich - Gretchen's 4th husband - was appointed but his signature was forged and he did not find out until several months later. Legal record
11/17/2006 Verla K. Regnery restates her trust in its entirety although attorney is 1,000 miles away and Verla K. Regnery has no capacity to do so. Eddie Keith a witness said it was no different than holding a gun to Verla's head. Legal Record
11/21/2006 [Verla K. Regnery has her second MARS Assessment (Memory Assessment and Research Services
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
I knew this would happen.I sent this from another post.If there is a problem please let me knowMedical record
11/22/2006 Fred arrived from China after six months. FWR
3/1/2007 Verla K. Regnery in good health. Frederick W. Regnery leaves his mother in his sister Gretchen's care and goes to back to China on business. Fred insists on a phone in Verla's room and a hearing aid he will pay for. Gretchen promises she will take care of both. On numerous calls from China Fred reminds Gretchen. Gretchen did neither. FWR
4/6/2007 Verla executes an Illinois Statutory Short Form Power of Attorney for Health Care appointing Gretchen Regnery-Wallerich as her initial Agent for Health Care and Lynn Regnery and then Frederick W. Regnery as her Successor Agents. Legal record
4/12/2007 Verla K. Regnery has new pacemaker installed at Marin General Hospital. Her health is fine. Medical record
4/15/2007 Verla K. Regnery begins to call Frederick W. Regnery and tells him that she wants to go home. FWR
5/3/2007 Verla K. Regnery sees Cardiologist Dr. Mark Wexman. Given a clean bill of health. Instructed to continue all heart medications.Come back in foru months. Medical record
5/10/2007 Gretchen's husband of 24 years, Tom Wallerick, files for divorce and moves out of marital home. GRW or TW
5/26/2007 Gretchen tells Frederick W. Regnery that she cannot handle the stress of caring for their mother. FWR
5/27/2007 Gretchen says that her mother has been going downhill since her arrival and is going to put her in a nursing home. FWR
5/28/2007 Frederick W. Regnery tells Gretchen that he is coming to take his mother home and not to interfere. FWR, GRW
5/29/2007 Gretchen tells Dr. Freedman that her mother is spitting out her heart medication.Gretchen discontinues them.
5/30/2007 Hospice is ordered and terminally ill documents signed by Dr. Freedman and Gretchen. Medical record? Opiates begin but no pain
In 48 hours a two daughters ends their 88 year old mothers life and all the mother wanted was to go home.


5/31 Fred calls his mother from the Beijing airport a strange female voice answers.His mother says "come and get me I am being hurt and poisoned"The phone is hung up and not unanswered again.
6/1/2007 Fred returns from China to see Verla K. Regnery, now a mother he can "hardly recognize." Verla is comatose. Dr. Siderow advises that Verla be taken to the emergency room.
FWR / Medical record?
6/6/2007 Gretchen, who has POA, refuses to allow her mother to go to the hospital. Finally Fred calls 911. Fred is assured by Freedman and Gretchen there will be no interference in Verla's treatment. XXXXX XXXXXds the ER nurse three Haldol pills. Sometime later Mrs. Regnery is given an IV and Fred is told it was to wash out the Haldol in Verla's system and in one hour she would be fully awake.

Verla K. Regnery is hospitalized at Marin General Hospital for assessment of her longstanding cardiac condition and appropriateness of her medications. Patient also seen for a work-up of "weakness&quot;

The ER report that Fred could not get for 7 months shows Gretchen and Freedman do not want any treatment for Verla. Medical Record
6/6/2007 Frederick W. Regnery visits Verla at Marin General Hospital and she advised him that she no longer wanted Gretchen Regnery-Walerich or Lynn Regnery to make health care decisions for her and that she wanted to immediately return to her home in Illinois.

After ER discharge Dr. Davidson says if Verla can pass swallow test in the morning she can continue her medications. Doctor Davidson said the hospital cardiologist would give Verla a full work-up. He did not. At 22:00 on 6/6 the night before the swallow test - without Fred's knowledge - Verla was given non-heart medication pills. She swallowed.
FWR
6/6-7/2007 Dr. Davidson states that Verla K. Regnery will be placed back on all previous medications. Davidson M.D. at Marin General says, if your mother can swallow her medications, they will be resumed in the morning. Dr. Davidson confirms Haldol as the drug Verla was overdosed on.

Verla passes swallow test. No medications, no Doctor Davidson no reason for two days. Twice in one hour Verla hold out her hand and asks for her medications. The nurse ignored her. FWR / Medical record?
6/9/2007 Verla K. Regnery discharged from Marin General Hospital in the same critical state as when she was admitted without treatment. Dr Davidson recommends Verla is to go to a nursing home and resume her medications. This does not happen. Medical record
June, 2007 Verna's living will is violated by Gretchen and every health care provider. I think the excerpt when death is imminent medications continue. This does not mean five months before someone's death the can be discontinued.

POA revocation and appointment on 6/6 ignored by everyone. Hardwood floors in the house, 6/6 and 6/17 hospital visits not terminally ill. Spitting out was used in the hospital record, relatives, two court appearances but what was not said was 24 hours after the medications were discontinued five new ones began that were not spit out. Also a patch, nasal spray and liquid are alternate ways to administer. In the conservator hearing because the doctor gave her no choice Norvasc a blood pressure medication was given. How about grinding it up and putting it in applesauce? What she did not explain is why the other nine were not given the same way?
Early June, 2007 Juaine, Marcy and Fred visited Verla at 125 Oakdale. The visit took place in Verla's tiny room. Gretchen's attorney Peter Flaxman was behind a door taking notes. Verla stated she wanted to be at her grandson Jeff's wedding, she stated that she wanted to go to the family home at Lakeside Illinois. She begged Fred and Juaine to take her away - take her back to Illinois. Marcy confirmed that Flaxman heard this conversation.
June, 2007 Fred leaves Gretchen's house after she made two trespassing calls. She takes out a TRO. A restraining order is entered against him preventing him from seeing his mother for three years. Copy of TRO
6/20/2007 Frederick W. Regnery files Petition for Appointment of Probate Conservator of the Estate and Person ("Petition for Conservator") and Petition for Appointment of Temporary Conservator of the Person and Estate ("Petition for Temporary Conservator") of Verla in the Superior Court of California, County of Marin under case number XXXXX Court record
6/25/2007 Frederick W. Regnery signs guardianship petition seeking to be guardian of the estate and person on Verla K. Regnery in Cook County Probate Court case number XXXXX P 4390 Court record
6/25/2007 Frederick W.Regnery signs affidavit is support of guardianship petition in Cook County Probate Court case number XXXXX P 4390 Court record
6/26/2007 Frederick W. Regnery files Petition for Temporary guardian in Cook County Case 07 P 4390 Court record
6/26/2007 Order entered in Cook County Case 07 P 4390 (Guardianship Proceeding) filing continuing petition for temporary guardianship so as to provide notice to the parties in Marin County Case PR-072906 Court record
6/26/2007 Marin County Case PR-072906 Order entered denying Temporary Conservator for Verla K. Regnery. Hearing on petition for Conservator on call for 08-27-2007 Court record
Summer, 2007 Lynn Regnery appeared at Verla's Fairview Village home while Verla was visiting Gretchen in California. Lynn 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 Frederick W. Regnery. She sells everything at a garage sale and keeps the money. ?
7/5/2007 Hospice visits commence. Hospice/Medical record
8/--/2007 At some point in August Verla K. Regnery is taken to Marin Terrace in Mill Valley. This is a skilled nursing facility. Verla does not have her medications restored. She gets around fine and eats and talks to the staff. Only when visitors are coming is she overdosed on drugs. Nursing Home record/ FWR
8/17/2007 Verla K. Regnery falls at 7:30 p.m. while standing next to a piano. Does not lose consciousness. OR Verla takes a fall on Gretchen's hardwood floors. Medical record
8/18/2007 Verla K. Regnery seen at Marin General Hospital following the fall. Medical record
8/24/2007 Hospice visit could not be completed because client wanted to ‘watch T.V. and eat grapes." Hospice/Medical record
8/26/2007 Hearing date for Frederick W. Regnery's Petition for Appointment of Probate Conservator of Verla in Marin County California case number XXXXX Court record
9/--/2007 Verla K. Regnery hospitalized for a brain lesion. Medical record
9/17/2007 Verla K. Regnery manages to talk briefly to Juaine when she manages to make a call from Gretchen's cell phone. She begs Juaine to come and rescue her and take her home. No one from the family is allowed to talk to Verla on the phone after this. Juaine
9/30/2007 - 1/30/2008 Lynn leases a room in a nursing home in spite of the fact she has a large one story house with four bedrooms and two people living there.

The nursing home was used when Lynn was at dog shows or Verla did not obey her, i.e. exercises every morning.Most times Verla could noot do them.Every time she could not Lynn took her to the nursing home

Lynn cursed, pulled, and twisted Verla when "helping" Verla off the toilet at Lynn's NC home. Lynn knew that Verla was extremely arthritic. Verla was seen by witnesses to be crying.Lynn then began yelling at Verla. The bathroom door was open during the entire event.in full view of five witnesses. Lynn and other family members
10/3/2007 Frederick W. Regnery calls caregiver. Verla K. Regnery is excited to see Fred and his family. She is walking and talking. Fred and family arrive. Verla is comatose. Fred calls 911 three times but they refuse to dispatch an ambulance on Dr. Freedman's and Gretchen's orders/instructions. FWR
10/9/2007 Hospice visits conclude. Hospice/Medical record
11/02/2007 Verla K. Regnery dies.
November, 2007 Fred orders autopsy from coroner. Cause of death lack of heart medications, overdose of morphine and valium. Reports given to MVPD, District attorney and Hospice. A toxicology test was mandatory. The coroner called Hospice telling them of my request and by state law he must preform the autopsy.

Gretchen gets there first and five months later an autopsy report is furnished but no toxicology test.

Peter Flaxman - Gretchen's personal attorney since June of 2007 is paid at least $70,000 from the VKR trust. Without Flaxman Lynn and Gretchen could not have succeeded in ending their mothers life. They then pay him with the victim's money.

For 15 months against her own will Verla is falsely imprisoned. Her life sustaining medications were withdrawn, a fraudulent terminally ill diagnosis was given to enable Hospice to come in and administer five toxic drugs. A hospital was stopped from treating Verla and the only hope she had, her son, is kept from helping her for the last five months of her life. Maybe the worst crime is two sisters keeping a son and a mother apart during the last five months of her life.

July, 2006 through November, 2007 During these 15 months there was a constant cry from Verla to go home. Home was Chicago for 88 years, two brothers, one living next door and 70 nieces, nephews and their children. Home was Fairview nursing home in her own house. Verla was a sweet simple person who always put others first. Verla only had three wishes which she made clear to her children many years earlier. 1. Don't ever take me from my home; 2. Don't ever put me in a nursing home; and 3. Don't ever put me in Hospice. In the last 15 months of her life she had to endure her biggest fears. Those last 15 months Verla would live comfortably on $150,000. In those same 15 months Lynn and Gretchen withdrew $800,000 from her trusts.

Is there any way to take 15 months of containment, asking to go home everyday, having her life sustaining medications taken and having a stroke that was intentional How could one kind hearted 88 year old woman be treated by her own daughters in such an evil manner.
- Hide quoted text



Please note all of the medical evaluations came after the 1000 pages of medical documents were studied

-
First medical evaluation

Page 1: At the time of admission your mother had no fever, no vomiting, no diarrhea, no electrolyte imbalance. Her tongue was moist. Serum electrolytes, Urine specific gravity were normal. Other blood tests like BUN, serum creatnine, blood sugar, hemoglobin, Liver function test, X-ray chest and sonography were also normal. Her pulse and B.P. were within normal limits.

She was taking the following medicines-
Lexapro
Norvasac
Isordil
Dioxin
Hydrochlorthiazide
Prandine
Lipitor
Tricor
Comumidin

All these medicines were stopped abruptly without any reason for stopping them. They were not replaced by other oral or injectable medicines. Initially, the drugs were stopped because of so called spitting (vomiting). The treating doctor opined that she was terminally ill but in ER reports there was no such mentionl. Instructions were to stop medicine till swallow test done. She passed the swallow test still all heart medicines were not restarted. Instead, drugs like morphine, valium, chlorhydrate, haldol, atropine were commenced. Indications/Cause for giving them was not written. She was comatosed from haldol, so she was given 125cc fluids per hour. But ER reports had said to give gentle hydration i.e. 50cc per hour. 125 cc per hour fluid was too much for her age her heart condition. Her urine output was not measured or written. She was walking, climbing stairs up and down, had no pain before that. No test to measure drug level in blood was undertaken. No cardiologist was consulted.

No signs of terminal illness were written or described. She was not spitting food or water or other eatable things but the reason for withdrawal of heart medicine was described spitting. (on 06/06). Swallow test was done on 06/07 and it was NAD (No abnormality detected). Other oral medicines mentioned above were started but not the heart medicine. She did not have any pain, anxiety, agitation or other illness before admission to hospice.

She lived 6 months after withdrawal of heart medicine which was a sign of good health. No substitute or alternate medicine given for that. This itself shows that she was not terminally ill or in very bad shape. Instead morphine and valium were started both of which are respiration and Central nervous system (CNS) depressant. There was no reason for starting them (she was not in any kind of severe or intractable pain).

Stopping diuretics causes fluid retention which leads to overload on heart and it can cause serious deterioration of patient.

Stopping isordil needs replacement and specific cause for stopping it. Stopping heart medicine altogether can cause ischaemic heart disease, congestive heart failure, arrhthymias, uncontrolled hypertension and its complications like stroke, damage to other vital organs like kidney, eyes and brain.

Cardiologist said that norvarsac could be started if family wants. One month earlier same cardiologist told to continue all these medicines for four months.
Diuretic medicines were taken off on 05/30 and restarted on 08/18 by the cardiologist i.e. after two and a half months gap. On 06/06, the patient had high blood pressure and norvasac was given to her. She had a stroke on 10/06. The blood pressure medicine was extremely important for him. Stopping hyper tension medicine amounts to criminal negligence in such a patient.

On 08/17 water retention was so much that they had to start diuretics. She was being kept in a house 100 steps from street, without phone on sewing bed and without any heart medicine. This alone can prove gross negligence and needs cardiologist opinion. The physical care and medical attention your mother required at age of 88 was not given to her but withheld.

ER report itself said that she was not terminally ill (08/18/07). She lived for 5-6 months after stopping her medicines. No records contain cause of stopping the drug, not restarting it, reason for starting other medicines like morphine or valium or haldol. Records did not mention that she was terminally ill and there won't be any deterioration in her health if the medicines were stopped or not


Second medical evaluation

Late Mrs. Regnery had following heart and heart related conditions:
Atrial fibrillation and implanter permanent pacemaker
Coronary artery bypass grafting
Hypertension
Diabetes
Stroke
She was on permanent heart medications which are intended for long term treatment of heart patients. She regularly received:

1.Isodryl (isosorbit dinitrate) a nitrous medication causes coronary vasodilatation, or widening the coronary vessels by molecular mechanisms.
2. Norvasc (amlodipine)- used commonly to treat hypertension but can relieve symptoms of angina pectoris too.
3. Digoxin- essential for atrial fibrillation and heart failure, especially for long-term treatment
4. Lipitor (atorvastatin)- primarily used in hyperlipidemia, but is mandatory for all patients with coronary artery disease due to its pleotropic effects such as stabilizing the arterial wall endothelium, controlling the local inflammatory reaction. It's recommended in atrial fibrillation, heart failure. Several studies prove that elderly have benefits too.
5. Tricor (fenofibrate) used to control hyperlipidemia particularly hypertriglicerydemia.
6. Coumadin (warfarin) mandatory for people with atrial fibrillation for prevention of thromboembolic events in people with high risk for thromboembolic events.
7. Prandin- oral antidiabetic drug used to control sugar level in diabetic people.
Following medications were recommended by neurologist but were never administered to Mrs. Regniery.
1. Namendia - medication for controlling the Alzheimer's disease
2. Acetylcholine esterase inhibitor- used to control the Alzheimer's disease

These medications were used during her hospital and hospice care:
1. Morphine usually used for heavy pain (cancer, heart attack, skin burns), have profound effect on central nervous system. Acts depressive on the breathing center.
2. Valium- diazepam- tranquilizer. Depresses the breathing center. Has synergistic effect with other neurotropes.
3. Haldol- antipsychotic. Indicated for treatment of schizophrenia and tics. Contraindicated for dementia related psychosis. Has profound effect on cardiovascular system, Can cause malignant arrhythmias, resulting in death.
In my 13 years of medical practice I have never seen nor applied the rule of terminally ill or life expectance less than 6 months as reason to discontinue any ones medication. In the clinic I work, we have been treating with utmost care the patients regardless of their age. I can confirm that we have put a pacemaker in 92 years old patient and 91 y/o has stent implanted due to acute myocardial infarction.
The discontinuations of her medications have certainly had deleterious effects on Mrs. Regnery's health and most probably her life span. I am sure that she was in stable condition considering her cardiovascular system, cause signs of cardiac decompensation are firstly noted on 10/09/2007 as and fluid collection in her stomach (ascites) Surprisingly just 7 days before 10/02/2007 she has no signs of decompensation noted. It is also doubtful why when noticing such an abrupt deterioration in her cardiovascular status, a diuretic and other cardiac therapy wasn't installed immediately. Giving the fact that she wasn't taking any cardiac medication there is a strong probability that she would respond favorably to the reinstallation of cardiac medication. The use of heavy neurotropes such as Haldol, morphine and valium has very strict indication, and within the reports I have been provided with I can not see any valid reason for their use, especially on long term scale. I can not find any justification for combining those medications as well, knowing that they have synergistic depressive effect on the respiratory center in the brain stem. More over I will stress the absolute contraindication for use of haldol in dementia related psychosis, which was very probable in Mrs. Regnery considering her dementia.
It is striking that Mrs. Regnery had swallowing problems which lead to her cardiac medication discontinuation, but she was swallowing just fine to be given Valium tablets.
The Norvasc which was latter reinstated (it was prescribed but not seen it in hospice documents) as only heart medication is far from sufficient for long term treatment of patients such was Mrs. Regnery. It could only help control her blood pressure, but not likely more than that.
Long haul flights have been proven to increase possibility of thromboembolic events considering the long hours of leg immobility. In elderly the risk is even more increased cause the already have decreased circulation and hyper clotting condition.
Therefore in my opinion the long journey Mrs. Regnery was exposed from Illinois to California, 6000 miles, certainly had negative impact on the health including possible stroke, even a microemboly which might not present itself as a major neurologic deficit but rather as discrete deterioration of already present symptoms such as dementia. The fact that Mrs Regnery had atrial fibrillation and was not on oral anti clotting medications makes this possibility even more real.
Unfortunatelly, apart from her age which is a fact but far from crucial one, I recognize many other events that contributed her departure. Unreasonable and unjust discontinuation of important medications which not only prolonged her life but also provided her with substantial quality of life, unnecessary exposure to a long haul flight of an elderly, with naturally decrease peripheral circulation, deprived of oral anticoagulants and with atrial fibrillation made her a probable victim of thromboembolic event. Unexplainable use of heavy neurotropes some of which are strictly contraindicated for her condition surely worsen her neurological status, consequently worsening the function of the other organs. I stress that there are no indication of multiorgan failure in several blood and physical tests that were available to me. She had normal liver and kidney function in all aspect. On several physical exams I was able to review from May to October, she had no pathological signs considering her lungs and heart. In every report her dementia was stated as the biggest problem, but by no means it is a sufficient element for terminaly ill diagnosis or does it limits expected survival by it self. The swallowing problem which occurs, is proven not to be extremely severe and could be overcome.
This is the third evaluation of my mothers medical state
. The heart medications cannot suddenly withdrawn in any circumstance. It is like stopping oxygen. Stopping them can precipitate ischemic heart disease, congestive heart failure, arrhythmia of the heart and even can stop the heart. It is like one want to be sure to stop functioning of the most vital organ of the body. The spitting theory does not work, as there has to be reason for spitting. There was no cause for her to spit selectively the things. She was spitting only heart medicines!! She was not spitting water or any other eatable? How is that explained. If one spits the medicines; DOCTOR SHOULD HAVE STARTED THE INJECTABLES SUPPLEMENTING THE HEART ORAL MEDICINES. Was this ever discussed or alternative thought of. In any hospice care, not all heart medicines can suddenly be withdrawn. It is like Euthanasia. Dr. Arun Hello, No, there cannot be a single good reason or as a matter of fact, even a reason to explain stoppage of these life saving medications. Whatever these cardiologist say, more they will be telling lies and more they would dig their grave deeper down. A simple thing in medicine is if you require it, spitting cannot be a reason to stop it. One has to find the alternate method to administer them. Stoppage of them is no answer. Answer lies in continuing them by the other route. The indirect evidence has to be the basis of your work. There was a negligence that all the investigations were done but urine analysis was not done. Ordering an investigation (urine exam) and not sending the sample is negligence in itself of hospital and doctors and incriminatory. Once they knew from the lab that urine has not been received, another sample should have been sent. There is always a written order of doctor, then a receipt of the lab, that these investigations were received. Finding these records can pin point the mal-intention. Moist mucosa means that there was no dehydration. In an old lady, with compensated heart, kidney dysfunctions and no fluid and electrolyte imbalance, the rare of intravenous fluids or 125 ml per hour is not normal. The urine specific gravity is good enough indicator or the dehydration. In dehydration the urine is concentrated and there is rise of specific gravity. In her report the urine specific gravity was absolutely normal. As we discussed, you have good evidences to make it a case and it is quite certain that your mother's heart was not terminally ill. Withdrawing all the heart medications suddenly, was the most likely cause for heart and other body functions to seriously affect. Please let me know about the defense's arguments and evidences, so I can make suggestions, if any. The Hospice 414.00 terminally ill admittance document is not contained in the Hospice records.This report is mandatory for their records.Your nurses report indicates your mother did not qualify in one category There are many things which are important and somebody has to be liable. The doctor writes the test for urine, nursing staff sends the urine and lab receives and do the test. Somebody in this chain has to be responsible. Did the doctor did not write it intentionally? Urine test in a hospitalized patient is important. If it was written why it was not sent by nursing staff. If the lab says it did not receive the urine, why was the sample not called again, despite the requisition. If it was called again, why it was not sent back. What is your lawyer saying? Is there a defense IME (independent medical evaluation)? If yes, what are his explanations? Yes, this is 100% criminal negligence. They have to give a genuine reason for it, which does not (or cannot) exist. How would you justify the withdrawal of heart medication? Then there is an obvious motive. Her medicines like Isodil, Norvasc, Tricor, Coumadin, Lipitor, Hydrochlorthiazide were extremely important and stopping Isodil would amount to criminal negligence. This is a life saver and there has to be a strong documentation or reasoning, like severe allergic reaction or reason something like that to stop it. Then it has to be replaced by some other medicine.
Stopping all of them, means trying to stop the life processes.
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

This is the criminal neglect case in Oregon Washington.Although it is not binding in Illinois we can certainly use this as reference.

Your case is stronger than this case and all the definitions like, "physical care or medical attention" and "'Withhold" should apply on your sister and your mother's doctors. This is a good statute on basis of one can work your case. I hope your lawyer also agrees to it. Dr. Arun To me this is not nearly as strong of a case as my mothers.The man was not isolated asking everyday to go home.spitting out was my sisters excuse but the next day my mother took five painkillers and did not spit them out.This man did not go to the hospital where his medication was denied or overdosed on haldol.This man did not die if heart failure.If my sisters says a doctor told her to do this I want to meet the doctor and see his order Oregon case,criminal neglect.If this is criminal neglect then my mothers is murder. A. XXXXX XXXXX, Judge. Argued and submitted on February 26, 2009, Portland Community College, Portland. Erica Herb, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. With her on the brief was Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, Legal Services Division, Office of Public Defense Services. Inge D. Wells, Senior Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General. Before Haselton, Presiding Judge, and Armstrong, Judge, and Rosenblum, Judge. HASELTON, P. J. Affirmed. HASELTON, P. J. Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction for one count of criminal mistreatment in the second degree, ORS 163.200(1)(a), assigning error to the trial court's denial of her motion for a judgment of acquittal (MJOA). Defendant asserts that the state failed to present legally sufficient evidence that she "with[held] necessary and adequate * * * physical care or medical attention" from the victim. Id. As explained below, we conclude that defendant's conduct in moving the victim to the home of her friend without the victim's prescription medications constituted "withhold[ing] necessary and adequate * * * medical attention" within the meaning of the criminal mistreatment statute because it precluded the victim from receiving those medications at the prescribed time. Consequently, we affirm. We review the denial of an MJOA to determine whether, after viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the state, a rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proved beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Cunningham, 320 Or 47, 63, 880 P2d 431 (1994), cert den, 514 US 1005 (1995). Although defendant moved for a judgment of acquittal at the close of the state's evidence, we consider the whole record to determine whether there is sufficient corroborative evidence. See State v. Lamphere, 233 Or 330, 332, 378 P2d 706 (1963) (when error is assigned to the denial of an MJOA, appellate courts consider the whole record to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to support a conviction). Consistently with that standard of review, the operative facts are as follows. In May 2000, Willy Lackey contacted his nephews, Ray and Mark Lackey, and requested that they help care for him because he was elderly and could no longer live alone.(1) Willy suffered from congestive heart failure, blood pressure problems, depression, anxiety, and prostate cancer, and was experiencing signs of early dementia. Willy also had chronic edema--retention of fluids and swelling--in his lower extremities. The nephews moved Willy from Montana to Mark's house in Redmond. In August 2000, Willy was diagnosed with terminal lung cancer, and his physician referred him to hospice for care. In September 2000, Mark hired defendant as Willy's caregiver. Shortly thereafter, defendant moved into Mark's home to provide Willy with 24-hour care. Defendant was responsible for, among other duties, administering Willy's medications. Willy took two diuretics to remove extra fluids--one in the morning and one twice a day--plus a blood pressure or heart medication once a day. Willy also took two "p.r.n."(2) (as necessary) medications: an antianxiety medication and morphine. The morphine was prescribed for Willy's "pain from his cancer" and "decrease[d] the work that [Willy's] heart ha[d] to do in congestive heart failure." Willy was on morphine, which could be dispensed up to once every hour, "multiple times a day." Although Willy's mobility was impaired and he could not leave the house independently, he was lucid and able to communicate. In December 2000, defendant began to have problems and disagreements with Mark regarding Willy's care. Those disagreements culminated in an incident in January 2001 in which Willy became upset and unhappy with Mark and sided with defendant. Sometime thereafter, Willy began expressing a strong desire to return to Montana. Defendant, along with Brookshire, a high school friend of Mark's, made a plan to take Willy back to Montana. Brookshire purchased a motor home for the trip in late January. Willy's family was not informed of that plan. Although hospice nurses were aware that Willy wanted to go to Montana and had discussed options with Willy, defendant did not involve hospice in her plan. Willy's physician also was not informed of defendant's plan and testified at trial that it would not have been in Willy's best interests to travel to Montana without first checking in with either the physician or hospice. On the morning of January 31, 2001, defendant moved Willy to the home of a friend, Harvey, where defendant was renting an additional room. Defendant then went to the bank where Willy had a joint checking account with his nephews. Defendant attempted to close out the account, using a power of attorney that defendant had helped Willy execute in her favor. Defendant informed the bank teller that Willy wanted to go to Montana and that she was withdrawing the funds for that purpose. The teller became "a little nervous" and, after speaking to her supervisor, informed defendant that it would take some time before she could give defendant the funds. The teller then called Mark, who notified Ray about the situation, and Ray called the police to report that Willy was possibly being "kidnapped." Redmond Police Officer Dickson, joined by another officer, Ludwig, went to Harvey's home to investigate the possible kidnapping. Upon their arrival, defendant informed the officers that she was caring for Willy, that Willy was there at the home with her, and that he was fine. Defendant led the officers to a back bedroom, where Willy was sitting on the bed. Willy was smiling and in "good spirits," but, consistently with his chronic edema, his lower extremities were swollen. Ludwig then asked defendant to step out of the bedroom and into the living room, while Dickson stayed with Willy to question him alone. Willy was alert and able to answer Dickson's questions. At some point during Ludwig's questioning of defendant in the living room, she abruptly turned and, hurriedly, walked into the back bedroom where Dickson was questioning Willy. The officers repeatedly ordered defendant to leave the bedroom, but she refused and became uncooperative. The officers ultimately arrested defendant for resisting arrest and interfering with a police officer.(3) After defendant's arrest, the officers contacted Oregon Senior and Disabled Services (SDS). Lockridge, an Adult Protective Services investigator from SDS, arrived to find Willy in good spirits. At some point, Willy informed Lockridge that he needed to have his medications. Lockridge searched the house, the motor home, and defendant's car for Willy's medications, but could not find them. Neither the officers nor Lockridge attempted to ask defendant if Willy's medications were in any of those locations. Willy also informed Dickson that he needed some medications "at that time." Dickson believed that "Willy was apparently overdue on medication and should have had some." Lockridge then called hospice, and hospice sent a nurse, Schwing, to Harvey's residence to assist in Willy's care. When Schwing arrived, Willy was lying down in the back bedroom and was "clear," "lucid," "knew where he was," and "knew what the plan was." Schwing called pharmacies and obtained refills of all of Willy's medications and arranged transportation for Willy to a nearby care center. The next day, police seized defendant's car and the motor home pursuant to a warrant and later searched them, but they found no medications. Based on those events, a grand jury charged defendant with, inter alia, criminal mistreatment in the second degree,(4) ORS 163.200(1)(a) (Count 4). That statute provides, in part: "(1) A person commits the crime of criminal mistreatment in the second degree if, with criminal negligence and: "(a) In violation of a legal duty to provide care for another person, the person withholds necessary and adequate * * * physical care or medical attention from that person[.]" Criminal negligence, in turn, is defined as: "'Criminal negligence' or 'criminally negligent,' when used with respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a statute defining an offense, means that a person fails to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the result will occur or that the circumstance exists. The risk must be of such nature and degree that the failure to be aware of it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation." ORS 161.085(10). As relevant here, the indictment alleged that defendant "did, with criminal negligence and in violation of a legal duty to provide care for WILLIAM LACKEY, unlawfully withhold necessary physical or medical attention from said WILLIAM LACKEY." At the close of the state's case, defendant moved for a judgment of acquittal with respect to Count 4.(5) Defendant did not challenge the sufficiency of the state's proof with respect to the requisite "criminally negligent" mental state. Rather, defendant argued solely that the state had failed to establish that defendant had "with[held] necessary and adequate * * * physical care or medical attention" from Willy. ORS 163.200(1)(a).(6) The state countered that, based on evidence of the events of January 31, defendant was culpable in either of two ways. First, the state contended that defendant had violated the statute by undertaking to move Willy to Montana without first taking the proper medical steps, including obtaining the advice and involvement of either hospice or his doctor. Second, the state contended that, because none of Willy's prescribed medications could be found inside Harvey's home, the motor home, or defendant's car, defendant had withheld necessary and adequate physical care or medical attention because Willy did not have his medications on site and "[t]hose items were necessary for Willy['s] * * * care." Defendant responded that she "was never in a position to provide or withhold * * * the medications after she was taken into custody" and, because the officers never asked her about medications, she did not have the opportunity to inform them where the medications were. The trial court denied defendant's MJOA. Subsequently, during the defense case, defendant testified that Willy's medications were present on site but that they had fallen between the bed and the oxygen condenser during her altercation with police officers. Defendant introduced as evidence medications that she contended she had found in that location four days later when she had returned to Harvey's residence upon being released from custody. During closing arguments, counsel for defendant argued that the medications were on site but that Lockridge and Dickson did not find them because they conducted only a "cursory search" of Harvey's home. Counsel further argued that, if someone had only asked defendant where the medications were, she could have told them where she had seen them last. The jury ultimately returned a guilty verdict on the second-degree criminal mistreatment count.(7) On appeal, defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying her MJOA on Count 4, reiterating that the state failed to prove that defendant "with[held] necessary and adequate * * * physical care or medical attention." As explained below, we conclude that the state presented legally sufficient evidence that defendant's conduct effected a withholding of "necessary and adequate * * * medical attention" from Willy. Specifically, other care providers were not able to administer medications, as prescribed, because of defendant's criminally negligent failure to have those medications readily available. As noted, ORS 163.200(1)(a) provides that a person commits the crime of second-degree criminal mistreatment if the person, "with criminal negligence," and "n violation of a legal duty to provide care for another person, * * * withholds necessary and adequate * * * medical attention from that person[.]" We previously construed the phrase "withholds necessary and adequate * * * medical attention" in State v. Bordeaux, 220 Or App 165, 185 P3d 524 (2008). In Bordeaux, the issue was whether the defendant's conduct in lying to emergency room personnel about the cause of his son's injuries--namely, that they had been inflicted by the defendant--constituted "withhold[ing] necessary and adequate * * * medical attention" within the meaning of the first-degree criminal mistreatment statute, ORS 163.205(1)(a).(8) 220 Or App at 167. We concluded that, because a construction of the statute criminalizing such conduct would essentially require a person to confess to one crime (criminal mistreatment for causing physical injury) to avoid being guilty of another (criminal mistreatment for withholding medical attention), the legislature did not intend the statute to encompass the failure to disclose to medical personnel inculpatory information about the cause of a child's injuries. Id. at 175-76. Although our interpretation and application of ORS 163.205(1)(a) in Bordeaux ultimately pertained to the particular--and, indeed, somewhat idiosyncratic--circumstances presented there, our discussion of the operative statutory terms "medical attention" and "withholds" informs our analysis in this case. Although we did not determine the ultimate contours of the term "medical attention" in Bordeaux, implicit in our analysis was that that term encompasses at least "medical care." See generally 220 Or App at 172-73. As pertinent to the circumstances of this case, the administration of prescription medication is "medical care" and, thus, constitutes "medical attention" for purposes of ORS 163.200(1)(a). In Bordeaux, we also addressed the meaning of "withhold": "'Withhold' is defined in pertinent part to mean, '1: hold back : keep from action : CHECK, RESTRAIN * * * 2: to desist or refrain from granting, giving or allowing : keep in one's possession or control : keep back * * *.' Webster's Third New Int'l Dictionary 2627 (unabridged ed 2002)." 220 Or App at 171 (omissions in Bordeaux; boldface in Webster's). Consistently with that definition, and subject to the "provision of self-inculpatory information" exception adopted in Bordeaux, an operative "withhold[ing]" occurs when the defendant--a person with a "legal duty to provide care," ORS 163.200(1)(a)--has engaged in conduct that prevents the victim from actually receiving necessary and adequate medical attention. We return to the evidence in this case, again viewed most favorably to the state. Based on that evidence, a jury could find that defendant failed to have Willy's prescription medications readily available for administration as required. Notwithstanding extensive efforts by Lockridge, the SDS investigator, and, later, by police officers, none of Willy's medications were ever found in Harvey's home, the motor home, or in defendant's car. The jury could further find that, at a time when the medications were not available on site, an actual need for administration of Willy's prescription medications arose. Willy informed Lockridge that he needed to have his medications and informed Dickson that "some medications were needed at that time." Dickson testified that "Willy was apparently overdue on medication and should have had some." Finally, the jury could find that, because of defendant's criminally negligent failure to have Willy's prescribed medications readily available on site, Willy was unable to receive his prescription medications as required. Defendant argues nevertheless that she cannot be liable for "withholding" under the statute because she had been arrested and the officers never asked where the drugs were.(9) Defendant's argument misses the mark. The premise of defendant's contention is that the medications were on site--and that, if she had been asked, she could have informed the officers where they were. However, as noted, the state presented evidence from which the jury could find that the medications were not, in fact, present in Harvey's residence or readily available nearby (viz., in defendant's car or the motor home). Thus, the fact that the officers did not ask defendant where the medications were is immaterial. Defendant's predicate conduct in failing to have the medications readily available so that they could be administered when actually required effected the operative withholding. California probate code-Dementia.There was the Mars report intentionally concealed by my sisters,and Flaxman from the court and health care providers.The hospital report "profound dementia" McIntosh,Kim Schwartz proposed conservator,her attorney,Flaxman my sister and the Judge.Everyone was aware of this but me.It would have saved my mothers life. If the Mars report is not concealed at the conservator hearing my mother gets conserved,medicine back and goes home (a) The Legislature hereby finds and declares: (1) That people with dementia, as defined in the last published edition of the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders," should have a conservatorship to serve their unique and conservatee, reduce costly administration by state and county

What caused all of this.An incapacitated woman whose daughters committed fraud and forgery to take her trusts.A forgery of $420,000 and withdrawals of 1.0. in her last 15 months of

There is no legacy trust My stay in Marin will be quite easy.especially with two court transcrips and eddie's testimony on the TRO The false imprisonment statute from California I dont know if it is appropiate if so we will pick another one. Financial explotation is where we should focus as it will get the Judges attention. After a 7,000 flight my mother ended up with up with dementia.The Mars clinic did an evaluation to confirm incapacity.That was the last time anyone saw the Mars report until my mothers death.Thre were two prescriptions my mother was to talk for her dementia but my sisters ignored them The insurance trust forged signature and fraud The 2006 fradulant concealment, $60,000 $420,000 forgery $500,000 in excess of what she would have needed Then there is the irrecovavle/revocable trust.The insurance trust did not have benificiaries until the day my mother died.The buy back Provision meant it was her money and my sisters embezzled it.On financial Explotation we can go back 10 years.That means $5.0m assets You will have to verify the SOL Lynns house 9/1/2006 1/31/2007 Lynn was abusive to her mother as she has been her entire life.zMy mother needed help getting out of a chair once standing Lynn did not have the patience so she would pull her by the arm(Eddie) mey motjher lived in fear not knowing when the next out burst would come.Several times in the bathroom in full view of relatives Lynn would get angry and pull up my mothers diapers to the point she would statr crying.Lynns response was to yell at her 88 year old helpless mother. My mother was promised never to be put in a nursing home.She was dfor five months in spite of Lynn's big new ranch house for my mother My mother was to exercise every morning.Many time she could not.Her puninshment was to go back to the nursing home for 2 or 3 days.Gretcchen ,Lynn and their ons were always plotting on how to get my mothers money It was over heard by Eddie that Lynn said to her son John she must die before Bush leaves office On a second occassion she told severall people it was time to oput the pillow over my mothers face (Eddie) On yet another ovccassion Gretchen and Lynn were going to put up $100,000 to have me murdered.Their offer was made from Lynn's husband In February against my better judgement I allowed my mother to go to California The house she lived in was not what was agreed upon.It was 100 steps up from the ttreet and my mother lived in a sewing room without a phone
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago

The slayer statute in Illinois. They have no statute of limitations on this claim. Other jurisdictions only give you two to three years from the date of death. All of the facts you cite look good. They help lay out the slayer statute and abuse claims. Make sure you give all the medical information you just posted, to the doctor who is to be the expert witness. If he gets on the stand explains all of it to the jury, your case will be strong. Show what you just posted about Oregon and Washington, to your lawyer. it is not binding authority in Illinois. It is good and can be persuasive authority.

RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

 

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?j4ttwhg2zjn

 

 

 

Ray,

I dont know if this is for you but my attorney sis so busy he can not understand it.

 

This is a motion judgement for the pleadings.Almost all of it relates to us not being income benificiaries while my mother was alive.In the worst case we would be contingent and hope the case law carried the day.

 

Then last night I read something I have read 100 times before.The Illinois trust and trustee act.Lets see what yopu take is and if it wipes out their motion.

 

A. is basically the standard grantor sole benificiary guidelines for accounting.Income benificiaries only. A was my mother

 

B is a different story you become a benificiary at the death of your mother if you are to receive part of the trust distribution.So unless I am losing my mind the contingent benificiary becomes a benificiary at death as long as there is a distribution to him and therefore he is entitled to accounting going back to the beginning.

 

 

Mother

 

(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.

 

Me

 


(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.

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
Your lawyer should have found this and used it. This is precisely what I have been saying. You are a beneficiary and you have standing. You can defeat this motion. Have your lawyer file a brief in opposition to this motion. Have him cite this in it.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
I need to make 100% sure.I have read it over and over again.Income benificiary only meaningful if you are in A. B has noting to do with oincome just becoming a benificiary at death and receiving part of the trust.Yoy then can go all the way back.Is their anything in the pleadings that could cause trouble.I just keep on hearing income benificiary over and over
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
This is correct. The part in B applies to you and this gives you standing. I did not see anything you cannot dispute properly. Tell your lawyer to find some case law to help you. This will improve your argument.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
http://www.mediafire.com/?2n2hnmweytl Hi Ray, This was the last second filing to beat the elder abuse statute.Of course the opposaition came back with everything and everything Their arguments was per the supreme court our service was too late.they say Juaine filed the exact motion in the federal court and it was dismissed.Not true,Juaine has no standing with the trusts,the insutrance policy has been signed off on,california has been tried again and again by me with the same result.They are classifying my mothers trust as a legacy trust so we missed our opportunity to contest it.I picked up the transcripts today but there is not much there 2-1/2 years ago and five attorneys ago I beat everyone over the hea ask for a trust accountijng and put all of you efforts into my mother.Of course no one listened and in the 11th hour this is what ges filed. Adding me takes several of the trust standing issues,the attorney thinks the time of service will not be an issue,Already trried in california was a mistake I have the detail from every day.The Judge will not rule on discovery right now. My thinking please confirm is we have four counts.Everything I have read or people I have talked to says elder financial abuse or fininancial explotation is defined as taking control of someones money directly or through their agent. Lets just talk about incapacity.My mothers agent for 20 years was her brother he his thrown off by fraud (Financial abuse) a forgery of the $3.4M policy that my mothers attoney is a part of (Financial abuse) every month money coming out in excess of my mothers care (financial abuse) $420,000 by forgery(financial abuse) $60,000 gifts (financial abuse) $500,000 in excess of my mothers needs when she died (financial abuse) I think because oof the position of authority and trust,POA, Trustees and daughters they will award punitive damages. The insurance interpleader came about at my request.First I was not going to settle then agreed only if my sisters nd their lawyer were left out of the settlement agreement.The were two weeks we found out the trustees signature is forged. These attorneys are a poor excuse for attorneys.12 months and they are still stuck in the mud.
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
Late service is not an issue. As long as the pleading is filed within the statute of limitations, service does not matter. There is financial abuse and exploitation. Your sisters took control of your mother's finances. They spent the money. She made no decisions about the money. This pleading you sent looks good.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

In a diversity federal lawsuit if another party is sued that would break diversity the district court only has two choices.Not allow the joiner or allow the joiner and remand the case to the state court they have no optionOur trust case is a state case and that is where we filed but diversity took it to the federal court.The abuse was filed in the state court and we tried to intervene with our federal case but was denied.That case to belongs in the state court.Now we have a malpractice legal case in Illinois and a brokerage suit in Illinois.Both are under state law.What if we sue there parties in the federal court and put the Judge on the spot.Al four cases are state cases.The broker and the lawyer are not frivilous suits to break diversity in fact no one knows we do.The Judge has a choice to deny the new plaintiffs or to rid himself of the trust case and the two new defendants and send them to the state court.If he doesnt and just holds on to the trust case before discovery even begins does he not put himself in an ackward position.There is another situation that I dont remember the name of but it is something like Judicial economies

 

What I dont know is whether my attornney will go for it.What is your opinion.

 

Unfortunatly with their motion to dismiss my sister admitted an affadavit.All lies.In the transcripts the Judge referred to the affadavit twice.I wrote my attorneys a letter and told them no one is mining the store.If they dont have time tell the client.I then followed my sisters affadavit ith the truth and named a document to suport what I said for each subject.The frusterating thing is since my mother died my entire focus has been on her abuse.I estimate potentially $5.0m.The trust is just an accounting issue.All five attorneys could not see it all they did was trust trust .Now that I think they have lost the ability to go back to California it changes a lot.If the state Judge takes it I dont think they can go back to the federal court as the refused our motion to intervene.

 

The calims now are financial explotation,False imprisonment,neglect and abuse and soon to follow slayer statute.The judge agreed to continue the briefing schedule but said a quick decision whether we can do discovery or not needed to be made soon.How can we have a lawsuit without discovery? Does that mean he needs to make a quick decision on whetther we have a case or not? Until he sees the evidence how can he say I wont take your case?Is there anything else we should be doing or filing?Letting my sisters transcript sit their influencing the Judges decision is unexcuseable.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
If you want to stay in federal court, you can. If this another person is added, you can still argue to keep the case in the same federal court action. This is because the case involving the other person is out of the same nucleus of fact. Discuss this with your lawyer. You have to discovery and you have to do it well in advance of trial. There are no other options for the judge, he has to schedule discovery. Your lawyer should pursue this with the judge.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Ray,

My post was lost.An uncle is removed by fraud,a forged signature and fraudulant notary,two people take over a $3.4M trust.Later the same two people withdraw $420,000 by forgery.This was their mothers money.Their mother was still alive and did not agree to this.Fraud,forgery are involved.However before prudential agrees to an interpleader before the $3.0M fell in the the wrong hands.No harm no foul.I am told today.They took this and a lot more from a helpless incapacitated woman who was to be protected by them.When they forge my signature and open an account under my name just so they could get 2/3rds does this clense their hands from forgery.My mother was living this was her money.I have no control over them forging my name but because the stole $100,000 from my mother and sent me unknowingly $33,000.If this were true children could clean out their disabled elderly parents without fear.

 

Please give me your thoughts

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
This is fraud and financial exploitation. Your mother did not have the capacity to manage her money. They executed forged documents and took control of the money. Also, the last post mentioned someone who said there was no crime. They are wrong. Even if you got a third, there was forgery. Your sisters took control of the money.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
I think what they are trying to tell me is I sustained no damages therefore it does not belong in the suit.They are wrong but I have to tell them how.They said when you pat a charge inf ront of the Judg you have to ask for damages.They claim I have no damages.
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
You have to prove that you would have received more money if this had not happened, or that your mother would have had more money if this had not happened. You prove this by showing how much money they withdrew. If they had not done these things, you would still get a third. However, it would be a third of a much larger sum because the trust funds would have been greater.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
Dear XXXXX and Julie, I was a little taken back today where something that has been a cornerstone of your case for the last year gets swept under the table especially when nothing has changed.N long ago Don asked Eddie to get Wallerich to sign something and Eddie did.Don said we may go back to the federal court and over turn the entire hearing.Today its no harm no foul.I hope you understand why I cant accept it and soon I will show you. Fraud is fraud forgery is forgery both involved millions of dollars that at the time no one knew where it would end up.If you had $1.0M and someone took it what is that called.If through my own diligence I ended up getting that $1.0M back is that no harm no foul? I think it is fraud and forgery.I asked Scott coming home how important the Judges perception of the defendants and plaintiffs were.He said very important.so should my sisters sit in front of the judge saying we are sorry my mother did not want any accounting so we did not do it.Or do they sit there with evidence and witnesses coming out out of every pocket,forgery,fraud,abuse,neglect financial explotation in intentional death?. I know this when I left for China in May of 2006 without taking a penny since except the insurance policy my 1/3rd would be worth one hell of a lot more than it is today.My sisters are evil as are their attorneys mix them all together and you are sitting on a time bomb. Today was the very first day that the irrevocable trust was not a big plus in our favor.If at all decisions like that have to evolve and everyone should be on board. Fred
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
This looks good. The language is strong. If you feel they will respond to this language, send this letter.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago
I already did
Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago

Sending it was the right choice. Hopefully, they will respond.

Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Whena 88 year old incapacitted person has two trusts and that is all she has to her name.She cant manage them so someone close they can trust does it for them.The through forgery and frauf thake every penny this woman has they have committed a crime they could go to jail for.,.We have not even got tto the medications yes.I think the penalty is greater the closer these people are to you as it puts you in a false sense of security.

 

The son tried for four months to help the mother but cant she dies from abuse.Why cant the som a benificiary sue these people for each and every act of financial abuse they committed even if he received 1/3rd.He may not iof they put the trusts in their name and wallerich name.No harm no foul??Words of an idiot .Four months knowing the torture they were putting my mother through is the worst foul there can be.I dont buty the no harm no foul.

 

I need to come up with a stredegy for these people.I hit them with the statute if I want to bring an illinois defendant into the case the judge has only two choices.Say no.Or O.K. O.K. is immeadiatly remanding it to the state court with this case and Letizia and Blair.They are all state cases and have no business in the federal court anyway.I pushed my lawyr he said the Judge will turn it down and hold it against us.I said wait a minute every Judge in the court house would allow the case to leave the Judge is naked and we no for sure he is dirty.My lawyer would not agree

Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Whena 88 year old incapacitted person has two trusts and that is all she has to her name.She cant manage them so someone close they can trust does it for them.The through forgery and frauf thake every penny this woman has they have committed a crime they could go to jail for.,.We have not even got tto the medications yes.I think the penalty is greater the closer these people are to you as it puts you in a false sense of security.

 

The son tried for four months to help the mother but cant she dies from abuse.Why cant the som a benificiary sue these people for each and every act of financial abuse they committed even if he received 1/3rd.He may not iof they put the trusts in their name and wallerich name.No harm no foul??Words of an idiot .Four months knowing the torture they were putting my mother through is the worst foul there can be.I dont buty the no harm no foul.

 

I need to come up with a stredegy for these people.I hit them with the statute if I want to bring an illinois defendant into the case the judge has only two choices.Say no.Or O.K. O.K. is immeadiatly remanding it to the state court with this case and Letizia and Blair.They are all state cases and have no business in the federal court anyway.I pushed my lawyr he said the Judge will turn it down and hold it against us.I said wait a minute every Judge in the court house would allow the case to leave the Judge is naked and we no for sure he is dirty.My lawyer would not agree

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
I think it is worth trying. Move it to state court. I do not see how the judge can refuse. As long as there is jurisdiction in state court, he has to allow it.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Hi Ray,

I have an attorney in S.F. that may take all three cases on a contingency after he reviewsthe court files.The Judge is really a dilemma.He is against us ruled three times against us and we should not have lost one.My attorney must feelbringing in a defendant may interfere with his career.Can I say do it no more discussion.

 

The most upsetting thing is he and his assistant never looked at the prudential fraud.They are saying no harm no foul.I have a very hard time with that but am willing to accept reality.

REcap again

 

Incapacity

deception with brother to remove him as thustee,fraud

Forge signature of new trustee which means two bebnificiaries control trust

Lawyer notarizes false siignature knowingly

withdraw $420000 by forgery including mine.

Thrie desperatly to collect from prudential

I release innocent trustee but not my sisters

Is this no harm no foul?

Here in my view it falls apart.My mother was one year from dying but had a buy back and her brother

we each get $1.0M

I have notr seen an financial explotation in the country that says one or more can commit ever imaginable crime to take her money and dump her brother.And because the criminals ended up with 1/3rd they are blessed of past sins

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
There was harm. Your lawyer should pursue this claim of fraud. Talk to the lawyer in San Francisco. Explore the option of a California court.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

They are saying no damages to be so I have no claim.Who is my mother to had every taken from her

 

If you became incapacitated had a trust run by your brother,one of you benificiaries commitd fraud, forgery,forgery again to withdraw $420,000.You can help yourseff and in fact dont know i is happing forgeget a year later died lookat the ast and time it happenedHow does the cout know she wont change her benificiaries.Does the could not have to look at the crime when it happened instead on one year after she died.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
There are damages. Your mother lost 420,000 dollars. There is a claim.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Ray,

 

It is probable for the abuse that took place in California California law would be used.That is great based on their e;lder abuse statutes.For example tro disinherit look at this

 


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:
(1) 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

 

Should I assume on the $420,000 that my sisters took it from my mother and her trustee/agent by fraud and forgery.The son is in China and is adament about taking the funds.Without his knowledge or consent they forged his name and put it in a forged account.This is the only way they could get theirs out.The brother finds out,tries to return the money but the account was closed so he waited for a very long time when it was legally his and his mother passed away.

 

I have been on my attorney pretty heavily,no didtribution to protect my share,will not name a new defendant to move the case to the state court so today he told me to continue talking to my even attorneys,a gross exageration,he used to like it,and in a round about way said start looking.The good thing is if I could find a good guy all he has o do in the federal court is get the accounting and try to move the case.The state court is the abuse and it is in its infancy.William Blair which is a push over is still there as is Letizia.It would also free up the 1/3rd which some of the work already done.I also have an attorney here who would be a great help just not capable of being the lead man

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
I think you can take this case to California and sue under their law. You will have to prove the defendants had some connection to California. Pursue this with your San Francisco lawyer.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

I think the Illinois state court will probably use California law.I believe the defendants have lost their opportunity to take the Case to California

 

I have a couple of attorneys looking at both cases.If they are interested what kind of agreement do you think I should try for..

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago

If it is in Illinois court, they have to use Illinois law. If you California is more favorable, you will have to take it to a California court. Either way, your case is strong. The facts show what your sisters did.

Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Attorneys that I have talked to that either have no interest or knowedge of elder abuse say the doctors and hospice your sister can hide behind and blame them.A POA and a daughter takes her mother to a cardiologist appointment on 5/3.Everything ids great come back in four months.On 5/28 a surprise letter from the brother and 5/39 a call to the doctor spitting out and 5/30 Hospice and opiates and 6/6 at the hospital no treatment.If a GP wants to remove your mothers heart medications after 15 years you call the cardiologist you just saw.If Hospice want to give opiates with no pain you fire them.Probably the most telling is medications are talked throughout and why they were removed.There is not one single word after there was no question she could swallow why the heart medications did not continue.She cant hide behind Hospice and the doctor.The POA says you can fire.If they are doing something unimaginable to your mother that could kill her and she died you are in the eye of the storn

 

I spoke to a recomended attorney today he is pulling the court records.I think at 1/3rd between the trust and abuse someone could make some money.He knows what my arrangement was with Johnson and he did not seem discouraged.You know the case and you are an attorney.What do you think someone would consider

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
I think a lawyer would accept this arrangement. This case is worth pursuing. Family members have a special duty to one another. Your sisters had a duty to make sure she was treated properly by hospice and everyone else.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Ray,

 

We are going into the state court asking to amend.I am not sure of the outcome.We have four counts,false imprisonment,abuse,neglect and financial explotation.One issue is this was brought by the executor who has no standing with any of the trust money.Maybe it will be me I dont know.

 

I am concerned about this case as they have put up a lot of barriers that we must get through.I would think without accounting,the ffraud and forgery of two trusts all coming from a grantors trusts in Chicago that would be pretty hard to not allow.

 

I have to go to N.C. friday my sisters divorse.I cant explain her to you but lets say her respect of authority is 0. She will be crazy when I am there and it would not suprise me to spite me she would empty the trust.The judge created this which was completly irresponsible 2-1/2 years after my mother died no accounting and unrestricted access to the trust funds.

 

Is there anything I can do.I cant count on my attorney.

 

Fred

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
You argue that you have standing. You were a beneficiary. Bring all the claims we discussed, as planned. Make sure the amended pleadings include the fraud, abuse, neglect, financial exploitation and false imprisonment. They have to allow these claims. Bring the claims for lack of accounting, fraud, and forgery. All you can do now is try to stress to your lawyer the importance of bringing these claims. Tell him there is no harm in just filing these claims. By filing these claims you are being safe.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Ray,

 

You and I took the original pleadings and added maybe 15-18 counts.Is this what you are referring to.I dont think that had abuse in it and certainly not the slayer statute

 

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
Tell your lawyer to take that original plus our 15 counts. Then, add the slayer statute and abuse. Your lawyer should be able to do this for you without any problems.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

I might as well be talking to a brick wall.They want to use the executor and use the original pleadings.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
Tell them not amending the pleadings would cause you and the law firm to miss out on money. To not pursue every possible claim is believed to be malpractice.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Ray,

Can you tell from loooking at the abuse pleadings why a benificiary must be the plaintiff.I need a little softer word or phrase than mal practice.I agree bring every clain but I need to soften it up.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
A beneficiary should sue because the depletion of assets was part of the abuse. This abuse harms the beneficiary because they get less money due to a depleted trust.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

There are several clains that should be included in the abuse claim.Not long ago many of them were included in the pleadings I had made and sent to you.

 

For us not to include each and every claim that we have would be an injustice to our case and we both would lose out.

 

As far as Juaine this was not my choice.I do not believe there was any solid reason behind it other than she was my mothers sister,the executive and would be viewed as a neutral party

 

From what I understand Juaine would be barred from certain claims where my children would not

 

Ray how is this

 

Rar how is this

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago

State all of this to your lawyer. The only reason that Juanie would be barred is because she is not considered a beneficiary.

Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Finally some good news.Against heavy objection the judge allowed us 28 das to amend our pleadings.

 

Our suit was filed in the state court.The federal court would not let us intervene.Then the state court again and 100 pages of their reasons to dismiss.Then today 28 days.

 

First are they dead forever to take the case to california.Is there any way after not letting us intervene that the opposition can get this case back in the federal court.

 

Our old claims were abuse,neglect,false imprisonment but California has a one year statute,financial explotation.I sent you our pleadings.What law is used.For example I was told a tort is the location where it happened.Being a tort professor you should know better than anyone.We should put something together as it is all in the computer and give it to them.

 

They do not want to do the slayer statute and that is O.K.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
If you filed in California federal, you could get a chance to intervene. Discuss this with your lawyer. If you file in California, the California law statute of limitations and laws apply. If you will in Illinois, Illinois law will be used. It is proper to file a tort claim in the state where it happened or the sate where the defendant lives.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

All of the Caloifornia statutes are dead.11/2/2007 was the date of death.We met the two year deadline in Illinois bu y two days.Further we have never filed anything in California.Is there some advantage in doing so? Is there any way for them to get back to California or the Chicago federal. I was told when it was first filed in the state court was their chance to object.If so all their witnesses must come here.Because of the Judge in the federal court should we not file every claim we have in the state court.

 

 

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
It might be better to file everything in Illinois state court.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

Ray,

We were handicapped from the beginning when the attorney did not file this as one case.I screamed at every one but all they wanted was the trust.

 

At first blush I was dissapointed with this until I started thinking.

 

1.We have a federal court case we need to be careful of stepping on their toes

 

2.California now would be a can of worms.Although I could eventully prove wha I say my sister has a possey on her side.My lawyer said heart medications and depressants.

 

3.On the 1987 trust why say more than you need to now.$420,000 taken from my mother by forgery leads us into everything else if the udge takes the case.

 

4.He got into accounting somewhat but again had to be careful about the federal court.

 

5.Money many different ways and then restraining my mother is wha he dwelled on.

 

These pleadings have to accomplish two things.Keep their response from hurting us or taking the case to California.

 

Convince the Judge we hav a case.

 

On the first how do they defend my mother was detained foor 15 months.Too many witnesses and they can't say my moher ever was at home.

 

The reason for detention was money.Anything in excess of $1.5M per year maybe $500,000,Black and white also in the trust this is explotation.

 

$420,000 this will be interesting.hey will say all of us signed off at the interpleader.I will say read the document.The two lawfirms there were representing my sisters.Dont you think in every way they wanted them relesed..My attorneys told them no deal so they took what they could.Two weeks later Wallerichs forgry surfaces.

 

The $420,000 I refused and Flaxman has it all ovr the record how upset I was.Wallerich signed the documents but Alvins idenification was written on a new page.

 

I don care if a 1000 atorneys say no foul no harm.Aunknowing,unwilling benigiciary's signaure was forged so that the othr two can withraw the money.When I found out I did not want to be part of the crime and tried to put the mony back but the account hd been closed.It sat for 9 months after my mothers death.

 

My conviction is they owe $420,000 back to the estate for five counts of forgery

 

If you did not commit the crime tried to stop it but it happened anyway and the thieves to cover up forged your signature and put some of the mon ey in your account.Is this no harm no foul?

 

Lastly my attorney opened my eyes that I knew was always there but n ever looked at it in the proper light.

 

My mothers and dads trusts the net income every year was to go to my mother.Prin cipal if needed by writing.This would involve one or two accounts being opened under the name Verla Regnery.These funds over the years would have been property of the estate and have nothin todo with Gretchen and Lynn.

 

Insead the funnelled funds fromTrust A to the living trust where they had exclusive control.I think this is a major issue as all they gave my mother was an allowance.

 

During my mohers life both retitled every last item into the name of the living trust.When my mother died there was not one drop of water to pour over.

 

All we have to do is get our toe in the door and we can expose everything.

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
You are correct and make some good points. Make sure the lawyer addresses the forgery and the loss of the 420,000 dollars. They owe you that money. There is no excuse fir detaining your mother or changing her medications. There is breach of fiduciary duty and fraud.
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal
Verified
RJ and 87 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you
Ask your own question now
Customer reply replied 7 years ago

 

 

 

Sorry I had to run out

 

My mothers and dads trusts the net income every year was to go to my mother principal if needed by writing.This would involve one or two accounts being opened under the name Verla Regnery.These funds over the years would have been property of the estate and have nothin to do with Gretchen and Lynn.

 

Insead they funneled funds fromTrust A to the living trust where they had exclusive control.I think this is a major issue as all they gave my mother was an allowance.

 

During my mohers life both retitled every last item into the name of the living trust.When my mother died there was not one drop of water to pour over.

 

All we have to do is get our toe in the door and we can expose everything

Personal Injury Lawyer: RJ, Professor replied 7 years ago
Make sure these terms of the trust are part of your evidence. They will prove what your sisters did was wrong nd prove you are entitled to monetary relief. Your sisters violated the terms of the trust. This is a breach of contract and a breach of fiduciary duty.
Ask Your Own Personal Injury Law Question
Ask RJ Your Own Question
RJ
RJ
RJ, Professor
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 3,070
3,070 Satisfied Customers
Experience: Former Torts professor and former personal injury paralegal

RJ is online now

A new question is answered every 9 seconds

How JustAnswer works:

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

JustAnswer in the News:

Ask-a-doc Web sites: If you've got a quick question, you can try to get an answer from sites that say they have various specialists on hand to give quick answers... Justanswer.com.
JustAnswer.com...has seen a spike since October in legal questions from readers about layoffs, unemployment and severance.
Web sites like justanswer.com/legal
...leave nothing to chance.
Traffic on JustAnswer rose 14 percent...and had nearly 400,000 page views in 30 days...inquiries related to stress, high blood pressure, drinking and heart pain jumped 33 percent.
Tory Johnson, GMA Workplace Contributor, discusses work-from-home jobs, such as JustAnswer in which verified Experts answer people’s questions.
I will tell you that...the things you have to go through to be an Expert are quite rigorous.

What Customers are Saying:

Mr. Kaplun clearly had an exceptional understanding of the issue and was able to explain it concisely. I would recommend JustAnswer to anyone. Great service that lives up to its promises!

Gary B.Edmond, OK

My Expert was fast and seemed to have the answer to my taser question at the tips of her fingers. Communication was excellent. I left feeling confident in her answer.

EricRedwood City, CA

I am very pleased with JustAnswer as a place to go for divorce or criminal law knowledge and insight.

MichaelWichita, KS

PaulMJD helped me with questions I had regarding an urgent legal matter. His answers were excellent.

Three H.Houston, TX

Anne was extremely helpful. Her information put me in the right direction for action that kept me legal, possible saving me a ton of money in the future. Thank you again, Anne!!

ElaineAtlanta, GA

It worked great. I had the facts and I presented them to my ex-landlord and she folded and returned my deposit. The 50 bucks I spent with you solved my problem.

TonyApopka, FL

Wonderful service, prompt, efficient, and accurate. Couldn't have asked for more. I cannot thank you enough for your help.

Mary C.Freshfield, Liverpool, UK

< Previous | Next >

Meet the Experts:

Infolawyer

Infolawyer

Attorney

1,148 satisfied customers

Licensed attorney helping individuals and businesses.

Ely

Ely

Counselor at Law

719 satisfied customers

Private practice with focus on family, criminal, PI, consumer protection, and business consultation.

LawTalk

LawTalk

Attorney

485 satisfied customers

I have 30 years of legal and litigation experience.

Dimitry K., Esq.

Dimitry K., Esq.

Attorney

449 satisfied customers

I provide basic personal injury advice to my clients in my own practice.

Tina

Tina

Attorney

390 satisfied customers

Personal Injury & Wrongful Death experience includes judgment for $10M & $3M settlement

Brandon, Esq.

Brandon, Esq.

Attorney

367 satisfied customers

Has received a certificate of recognition from the California State Senate for his outstanding legal service.

P. Simmons

P. Simmons

Attorney

265 satisfied customers

16 yrs. of legal experience.

< Previous | Next >

Related Personal Injury Law Questions
My Calif. medical malpractice negligence complaint requires
My Calif. medical malpractice negligence complaint requires which parts? What is repeated if any, and what is to be included in the First Amendment? How is a complaint different from an Amendment?… read more
Infolawyer
Infolawyer
Attorney
Doctoral Degree
1,148 satisfied customers
If we can show an intersection is an unsafe design, perhaps
If we can show an intersection is an unsafe design, perhaps the worst in the entire state, due to having unrelated traffic signals less than 200 feet apart after a long stretch of road without signals… read more
Ely
Ely
Counselor at Law
Juris Doctor
719 satisfied customers
Had surgery 2 years ago to remove gallbladder and mass by
Had surgery 2 years ago to remove gallbladder and mass by stomach. Had the same symptoms after surgery. Went to different doctor and had same tests run. He said it looked like a gastric bypass. He did… read more
PaulmoJD
PaulmoJD
Attorney At Law
Doctoral Degree
106 satisfied customers
What is my legal rights when a juvenile has punched me and
What is my legal rights when a juvenile has punched me and cause TBI medical problems. … read more
Ray
Ray
Lawyer
Doctoral Degree
30,828 satisfied customers
I need a Medical Malpractice/Negligence Lawyer. I need
I need a Medical Malpractice/Negligence Lawyer. I need his/her advise to file a case against a long term Nursing home at Mesa, AZ. My wife expired due to absence of doctors and I feel administering a … read more
WiseOwl58
WiseOwl58
JD Honors Graduate
3,698 satisfied customers
In Illinois in order to prevail on a personal injury case
In Illinois in order to prevail on a personal injury case that resulted in death. What has to be proven? Nursing home negligence… read more
Ray
Ray
Lawyer
Doctoral Degree
30,828 satisfied customers
LONG STORY SHORT- SURGEON NEGLIGENT CONDUCT INJURED ME > 1.
LONG STORY SHORT- SURGEON NEGLIGENT CONDUCT INJURED ME > 1. I have sent to the surgeon-Hospital, my 154 page NOI medical malpractice with 321 pages of supporting documents (MR etc) > I understan… read more
Seattle Scott
Seattle Scott
Private practice attorney
995 satisfied customers
It is my understanding that the NOI must be sent at least
It is my understanding that the NOI must be sent at least 182 days from the day of the NEGLIGENT ACT before the two year mark to prevent TROLLING > I had an initial Consultation with the surgeon on… read more
Seattle Scott
Seattle Scott
Private practice attorney
995 satisfied customers
My right two may be amputated because of my doctors in
My right two may be amputated because of my doctors in Hawaii. I am getting care here in California. I want to sue them because of negligence, because they never checked within the last 6 months if th… read more
LegalGems
LegalGems
Juris Doctorate
10,647 satisfied customers
One summer, Baxter and his wife,, were on their new boat
One summer, David Baxter and his wife, Melissa, were on their new boat with another couple, tubing on the Mississippi river. David and the other couple had been drinking all day, "about seven or eight… read more
JaneLS,Esq.
JaneLS,Esq.
14 satisfied customers
Negligence leading to mental abuse follow by related health
Negligence leading to mental abuse follow by related health issues. … read more
PaulmoJD
PaulmoJD
Attorney At Law
Doctoral Degree
106 satisfied customers
Can Gross Negligence overcome charitable immunity for a
Can Gross Negligence overcome charitable immunity for a medical malpractice case? The limit is in NJ is $250,000 and I am wonde