CONFIRMED BY ILL. SUPREME COURT– YOU ARE VIEWING THE MOST DANGEROUS BLOG IN ILLINOIS. This blog warranted a 3 year suspension by the ARDC/Jerome Larkin! Mottos: "Sunlight is the best disinfectant". Justice Louis Brandeis ; "If the truth can destroy something, then it deserves to be destroyed" Carl Sagan; "Justice is Truth in Action" Benjamin Disraeli. Illinois uses the ARDC to quash dissenting attorney activist blogs ; "The freedom of the press is one of the greatest bulwarks of liberty, and can never be restrained but by despotic Governments" — (1776-First Amendment preamble adopted by 8 US colonies)

From Joanne; a belated Thanksgiving and prays for all of you who have been isolated from your grandparents, siblings and children thru wrongful state action

Dear Readers;

I have heard from many of you who cannot see their own grandparents, parents and even children due to wrongful state actions.  Rest assured you have been in my thoughts and prayers as we battle Elder Cleansing, State and Medical Kidnap and Wrongful Custody cases in the court system.

BP still cannot see his new born child. DCFS is withholding the child from him.  His attorney has asked that the child be immediately returned, but the Juvenile (travesty of justice) court system refuses to do anything, instead putting a good father through a rat maze of spur of the moment drug tests, endless parenting classes and inspections and all sorts of what not.  He has not be charged with anything, no complaints have been filed against him, but on the day his infant son was set to be discharged from the hospital, DCFS swooped in and removed the child based upon a metabolite of an alleged illegal drug in the child’s meconium, etc.  There was no real analyis, DCFS tests are for metabolites, which are often mimicked by common food products such as poppy seeds and quinine water.  Please pray for Brian.  Juvenile court and DCFS have assumed the role of evil monster and the Juvenile Court judge doesn’t care.

Another mother, Ms. SK had her daughter wrongfully ripped from her arms, when the child’s doctor filed a DCFS report for possible sexual abuse by him and his 29 year old son.  The mother did nothing wrong, but at the next court hearing, her incompetent attorney told her she had to waive her rights to coparenting because otherwise the “police would arrest her.”  This turned out to be a croc of you know what.  It seems the evil GAL and her attorney were in on a plot to churn the bill with endless proceedings against a wholly innocent mother!  She now has a competent attorney advising her.  But does she have her daughter back?  Heck no.  She will be going into court next month to get her daughter back, please pray for her too.

I hear about new cases of corruption every week.  Other cases develop new aspects of corruption as corrupt lawyers and judges continue to feast like vultures on the innocent and uninformed.

And guardianship judges left and right continue to engage in the mantra of “target, isolate, narcotize, drain the estate and then narcotize to death when the money runs out.”  We need to return truth and justice to our court system.  It is sorely needed.

Please pray for them all.



See from Ken Ditkowsky below:

With the Federal Trial of Philip Esformes looming in March, this cartoon from the Wall Street Journal has particular meaning.
All of us are frighted that a ‘fix’ is in the works!    This is especially concerning as right here in Illinois it appears that activities similar to those exposed in the Esformes case are going one hot and heavy with no end in sight.    The ‘cover up’ which included the Mary Sykes case and the Alice Gore case are becoming old hat and the miscreants not only escaped criminal prosecution but neither the State of Illinois or the United States of America appear to have made any effort to collection the INCOME TAXES generated by the criminal abuse of the public trust.
The mantra of the State of Illinois was made very clear by the Administrator of the Illinois Attorney Disciplinary Commission (IARDC) when he wrote the Illinois Supreme Court concerning a blog that exposed judicial corruption and pointed out that it was akin to “yelling fire in a crowded theater”
The Billion dollars that Philip Esformes stole from Medicare (alleged in the indictment) apparently has not set the PRICE high enough to induce any interest in the product called: LAW ENFORCEMENT!

I thought this article from The Wall Street Journal would interest you.

Pepper…and Salt

From JP: Another letter to the US DOJ asking them to investigate clearly corrupt courts, and they take no action.

Another letter detailing a string of felonies goes uninvestigated by the FBI and other authorities, despite the fact the victim makes it clear that a string of felonies has occurred.


Jacqueline Pidanick

262 Old Bridge Dr.

Bluffton, SC 29910






U.S Department of Justice

Civil Rights Division

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20530


Re: My Reply to your  UNSIGNED Nov 9th 2017 letter indicating you refuse to investigate

Rampant Corruption in the Courts of Beaufort, South Carolina


Dear Sir or Madam;


       This is in response to your unsigned letter of Nov.9, 2017 in which you advised me that that you would not be investigating the court system, lawyers and judges of North Carolina despite the fact they have engaged in the following string of felonies:


  1. infant 8 week old daughter was beaten by Christopher Maddaloni (“Father”) and pictures were shown in court to Judge Fuge who did nothing but allow the Father joint custody. Father, it turns out has a long history of Domestic Violence and Child Abuse.  Judge Fuge ignored all the evidence of past Domestic Violence and child abuse and would not hear it.
  2. transcripts were changed, evidence was changed and distorted on numerous occasions.  complaints were repeatedly filed and ignored by the local authorities
  3. I was repeatedly told not to talk in court, being pro se, and I could not refute numerous blatant lies which were spewn in court–while the abuser’s attorney was able to put into the record every ridiculous, blatant and obvious lie he could think of
  4. Many or most of my Appellate motions and filings were ignored or the Appellate court clerk says she never received my filings even though there is proof of delivery to the court by UPS and the UPS legal department has verified the deliveries as being actual.
  5. Honest lawyers do not want to go to court and help me because they have no tolerance for the amount and level of corruption displayed in the courtroom and they believe finding justice there to be an elusive undertaking they would never charge for
  6. I was haled into court without any proper notice or petition and given a Sanction of $5,000 or 30 days in jail for posting a petition to remove Judge Fuge.  The Appellate court stayed the sanction.  However, the attorney for father, Michael Horton, still refuses to return all of my $5,000 paid to him prior to the Appellate Court issuing that order.  I sued the attorneys and Father in Federal Court for First Amendment Retaliation.  Two police officers then visited my home and threatened me not to make any more posts on social media because my posts appear to threaten judges and attorneys.  I added these two police officers to my suit for First Amendment Retaliation.


After all of this, all I get from the US Department of Justice is an unsigned form letter you see no reason to investigate corrupt courts and police in South Carolina?  That is truly a preposterous insult to honest law abiding taxpayers.


When I complained to the local judicial disciplinary committee, the disciplinary committee told me they will take no more complaints regarding Judge Peter FUGE. The sad part was I never said the name of the judge–they just knew immediately whom I was speaking of when I started to discuss my case with their personnel.


The packets of information and evidence I send to your offices are very time consuming and expensive to prepare.  Each one can cost $50 or more.  I have a family to feed, I cannot afford those types of expenses.


Accordingly,  I am requesting a phone call and visit to review all evidence that has already been uploaded completely into numerous clouds and computers.  I demand that an investigation be opened into the courtroom of Judge Peter Fuge and the Beaufort County Appellate court.  Hundreds of Affidavits are out there at this point and this case is not going away. I demand respect and consideration. I have a popular blog.  Other popular blogs pick up my postings on my case and other Fuge corrupt custody case stories.  I am also sending this to President Trump asking for a phone call and a personal meeting regarding rampant court corruption which is not addressed by either the US DOJ or FBI. This is our country and thousands in South Carolina have the same problem, thousands, and I am now collecting all your letters stating you have reviewed this horrendous situation and your offices do not find any violations of law, when in fact, they are clearly a string of felonies perpetrated by lawyers in suits and judges in black robes in Beaufort County, including Judge Fuge.


I can no longer afford to send all the massive evidence of corruption again and again for you to lose or write back some unsigned form letter that a citizen of South Carolina does not matter to the US DOJ. If you lack the time, please hire some competent people willing to address these horrendous situations good parents encounter in the South Carolina Court system. This is your job ! Do it !


With sincere respect I am also submitting this letter to numerous reporters–local and nationwide, government officials and so on.


Jacqueline Pidanick

College student and mother of two young children


From EF: More information on Jerome Larkin and Chicago corruption

Jerome Larkin

Jerome Larkin

Jerome Larkin, the Administrator of the ARDC, Speaker Madigan ‘s crony and one of the main Protectors of rampant judicial corruption in Illinois Court system. 

jerome larkin

From 2006 to present time Jerome Larkin always closed all my complaints against predatory  lawyers who operate massive racket and money laundering mill in Illinois Court, no matter how much evidence I provided.

Instead all Jerome Larkin’s energy went to quash opposition and  vigorously attack honest lawyers who truthfully expose judicial corruption. ARDC disbar honest lawyers

Jerome Larkin is very likely a father to Julia Larkin, former political aid to IL Democratic Party Speaker Michael Madigan.


Julia Larkin worked for the Speaker from June 2008 through January 2017 and was  a very multi-tasking employee.

Besides political help to Mr. Madigan supported candidates, her work tasks also included “Reviewing wide range of complex documentation including but not limited to property tax documentation

Julia Larkin resume

It is not a secret that Mr. Madigan makes his money by lowering property taxes

Apparently with support from Madigan’s taxpayers’ funded political aids like Julia Larkin who was regularly involved in Mr.Madigan-related ethics scandals


Jerome Larkin’s family is very active on political horizon and  donated very substantial amounts of money to various political campaigns, 38 pages of contributions.

lakrin donations

Jerome Larkin , who has signed the complaint against Ken Ditkowsky, has funneled several million dollars through his property in the last ten years.

For example, Larkin took out a loan for $450,000 in December of 2001 and paid it back in exactly five years. In the meantime, he had taken out another $450,000 loan—in October of 2006, which he paid back in just a tad over four years, in January of 2011. In the meantime, he had taken out yet another mortgage—this one for $101,000—in November of 2009, which he was miraculously able to repay in just about a year.

But his unusual loan behavior doesn’t stop here. In January of 2011, Larkin took out a whopping $750,000 mortgage on the same piece of property. Larkin must have a direct line to lottery bucks, because he was able to repay this loan by January of 2013.

In the meantime . . . are you getting the picture yet? . . . he took out another $750,000 loan in December of 2012.

Neither Jerome Larkin nor his wife, psychologist Antoinette Krakowski responded to telephone inquiries concerning the amount of money being funneled through their home.

Larkin is the big cheese over at the ARDC. There are other attorneys in the employ of that powerful, shadowy, not-government, not private – commission whose loan history is also questionable, including attorneys Melissa Smart and Sharon Opryzcek.

Apparently, the word about the loan trough is getting out. A check was run on the loan history of attorneys and guardians ad litem, Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga, whose actions first alerted Ken Ditkowsky to the predatory nature of probate guardianships. Lo and behold, Adam Stern’s loan history looks like that of a hyperactive kid in a Ritalin store.

Details can be found  below.

A scandal is brewing in Chicago which threatens to make Operation Greylord look like a dress rehearsal for a cotillion. Starting with a seemingly innocuous question, tendered to press liaison Jim Grogan at the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (ARDC) in Illinois, a boil of corruption got inadvertently pricked, which threatens now to reveal a subterranean cancer in the legal system in Illinois.

For those who are unaware of Greylord, here is a bit of history: back in the eighties, a collaborative effort by the FBI, IRS and a couple of outraged judges and attorneys resulted in one of the biggest takedowns of public officials in the history of Illinois. At the end of the 3 1/2 year undercover operation, a total of 92 people were indicted, including 17 judges, 48 lawyers, ten deputy sheriffs, eight policemen, eight court officials, and state legislator James DeLeo.

The extent of the takedown might have mitigated further predatory acts by those in the legal system. Thirty years later, however, the corruption that was supposedly expunged by Greylord has simply become systemic.

Back to Jim Grogan. Grogan, who is an attorney as well as ARDC press liaison, declined to reply to questions from this reporter as to why no statements of economic interests could be found for the attorneys who work for the ARDC. The law governing economic interests reporting is in place to ensure that those working in government capacities are not being influenced by financial lures and temptations. These statements are mandated by 5 ILCS 420 to be filed every year for nearly everyone who works in a government capacity.

Here are relevant clauses from the law, with pivotal sections underlined:

When Grogan failed to respond to the query, Press Secretary Jim Tybor at the Illinois Supreme Court was contacted and astoundingly told this reporter that this law did not apply to the judicial branch. (See 6 and e, above).

Michelle Burton, a paralegal at the ARDC assured this reporter that the ARDC employees are not state employees. However, the website for the ARDC announces that the Commission is an arm of the Illinois Supreme Court.

The ARDC is in a particularly pivotal position. As the Commission responsible for disciplining attorneys, the ARDC functions as a gatekeeper. In that sense, the ARDC defines the legal climate in Illinois. Right now, the ARDC has taken upon its shoulders the regulation of an attorney’s right to free speech. Attorney Ken Ditkowsky, who has been practicing law in Chicago area since 1961, is facing disciplinary proceedings for sending emails to federal authorities asking for an investigation of corrupt practices in Illinois courts.

Shades of Greylord . . . Except this time, the feds are turning a deaf ear to evidence of legal malfeasance in Illinois. And Ditkowsky may in fact lose his license to practice law, due to his incisive perceptions and requests for investigation.

Attorney Ken Ditkowsky’s concerns about judicial and attorney misconduct began with the adult guardianship of Mary Sykes, an elderly woman who was placed under a guardianship without due process. Another Illinois attorney, JoAnne Denison, is also under disciplinary proceedings due to her maintaining a blog about the Sykes guardianship. (Source)

Ditkowsky soon realized that the phenomenon of what he is calling “elder cleansing” is going on nationwide. And for his act of speaking out against a pervasive assault on a vulnerable demographic group—the elderly and incapacitated—the ARDC has recommended a four year suspension of his license to practice law.

As it turns out, the ARDC attorneys appear to have quite a bit to hide in terms of their economic interests.

If you want to bribe someone, there are only a couple of ways to do this that would not trigger the red flags that are built into the banking infrastructure. One way would be to give someone a big envelope stuffed with cash. Brian Mulroney, a former Prime Minister of Canada, was caught red handed receiving such a bounty and a scandal ensued. (Source)

The other way is through a “loan.” The mechanism is simply and virtually opaque—Mr. X takes out a loan, such as a mortgage and Mr. Y pays it back. There are no banking flags to trigger and no embarrassing wads of cash, a la Mulroney, to explain.

The use of such property loans to funnel payola to judges was exposed in a 2009 article, which first appeared in the San Bernardino County Sentinel. Now it seems that those in the Illinois legal system, specifically attorneys at the ARDC, have climbed onto the dinero express.

Jerome Larkin, the Administrator of the ARDC and the individual who has signed the complaint against Ken Ditkowsky, has funneled several million dollars through his property in the last ten years. For example, Larkin took out a loan for $450,000 in December of 2001 and paid it back in exactly five years. In the meantime, he had taken out another $450,000 loan—in October of 2006, which he paid back in just a tad over four years, in January of 2011. In the meantime, he had taken out yet another mortgage—this one for $101,000—in November of 2009, which he was miraculously able to repay in just about a year.

But his unusual loan behavior doesn’t stop here. In January of 2011, Larkin took out a whopping $750,000 mortgage on the same piece of property. Larkin must have a direct line to lottery bucks, because he was able to repay this loan by January of 2013.

In the meantime . . . are you getting the picture yet? . . . he took out another $750,000 loan in December of 2012.

Neither Jerome Larkin nor his wife, psychologist Antoinette Krakowski responded to telephone inquiries concerning the amount of money being funneled through their home.

Larkin is the big cheese over at the ARDC. There are other attorneys in the employ of that powerful, shadowy, not-government, not private – commission whose loan history is also questionable, including attorneys Melissa Smart and Sharon Opryzcek.

Apparently, the word about the loan trough is getting out. A check was run on the loan history of attorneys and guardians ad litem, Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga, whose actions first alerted Ken Ditkowsky to the predatory nature of probate guardianships. Lo and behold, Adam Stern’s loan history looks like that of a hyperactive kid in a Ritalin store.

A review of the Cook County recorder’s website reveals that Stern has run over a million dollars through his property loans in roughly the last ten years. A couple of examples of quickly repaid large loans taken out by Stern include a $272,000 mortgage taken out on 9/13/2004 and paid back on 2/17/05. Stern also took out a $51,000 mortgage on 9/13/04 and paid it back May of 2005. On October 4, 2004 Stern took out an $80,000 mortgage which he paid back less than three months later.

Adam Stern also has a federal tax lien on his home for $60,000. Stern, who is parenthetically serving as guardian ad litem in the Sykes guardianship and is thus in the responsible position of looking out for OPM—other people’s money—can’t even pay his own taxes.

Attorney and guardian ad litem Cynthia Farenga’s loan history is similarly manic. Farenga is also a guardian ad litem in the Sykes case. For example, Farenga took out a $385,000 loan on 11/09/2006 and paid it off on 6/12/2007. A loan of over a half million dollars – $575,000 to be exact – was paid off by Farenga within five years, on 6/24/2013. Farenga took out a smaller, $244,000 mortgage on 10/16/2003 and paid it back within two years, on 9/28/05. In the meantime, she had taken out another mortgage, this time for an even $300,000 on 9/07/2005, which she quickly reconveyed in less than a year and a half, on 1/08/2007. All told, over two and a quarter million dollars have been funneled through Farenga’s property in the last ten years.

The head of a private investigator’s firm out in the Southern California area confided in me that judges were coming to him to inquire how to hide their property, so that public searches for these records would not result in transparency. Recently, Judge Ronald Christianson, formerly the Presiding Judge in San Bernardino County, changed the name on the records of his primary residence to “Property Owners.” Such tactics will make determinations of suspicious activity increasingly more difficult.

Ditkowsky has filed a complaint with the ARDC referencing the impropriety of Adam Stern working as a GAL when he has failed to fulfill his own tax liabilities. At the time of going to press, other records detailing suspicious financial activity by ARDC attorneys and others are being turned over to a Grand Jury.

The Director of the Administrative Office of the Illinois Supreme Court, Michael Tardy, did not respond to queries from this reporter concerning the economic interests and reporting requirements of the ARDC, which is an arm of the Illinois Supreme Court.


Government Attorneys Implicated in Ethics Scandal
Janet Phelan
October 28, 2013
Activist Post

Illinois App. Ct.: Assignment Document Without Assignment of the Debt Conveys Nothing

From GG: Homeowners need all the help they can get. This a rare case where a homeowner sought and obtained some relief from foreclosure

Livinglies's Weblog

So here, in black and white, is yet another appellate decision  confirming what I have said for 12 years: The assignment of the mortgage is merely the delivery of a piece of paper. It conveys nothing in terms of an interest in the real property or the right to foreclose the mortgage. BUT if the assignment of the document is accompanied by a sale or assignment of the allegedly underlying debt, then the assignment can be used as evidence of an encumbrance and the contractual right to seek foreclosure.

Just as a promissory note can be used as EVIDENCE of a debt and is not the debt, so too is the mortgage EVIDENCE of an encumbrance and the right to foreclose. Confusion on this issue has led to millions of defective foreclosures.

“ ‘[a]n assignment of the mortgage without an assignment of the debt creates no right in the assignee.’…

View original post 942 more words

From KKD and the ABA: Junk faxes from lawyer warrant $4.2 million award, but fleecing and murdering Grandma still covered up in ND Illinois

While this article is interesting, Jay Brouckmeersch was murder in Feb. 2017 by the Office of State Guardian in conjunction with Judge Quinn who denied her necessary medical treatment and the lawyer for the OSG often didn’t even show up in court. The case was a travesty of justice.

In the Mary Sykes case, $3 million is missing from her estate, the home was sold for pennies on the dollar and in the end she was narcotized to death and isolated in a nursing home.  No investigation and no one cares.

Details of other cases across the nation have been published on this blog indicating the deaths/murders of dozens of disabled persons and senior citizens, and no authorities seem to care.

The White House receives regular emails on the numerous risk factors for seniors, and I have never heard a peep from them.

In the Mary Teichert case, two decisions have emanated from the ND of Illinois where the Scully children have sued for their civil rights violations, that their case was wrongfully and unconstitutionally sealed, Linda Scully was arrested dozens of times for trying to protect her mother’s $2 million apartment building which was sold for $250,000 in the end, ruined by the OPG and others.  In the end, the OPG had Mother Teichert narcotized to death and isolated from 30+ family member.

Apparently faxes are important to the tune of $4.2 million, but Judge Korcas in Federal Court pretends the complaint filed is not a “short and concise” statement of the case when in fact it is but he just doesn’t like what it says (mom was murdered and the courts and attorneys were involved).  you can find the complaint here:

you can find the decision of Judge Korcas here:

Now he’s holding the complaint hostage.  He won’t grant or deny the Scully Children’s Pauper’s Petitions and the 7th Circuit can’t hear the case until he does.

However, we all know that 333 junk faxes are worth $4.2 million.


Question from AD: How to write a proper Brief and Motion

How to write a Motion and Brief in Support of your Motion

First and I cannot emphasize this enough–check the rules first and again when your brief and motion is done.  In every jurisdiction, there may be numerous sets of rules and laws that apply to Briefs and Motion.  Federal Court is easiest at maybe one or two sets of Rules.  Illinois State Court is a pain because there’s the Supreme Court Rules, the Illinois Rules of Civil Procedure the State legislature passes, then each County can have rules, and then each local court building can have rules, particular Divisions can have rules and of course each Judge can have rules on the judge’s website so you have to check everywhere before you file a motion.

The Motion is generally drafter after the Brief, and contains a short (2 to 3) page synopsis of your Brief, hitting all the most important topics.

A Motion has numbered paragraphs, a Brief does not.

For the Brief:

Your introductory paragraph should state the 3 strongest reasons why you should be granted relief and why your opponent should be granted nothing.

It should start out as follows:

Now comes your Movant, (Plaintiff X) and respectfully Moves this Honrable court to: (describe what your motion is for, don’t make the title too long). The grounds for this Motion are as follows: Now list your 3 to 5 best grounds for granting your motion. Often judges only read the first few pages and the last few pages.

Next comes a Statement of Facts or a Statement of Procedure.

You want to give the judge a quick synopsis of what the case is about and how it has progressed. For example:

Statement of Facts:

1. On X date, Plaintiff was falsely arrested by two officers, Officer X and Officer Z for Animal Abuse or Ill. State Law X. Neighbor Z said that Plaintiff L squirted bleach on her dog’s paws, the dog licked it’s paws, had to be taken to the vet and died soon after.  That was a lie.

2. The Officers X and Z failed to further investigate with Vet B.  Plaintiff L instructed the officers to call the Vet to confirm he had not seen Defendant’s Dog.

3. Plaintiff L told the Officers the next day, C date, that she saw the dog being walked and it was on her video surveillance camera. The officers refused to look at the footage and she was arrested instead.

4. During the arrest, the Officers made disparaging, hateful comments about Plaintiff L during the arrest. That she was old, black and stupid and just trying to kill her neighbor’s dog.

5. Plaintiff L told the Officers it was a hot summer, the Neighbors C always let their dog pee and poop in the alley and they never clean it up and it stinks. So Plaintiff L every other day or so would spray the alley with a dilute solution of bleach and hose off the offending areas. She did not poison her neighbor’s dog, but was just trying to clean up the alley where the neighbors walked their dog.

Statement of Procedure.

6. On X date Plaintiff was falsely arrested and held at the police station overnight.

7. On Y date, Plaintiff L produced $1,000 bond and was released.

8. On the following dates, Plaintiff L was haled into court to go through a variety of pretrial procedures and at each date she or her lawyer protested she was falsely arrested. Her lawyer cost her $6,000.

9. On E date, a bench trial was held and Plaintiff was acquitted.  The neighbors never showed up in court with any evidence that their dog was harmed at all.

10. On F date Plaintiff filed a cause of action under 42 USC 1983 for False Arrest and False Imprisonment and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress was filed in this Federal Court.

11. On G date Plaintiff served a full set of discovery on the Police Dept.

12. The defendant Police Dept refused to answer the discovery and counsel for the police dept in a phone conversation said he did not know when his client would answer the discovery.

Now you can see the case is fully explained, so now you can make your Motion and Legal Argument.

Legal Argument

Plaintiff is entitled to her discovery under Rules X, Y and Z. (Cite the applicable laws and how they apply to your case).

Then weave in case law. Provide proper citations by looking at the top of the case and copying the title of the case and all reporters exactly as you see it. Westlaw, Nexus and Fastcase all have proper citations built right in. Fastcase is free to Ill. State Bar Members. You can also get it cheap for a year (under $100) through various libraries, check their website.

Explain why each case is pertinent to your motion and how it help you to win your motion.

The write a conclusion of exactly what relief you want the court to give you.

In this case, you would ask for a Order the Deft. Must comply with discovery in 10 days or face sanctions. If you are pro se, you have no attorney’s fees, so as for a fine of $50 per day for up to 30 days.

I hope this helps everyone write up their motions and briefs better


From KKD: Nursing home in Fla. killing 11 seniors has long troubled history of corruption–and Esformes involvement

NEW: Owner of nursing home where 8 died linked to Medicare fraud case

John McCall

Police surround the Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills, owned by Larkin hospital President Jack Michel. The nursing home had no air conditioning after Hurricane Irma knocked out power. Several patients at the sweltering nursing home died in Hurricane Irma’s aftermath, raising fears Wednesday about the safety of Florida’s 4 million senior citizens amid widespread power outages that could go on for days. (John McCall/South Florida Sun-Sentinel via AP)

The hospital co-owned by a Florida doctor whose nursing home was the site of eight deaths last week is linked to the biggest Medicare fraud case ever filed against individuals in U.S. history, court records show.

Neither Larkin Community Hospital nor its president, Dr. Jack Michel, is named nor charged in the criminal fraud case filed last year in Miami federal court.

But in 2004, in a civil case also filed in Miami, federal prosecutors cited multiple links among Michel, Larkin and Michel’s former business associate, Philip Esformes, the man prosecutors say is the ringleader of a scheme that used elderly patients to bilk Medicare and Medicaid of about $1 billion.

Further, court records say one of the hospitals in the current criminal case is the same one at the heart of the 2004 civil case, which targeted both Esformes and Michel — and that hospital was Larkin Community Hospital.

Federal prosecutors alleged at that time that nursing home and assisted living patients were being admitted to Larkin for care that wasn’t needed, leaving Medicare and Medicaid to foot the bill.

The civil case was settled for $15.4 million, with no admission of wrongdoing by Esformes, Michel or others named in the suit.

Michel spokeswoman Alia Faraj-Johnson emphasized that Michel and Esformes “have not had a relationship since the civil case was settled” in 2006.

Further, she said, after the settlement, whatever business dealings the two men had were severed. “Dr. Michel divested from all of Mr. Esformes’ facilities” and Philip Esformes’ father, Morris, who had an ownership interest in Larkin, also divested his interest in the hospital.

A spokeswoman for the Department of Justice declined to comment when asked about Larkin in the current Medicare fraud case.

Larkin Community Hospital has thrived under Michel’s leadership since the civil case.

The hospital executive has a string of awards to his name, including being named “Our Hometown Hero” by a local TV station.

The hospital has a nursing school and a residency program. It has two campuses. Specialized services include arthritis and psychiatric care. The 2015 purchase of the Hollywood Hills nursing home seemed like yet another step forward.

The acquisition, Michel told the South Florida Business Journal, was “another step in the evolution” of Larkin Community Hospital, where Michel is president and chairman.

But last year, prosecutors said that after settling the lawsuit in 2006, “Philip Esformes and his co-conspirators allegedly continued this criminal activity — adapting their scheme to prevent detection and continue their fraud after the civil settlement,” according to the Justice Department news release.

Esformes, prosecutors charge, was doing in 2016 what the 2004 civil suit alleged he had been doing with Larkin and Michel.

$1 million for $5 million

Sometime in 1997, federal prosecutors said in the 2004 lawsuit, Jack Michel sat down with Philip Esformes at the Fontainebleau Miami Beach hotel.

Michel didn’t yet own Larkin Community Hospital. He was years away from acquiring the Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills, where eight elderly patients died after Hurricane Irma blew out air conditioning, leaving them in sweltering, post-hurricane heat.

But he had a plan to make money both from nursing home patients and Larkin.

In fact, he already was doing so, the U.S. Attorney’s Office alleged in 2004, through a series of kickbacks coordinated with his brother, George, also a doctor, and the father-and-son business team of Morris and Philip Esformes.

Prosecutors believed that months before the Fontainebleau meeting, Michel met with a longtime employee of Larkin Hospital’s owner, and said, “Ask your boss if he would pay $1 million to make $5 million.”

The then-owner of Larkin Hospital struck a deal to pay kickbacks to Jack Michel and a practice group Michel owned, Oracle Health Systems, in exchange for patients, court records state.

The estimated profit to Michel: $70,000 a month.

In addition to owning a physicians’ practice and pharmacy, Michel was medical director at Oceanside Extended Care Center, a North Miami Beach nursing home in which the Esformes had an ownership interest.

Many patients would come from Oceanside.

To do so, they would be transferred 20 miles to Larkin, passing much closer hospitals and, prosecutors alleged, jeopardizing the health of patients with the longer drive.

At least some would get medical treatment that was not needed, but which could be billed to Medicare and Medicaid.

Some months later, Jack Michel made plans to buy Larkin.

When he, Philip Esformes and other business associates gathered at the Fontainebleau, prosecutors said, they agreed it wouldn’t be necessary to pay kickbacks anymore to doctors to get patients for Larkin.

With Jack Michel owning the hospital, they could simply use their own growing string of nursing homes and assisted living facilities to pack the hospital.

In fact, when Jack Michel took the reins at the hospital, his brother George was the admitting physician for virtually all of the nursing home referrals to the facility.

Whistleblowing doctor

In 2016, Larkin again came under fire for allegations of unneeded medical treatment, this time in a doctor’s whistleblower suit.

In his federal action, Dr. Elroy Kalme said he joined Larkin in 1997, and stayed until he was fired in 2012. He was the medical director of the hospital’s podiatry department, said Kalme, as well as a member of the Medical Executive Committee.

In 2010, second-year podiatry residents approached him, reporting that a doctor was filing false claims to Medicare and Medicaid, he said in his court filing. The actual medical care was being done by a first-year resident, they told him.

Another resident, said Kalme, reported that the same doctor was offering cash, food and bar outings if the young doctors would refer nursing home patients at Larkin for graft surgery.

Kalme said he reported it to Michel, who told him to investigate, but according to Kalme, added, “Do not call me on the phone to tell me about situations and problems that deal with the possibility of fraud or Medicare problems and don’t send me any emails with stuff like this.”

Kalme said he did investigate and did find other problems.

Partnerships were being made with assisted living facilities to assure that patients would be taken to Larkin “even if they did not meet medical criteria,” he said. Some patients whose medical problems were not serious enough to warrant being kept in the hospital were given a psychiatric diagnosis.

Further, said Kalme, “Larkin allowed podiatry residents to schedule patients for surgical procedures that were not medically necessary simply to bill Medicare,” including amputations and bone resections.

Faraj-Johnson dismisses the allegation. To begin with, she said, Michel has never heard of the whistleblower action. There’s no indication in the whistleblower suit that the hospital was ever served.

As for Kalme’s assertion that Michel asked that nothing be put in writing, “Larkin has a strong compliance program in place and would never ask someone not to document potential fraud allegations,” she said.

In any event, if there were problems, “The physician should have alerted the compliance officer so that the officer could conduct a proper investigation.”

After several months in which Kalme filed no further motions, the doctor withdrew his suit.

The nature of the whistleblower suit meant that the U.S. Attorney’s Office had a chance to continue the case. It declined, though a prosecutor specified that the agency wanted to retain the ability to revisit the allegations at a later date.

By then, Philip Esformes, Michel’s ex-business associate and co-defendant in the $15.4 million settlement, was back in court, facing criminal charges of Medicare fraud and unneeded treatment for elderly patients.

A $1 billion charge

There was no finding or admission of guilt in the civil settlement, and nothing barring Esformes from buying and running more nursing homes.

That’s what the Miami businessman did. Ten years later, prosecutors said he operated a string of more than 30 nursing homes and assisted living facilities, filled with thousands of patients on Medicare and Medicaid.

Last July, federal prosecutors arrested Esformes and two others, including a former Larkin hospital employee, charging them with “the largest single criminal health care fraud case ever brought against individuals,” the Department of Justice wrote in announcing the prosecution.

It was, added prosecutors, “essentially identical conduct” to the deals that had triggered the civil kickback charges and the multimillion-dollar settlement: unnecessarily admitting patients from Esformes’ network of nursing homes and assisted living facilities to a hospital.

Using kickbacks and bribes, Esformes and his associates faked Medicare and Medicaid billings, prosecutors said, racking up charges for treatment that wasn’t needed and in some cases was never provided.

Along with Esformes, Odette Barcha and Arnaldo Carmouze were charged.

Barcha, once the director of outreach for Larkin, is charged with recruiting doctors at what is referred to as Hospital 1 in the indictment and paying them to refer patients to Esformes’ nursing homes.

Carmouze, the indictment charges, was a physician’s assistant who signed off on faked prescription and medical records, admissions and discharge paperwork at Hospital 1, sometimes not even meeting the patient.

Hospital 1 is the same hospital involved in the 2006 settlement, according to the indictment. That case pinpointed Larkin. No other hospital is named in the civil charges brought by federal prosecutors.

Faraj-Johnson said it was only natural some patients from Esformes’ sprawling nursing home and assisted living facility network would wind up in Larkin, but the hospital wasn’t getting a disproportionate share of those patients relative to other hospitals.

Esformes is expected to go to trial next year. He is being held without bond.

Barcha has entered a plea of not guilty. And while she was a Larkin hospital employee, her attorney clarified, she was never involved in Michel’s other business venture: “At no time did any of her duties or responsibilities relate in any way whatsoever with the facility known as Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills.”

From Joanne;

this is about as sick and disgusting as Medicare/Medicaid fraud gets:  billing for unnecessary amputation and bone resections on the elderly to make a buck.  Dozens of licensed physicians had to be involved in the scheme, why aren’t they in prison?  Why isn’t the Director Michel in prison?

From PPJ Gazette–Great article on how the government can improve the quality of nursing home care

via CBS12 Investigates PROMO: Government failures cause nursing home nightmares

CBS12 Investigates PROMO: Government failures cause nursing home nightmares


CBS12 Investigates: Government failures cause nursing home nightmares

Airs at 11:00 pm est on Friday -Nov 10th, 2017.  Veterans Day…CBS12 Investigates uncovered reports of true horror stories happening at nursing homes across the country that by law should have been reported to the police.

My wonderful and caring mother- Patricia Dahmer was interviewed with other victims family of Wrongful Death, Neglect, and Abuse in Nursing Homes.  What my father- George Dahmer aka Former Pro Wrestler from WWF/WWE went through was Totally Unacceptable, Injustice, Cruel, Vicious, and Unbelievable.  

My father is not alone.. It’s time to draw the line and do something.Contact yourState Reps and Senators to TAKE ACTION!  (202) 224-3121 {Press 1} for Senator and {Press 2} for State Rep. Put your zip code in.. You can call 24/7. After hours leave a voicemail.

No One should go into any Health Care Facility and get Abused, Neglected, or which it leads to Unnecessary Pain and Suffering or results in wrongful death…

  • Patricia Dahmer says her husband of 49 years died because the nursing home didn’t properly care for him.
  • “It was very depressing. All they could say was, ‘We’ll take care of him,’ but they didn’t,” Dahmer said.
  • White House Comment Line (202) 456-1111
  • Families for Better Care  
  • Foundation Aiding the Elderly
  • All Elderly should be Treated with Dignity and Respect! One day Soon we will all be the elderly if God is willing!  We are the Elderly’s Voices and Must be heard..  Please continue to Sign this Campaign Petition and Invite Friends to Sign!  We Are the Elderly’s only Hope to Carry on! Elder Rights should be GRANTED not VIOLATED!  The more action takers the faster changes will be made..Agree or Disagree?~ Chief White Owl’s Law*** Stiffer Laws and Harsher Penalties for Nursing Homes *P*E*T*I*T*I*O*N*  Plz Sign & Invite Friends.

From CS: Great pleading to use for a Motion to Dismiss Guardianship

Daughter, SS, interested person and daughter of Mother WW, submits this brief together with a sworn affidavit and legal authorities demonstrating that the county has egregiously violated Mother’s rights and restoration is mandated. Daughter’s right to be free from retaliation for advocating for the rights of her mother—were violated too. Even if the Court could retroactively determine by appropriate medical expert testimony that she was “incapacitated,” the court would onlybe able to rely on a temporary condition that no longer exists—at best. See Affidavit of Daughter, attached hereto, attesting to the fact that her mother does not suffer from drug addiction or any observable impairment substantially limiting any activity of daily living and lack of medical evidence suggesting otherwise. See attached Introduction to Guardianship and Conservatorship in Michigan, attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Mother and Daughter join together seeking termination and restoration in this matter as justice requires under state and federal laws, including but not limited to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 1984, 14 th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and Amendments of 2008 and 2016, Michigan Rules of Procedure and Evidence and other legal authorities cited herein. The ward’s rights will continue to be violated under the statutes listed below absent a termination ofthis guardianship and restoration of rights.42 USC 1983 FOR VIOLATIONS OF 14 TH AMENDMENT§ 1983. Civil Action for Deprivation of RightsEvery person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, orusage, of any State or Territory of the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable.For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia. The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees the following:AMENDMENT XIV. CITIZENSHIP; PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES;DUE PROCESS; EQUAL PROTECTION; APPOINTMENT OFREPRESENTATION; DISQUALIFICATION OF OFFICERS; PUBLICDEBT; ENFORCEMENT§ 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to thejurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the Statewherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shallabridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; norshall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without dueprocess of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equalprotection of the laws.* * *The Fourteenth Amendment is a source of substantive and procedural due process.  Additionally, for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See, e.g.,  Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410, 126 S.Ct. 1951, 164 L. Ed. 2d 689 (2006). “Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983 provides that ‘[e]very person’ who acts under color of state law to deprive another of a constitutional right shall be answerable to that person in a suit for damages.”Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 417 (1976). The United States Supreme Court has noted that: [i]ts language is absolute and unqualified; no mention is made of any privileges, immunities, or defenses that may be asserted. Rather, the Act imposes liability upon “every person” who, under color of state law or custom, “subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States . . . to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws. Owen v. City of Independence , 445 U.S. 622, 635 (1980)(quoting portions of § 1983)(emphasis in orig.).Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 a plaintiff must allege the following:(1) A person;(2) acting under color of state law;(3) deprived the plaintiff of a right secured by the Constitution and lawsof the United States.A COUNTY IS A “PERSON”A person is defined as a municipality, state or governmental unit. The SupremeCourt concluded that Congress intended “municipalities and other local governmental units to be included among those persons to whom § 1983 applies,” Monell, 436 U.S. at 690, i.e., that local governmental units were “persons” who could act unconstitutionally.It held that local governing bodies could be sued directly under § 1983 for “monetary, declaratory, or injunctive relief where . . . the action that is alleged to be unconstitutional implements or executes a policy statement, ordinance, regulation, or decision officially adopted and promulgated by that body’s officers.” A local governmental entity, municipality or school district is a person for purposes of § 1983. See, e.g., Board of County Comm’rs of Bryan County v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 117 S. Ct. 1382, (1997) (County and Sheriff’s Dept.).A persistent, widespread practice of discrimination and civil rights violations, evenif not officially adopted governmental policy, where it is so common and widespread is sufficient to constitute a custom that fairly represents municipal policy. Bennett v. City of Slidell, 735 F.2d 861, 862 (5th Cir. 1984) (On Petition for Rehearing) En banc) (per curiam), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1016, 105 S.Ct. 3467, 87 L.Ed.2d 612 (1985).“COLOR OF STATE LAW”The “color of state law” requirement refers simply to the fact that the personviolating the citizens’ constitutional rights is clothed in apparent authority of law, which is indisputable in this case and every other case where a judicial officer or officer of the court is given the authority to deprive a citizen of liberty and property. In West v. Atkins, the United States Supreme Court noted that the “traditional definition of acting under color of state law requires that the defendant in a § 1983 action have exercised [a misuse of] power ‘possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of state law.’” 487 U.S. 42, 49 (1988) (quoting United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299, 326 (1941)).To constitute state action, the deprivation must be caused by the exercise ofsome right or privilege created by the State… or by a person for whom the State is responsible, and the party charged with the deprivation must be a person who may fairly be said to be a state actor. State or governmental (county) employment is generally sufficient to render the defendant a state or governmental actor. It is firmly established that a defendant in a § 1983 suit acts under color of state law when he abuses the position given to him by the State. Private persons, jointly engaged with state officials in the challenged action, are acting “under color” of law for purposes of § 1983 actions.Dennis v. Sparks, 449 U.S. 24 (1980). The Supreme Court recently confirmed that private parties can be liable if their actions are taken under color of state law, though they may also be entitled to qualified immunity for those actions. See Filarsky v. Delia, 132 S. Ct. 1657 (2012).QUALIFIED IMMUNITYPublic officials enjoy only qualified immunity under section 1983 for constitutional violations, provided their actions are not taken with deliberate indifferenceto known constitutional rights. To determine whether the plaintiff has overcome the presumption of qualified immunity, the Court first considers whether the plaintiff has proven a violation of a clearly established constitutional right . Collins v. Ainsworth, 382 F.3d 529, 537 (5th Cir.2004 ). A right is “clearly established” if its contours are “sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.” Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 640, 107 S.Ct. 3034, 97 L.Ed.2d 523 (1987) . If that prong is met, the court must consider whether the defendant’s “actions were objectively reasonable” in light of “law which was clearly established at the time of the disputed action.” Collins, 382 F.3d at 537 . “The touchstone of this inquiry is whether a reasonable person would have believed that his conduct 748*748 conformed to the constitutional standard in light of the information available to him and the clearly established law.” Glenn v . City o f Tyler , 242 F.3d 307, 312 (5th Cir. 2001) .11 Given oaths are taken to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States by public officials, not one can claim ignorance of the law after taking this sworn oath. Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. at 840-42. Due process and equal protection were incorporated into the Constitution in 1868, no public official can reasonably claim to be ignorant of its core protections.SUPERVISOR LIABILITYTo prove a § 1983 cause of action against a supervisor, the plaintiff must allege“either a supervisor personally was involved in the constitutional violation or that there is a ‘sufficient causal connection’ between the supervisor’s conduct and theconstitutional violation.” Rios v. City of Del Rio, 444 F.3d 417, 425 (5th Cir. 2006)(quoting Evett v. Deep E. Tex. Reg’l Narcotics Trafficking Task Force, 330 F.3d 681, 689 (5th Cir. 2003)). Roberts v. City of Shreveport, 397 F.3d 287 (5th Cir. 2005). To establish § 1983 liability against supervisors, a plaintiff must show that:(1) the [supervisor] failed to supervise or train;(2) a causal connection existed between the failure to supervise or trainand the violation of the plaintiff’s rights; and(3) the failure to supervise or train amounted to deliberate indifferenceto the plaintiff’s constitutional rights. Id. at 292.DUE PROCESS VIOLATIONSProcedural due process violations exist when a governmental entity fails to followits own statutory procedures mandated by federal and state law, such as this case where Mother was deprived of liberty and/or property. In this case, Mother was deprived of a meaningful opportunity to participate in proceedings toremove her chosen guardian, Daughter, as guardian and appoint MARYROWAN, a predatory guardian. Michigan statutes governing guardianship were not followed, but flagrantly ignored. Reference to the attached guide and governing Michigan statutes to impose a guardianship upon a citizen clearly shows that procedures mandated were not followed. Substantive due process rights guaranteed include equal protection of the law and due process of law, which includes notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard. The rules of evidence mandating a finding of incapacity under Daubert and Rule 702 were egregiously violated.DAUBERT , RULE 702 AND EXPERT TESTIMONYThe United States Supreme Court mandates compliance with Rule of Evidence702 in order for any expert opinion or testimony to be admitted in any court of law and the Daubert case is the landmark case that defines in excruciating detail what is required before an expert can even opine on a matter. Daubert v. Merrell-Dow Pharmaceuticals, 113 S.Ct. 2786 (1993) (hereafter “Daubert”). See attached advanced continuing education course by Texas Probate Judge Steven King of Tarrant County, Texas; Daubert and its impact on estate and fiduciary litigation. Michigan Rule of Evidence 702 mirrors the federal rule 702 and states:Rule 702 Testimony by ExpertsIf the court determines that scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise if (1) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data,(2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts ofthe case.The United States Supreme Court, in the 1999 decision of Kumho Tire Corp., Ltd.v. Carmichael, 119 S.Ct. 1167, 526 U.S. 137 (1999), held that the gatekeeper function of the trial court, established in Daubert applied to all expert testimony. Id. at 1174. Daubert governs the admissibility of expert testimony in EVERY STATE as ruled by the high court, such that Michigan courts cannot evade its requirements. The requirements of Daubert are to safeguard against unqualified individuals or laypersons relying on junk science or supposition (rather than evidence) from being allowed to testify in a court of law and provide evidence. Daubert mandates the following, w hich is more fully describedin the attached article by Judge Steven King.1. Gate One: Helpfulness –Pursuant to Rule 702, the subject matter of the expert’s testimony must “assist the trier of fact.” If the expert’s methodology, reasoning, or foundation is unreliable, the evidence will not assist the trier of fact.2. Gate Two: Qualifications –the expert must be qualified on a case specificopinion- 3. Gate Three: Relevancy – The expert testimony must be sufficiently tied to thefacts of the case so that it will aid the jury in resolving the factual dispute.4. Gate Four: Methodological Reliability The expert’s methodology must bereliable.5. Gate Five: Connective Reliability –The expert’s reasoning applying his/hermethodology must be sound for the expert’s opinion to be admissible.6. Gate Six: Foundational Reliability –Reliability of the underlying facts or dataupon which the expert’s opinion is based.Judge King is indisputably an expert on guardianship and rightfully defines thestandard mandated to deem a citizen incompetent or incapacitated and states,Hiring a psychiatrist or neurologist who has experience determining andtestifying to capacity, or lack thereof, in guardianship proceedings is ofgreat importance. They will be familiar with the legal test for capacity.Geriatric psychiatrists and neurologists should be used in appropriate casesif possible due to their specialized knowledge. A good approach toselecting an expert is to ascertain and hire the physician the judge appointson independent psychiatric exams. These individuals generally have thejudge’s respect and the requisite level of expertise in the areas of capacityand mental examinations. Regardless of who is selected, he or she shouldbe board certified, if possible” in specialized areas treating elderlysuspected of Alzheimer’s or dementia. See attached article by Judge StevenKing on Daubert.Daubert and Rule 702 were flagrantly ignored and the specialist required toevaluate Mother’s mental capacity was unqualified by the above statement and mandate that a medical diagnosis come only from an M.D., at a minimum. The law prefers specialists and a psychologist is not a medical doctor. George Fleming is a psychologist, not a medical doctor and is guilty of practicing medicine without a license by undertaking competency examinations, such as Mother’s. There was no medical doctor who evaluated her competency to deem her incapacitated from the outset and her personal physician flatly denied that she was incompetent in the least.Mother’s primary care doctor, DR. RUBINA AHMED, has also opined that she is mentally competent. The county failed to present any expert testimony or even so much as a sworn affidavit attesting to the same. Without clear and convincing evidence of Mother being incapacitated, guardianship was not legally authorized. This violated her constitutional rights.Michigan Probate Code also mandates that the proposed ward’s desire of aguardian be considered and Mother’s clearly stated demand for her daughter to be her guardian was ignored as she was given over like chattel to MARY ROWAN without cause to justify such a devastating deprivation of rights.Daughter initially opined that her mother appeared to suffer fromdrug addiction, but her lay opinion was incorrect because it was based upon deception of fiduciaries looking to exploit Mother, rather than truth. Daughter ultimately determined that her mother did not suffer drug addiction, but was in severe pain and needed intervention from a medical professional. Daughter promptly secured care for her mother in the form of three surgeries to eliminate the excruciating pain in her back.MARY ROWAN was consciously indifferent and/or completely ignorant and blase about Mother’s medical problems and failed to comply with even minimum standards for a guardian. See Affidavit of Daughter, Daughter NEVER INTENDED that her statements be relied upon as medical evidence, nor should they have been afforded such weight. Moreover, Mother’s back pain was at best a temporarily disabling condition rather than permanent incapacity justifying guardianship by a stranger intent on exploiting her. Mother is not mentally incapacitated and cannot be discriminated against simply based upon conditions of aging, such as sciatic nerve pain common to many. Arthritis and bone spurs resolve when treated and Mother’s pain is all but gone save brief scheduled medical treatments responsibly overseen by her daughter and ignored by ROWAN and every person charged with protecting Mother.ADA CLAIMS FOR DISCRIMINATIONCongress enacted the ADA “to provide a clear and comprehensive nationalmandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities.” 42 U.S.C. § 12101(b)(1). Four types of discrimination have been identified as actionable:disability discrimination, associational discrimination, unjustified segregation that fails to comport with the mandate of least restrictive alternative, and/or illegal retaliation against any person advocating for the rights of a person with a suspected disability. The ADA was violated in all of the foregoing ways in this case.First, Mother’s rights were disregarded entirely based upon her apparentdisability and inability to challenge the powers that be. Second, Mother wasdiscriminated against in her choice of associations when she was denied access or any form of communication with her daughter for over 8 months.Outrageously, Daughter searched for her mother in panic those 8 months before 2 In Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581,598, 119 S.Ct. 2176, 144 L.Ed.2d 540 (1999) (plurality opinion)).Instead, the plurality in Olmstead held that it was “satisfied that Congress had a more comprehensive view of the concept of discrimination advanced in the ADA,” which was passed to stamp out the “unjustified`segregation’ of persons with disabilities.” Olmstead, 527 U.S. at 598, 119 S.Ct. 2176 discovering she was virtually imprisoned by ROWAN in a warehouse in East Detroit.ROWAN’S actions are criminal in her neglect, abuse and exploitation of Mother.Third, Daughter was unjustifiably segregated in violation of the OlmsteadAct and integration mandate of Title II, requiring governmental units to provide the least restrictive alternative and community based services while avoiding seclusion or institutionalization of any form (even nursing homes). Mother was deprived of the choice to reside with family or friends, but hidden like a hostage by ROWAN. The fourth way the ADA was violated with respect to Mother and Daughter was extreme retaliatory actions by ROWAN against Daughter, such as pursuing false criminal charges dismissed by the Judge as baseless. ROWAN appeared at Daughter’s home to take Mother by force with no court order, permitting Daughter to use reasonable force to protect her mother and herself.ILLEGAL RETALIATION UNDER TITLE IIIUnder Michigan law, a person can use deadly force against someone to defendthemselves if they believe deadly force is the only means of protecting themselves or their family members, with no requirement to retreat. That’s as long as the person isn’t engaged in a crime, is somewhere they’re legally allowed to be, and feels deadly force is the only way to defend themselves. The charges ROWAN brought against Daughter included obstructing a public servant and assault and battery for merely spraying ROWAN with a water hose to protect Mother from being kidnapped by ROWAN because ROWAN would not leave after being warned to get off the property. ROWAN repeatedly harassedDaughter before Daughter chose to spray her with a hose, causing Daughter to be fearful of her mother’s safety as well as her own. Had ROWAN appeared with a court order, Daughter would never have been so alarmed and frightened. The charges were dismissed as frivolous given Daughter could have legally sprayed her full of lead rather than water under Michigan “stand your ground” law.SCOPE OF ADA PROTECTIONThe ADA’s protections are sweeping and comprehensive as evidence byCongress twice amending the regulations in 2008 and 2016 in response to courtswatering down the protections intended. Courts have universally held that anyactivity performed by a government entity falls within the definition of “services,programs, or activities” denied to a disabled individual. Frame v. City ofArlington, 657 F.3d 215 (5th Cir.2011) (en banc), cert. denied,U.S., 132 S.Ct. 1561, 182 L.Ed.2d 168 (2012). In Frame , the court found that “[t]he Supreme Court has broadly understood a `service’ to mean `the performance of work commanded or paid for by another,’ or `an act done for the benefit or at the command of another.'” See id. at 226. This brings in independent contractors to hold the county liable so that it cannot evade liability by using 1099 appointees instead of employees to violate the ADA. The County cannot violate the ADA by using independent contractors to violate it for the county.SECTION 504 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973The ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 impose upon publicentities an affirmative obligation to make reasonable accommodations for disabled individuals.. The accommodation must be sufficient to provide a disabled person meaningful access to the benefit or service offered by a public entity. Se e Alexander v. Choate, 469 U.S. 287, 301, 105 S.Ct. 712, 83 L.Ed.2d 661 (1985). In evaluating whether a plaintiff has stated a claim for disability discrimination, the application of the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act are substantially the same, with the difference being that Title II violations do not require that discrimination be solely based upon a person’s disability. Hainze v. Richards, 207 F.3d 795, 799 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 959, 121 S.Ct. 384, 148 L.Ed.2d 296 (2000).Under Title II of the ADA, “`discrimination need not be the sole reason'” for theexclusion or denial of benefits to the plaintiff, see Soledad v. United StatesDepartment of Treasury, 304 F.3d 500, 503-04 (5th Cir.2002) (quoting Ahrens v.Perot Systems Corp., 205 F.3d 831, 835 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 819, 121 S.Ct. 59, 148 L.Ed.2d 26 (2000)), 29 U.S.C. § 794(a). Other courts have reached similarly all-encompassing concepts of what can constitute a service or benefit under the ADA. See Noel v. New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission, 687 F.3d 63, 68 (2d Cir. 2012) (quoting Innovative Health Systems v. City of White Plains, 117 F.3d 37, 45 (2nd Cir.1997) (“[T]he phrase `services, programs, or activities’ has been interpreted to be `a catch-all phrase that prohibits all discrimination by a public entity.'”)); Kiman v. New Hampshire Department of of Corrections, 451 F.3d 274, 286-87 (1st Cir. 2006) Jones, Johnson v. City of Saline, 151 F.3d 564, 569 (6th Cir.1998) (concluding that “services, programs, and activities include all government activities” and that ” the phrase `services, programs, or activities’ encompasses virtually everything that a public entity does”) . Hobart v. City of Stafford , 784 F.Supp.2d 732, 756-57 (S.D.Tex.2011) Salinas v. City of Braunfels, 557 F.Supp.2d 771, 775 (W.D.Tex.2006) Barden v.City of Sacramento, 292 F.3d 1073, 1076 (9thCir. 2002), cert. denied, 539 U.S. 958, 123 S.Ct. 2639, 156 L.Ed.2d 656 (2003))Mother (1) is a qualified individual within the meaning of theADA; (2) who was excluded from participation in, or denied benefits of, services,programs, or activities for which the public entity is responsible, or was otherwisediscriminated against by the public entity; and (3) that such exclusion, denial ofbenefits, or discrimination was by reason of disability.” Melton v. Dallas AreaRapid Transit, 391 F.3d 669, 671-72 (5th Cir.2004) . Specifically, Mother’stemporary disability rendered her vulnerable to the very exploitation ROWANcommitted and powerless to stop it. The county is estopped from denying Mother is a person with a disability by virtue of the court’s ruling, deeming herincapacitated. The ADA defines “disability” broadly as: (A) a physical or mentalimpairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of suchindividual; (B) a record of such an impairment; or (C) being regarded as having such an impairment.” Id. at § 12102. It At a bare minimum, notice and a meaningful opportunity to participate is required for the county to avoid liability forviolating the ADA.3 Significantly incapacity or incompetence is not the sameconcept as merely having a disability or temporarily disabling condition. Were thattrue, every State would violate the ADA through guardianship proceedings of thedisabled.CONCLUSION AND RELIEF REQUESTEDThe foregoing demonstrates the violations of Mother’s rights that are ongoing and shock the conscience for which this guardianship must be terminatedand her rights restored. Daughter respectfully prays that this Honorable Judge take notice of her affidavit and the attached legal authorities and references and dismiss the guardianship , restoring Mother’s rights in full.3 The law recognizes temporary incapacity and equity precludes the county having its cake and eating it too by claiming in retrospect that someone deprived of rights in violation of federal law was not actually disabled to be covered by the ADA’s protection

From FB: and while one Cal. judge recognizes the rights of parents; another one in LA is stripping away parental rights to protect their children from state intervention in the family,amp.html

Now, notice it is admitted by DCFS, the mother did nothing wrong, the girl is out of control and incorrigible, so why the need to strip mom of her rights?


Appeals court gives counties more power to remove kids from homes

Wading into a sensitive area of child welfare, a California appeals court panel has ruled that county officials can remove a dangerously incorrigible child from the home even if the parent has responded appropriately to the behavior problems.

The case involved a 17-year-old girl who repeatedly ran away from her mother and gave birth to two children, prompting the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services to remove her from her mother’s custody. a decision released Thursday, a three-judge panel of the 2nd District Court of Appeal unanimously said that “when a child … faces a substantial risk of serious physical harm, a parent’s inability to supervise or protect a child is enough by itself to invoke the juvenile court’s dependency jurisdiction.”

The ruling could prove to be an important moment in the decades-long debate in child welfare circles about when government agencies should remove troubled children from their parents and whether officials should be doing more to keep families united.

Armand Montiel, a DCFS spokesman, said “the court agreed that child safety is Job One. When a child is in danger and the parent is unable to protect the child, we need to step in.”

But Sanford Jossen, an El Segundo attorney who frequently represents children and parents involved in the child welfare system, described the ruling as “very disturbing.”

“It significantly expands the department’s ability to interfere with the parent-child relationship,” Jossen said. “There are many parents in this state who do everything possible but are not able to control their children.”

Child welfare experts said the case appears to be headed for the California Supreme Court because it conflicted with another state appellate court that ruled in 2010 that a parent had to be abusive or neglectful for the child to be removed from the home.

The case ruled on this week concerned a girl who began running away from home for days at a time when she was 14 years old. During that time, she did not attend school and falsely reported that her mother was abusive. On one occasion while on the streets, the girl came into circumstances that required a hospital visit, the court said. In another instance, she threw furniture during a tantrum.

“Notwithstanding these efforts, [the girl] remained ‘rebellious,’ ‘incorrigible’ and ‘out of control,'” the court said.

At 15, the girl gave birth to the first of two children. When she turned 17, DCFS successfully petitioned the court to remove the girl from her mother’s custody and placed her with her grandparents, where she lived until reaching adulthood.

The “mother in this case was neither neglectful nor blameworthy in being unable to supervise or protect her daughter,” the appeals court said.

Lara Holtzman, who is managing attorney for the Alliance for Children’s Rights and has spent many years working in Los Angeles’ child welfare system, agreed that the appeals court decision could be used by county lawyers to remove children who would have previously been left with their parents.

“A decision like this could give DCFS more leeway to feel that they don’t need certain facts in place before removing a child,” she said. “But it doesn’t mean that they have to open the floodgates. They may say we only want to call this into play when everything else has been tried.”

Holtzman said that the case also highlighted the difficulty parents have obtaining services to help prevent their children from coming under court jurisdiction.

In recent years, state and federal officials have attempted to relax rules to give Los Angeles County’s child welfare system more freedom to spend money on parenting classes, substance abuse treatment and other services for families not yet in the foster care system.

But funding for child welfare services across the nation is generally triggered only when a child enters court jurisdiction, and agencies have struggled to find effective means to help families before the court removes children from parents’ custody.

“The county has not excelled at helping parents hold on to their children,” Holtzman said. “Parents shouldn’t have to lose custody to get services and help.”

And more and more families are seeking services.

Los Angeles County supervisors have recently identified DCFS as the leading agency to intervene with children who are involved in sex trafficking. Holtzman noted that many parents of those children have gone to great lengths to help them and are likely to be more effective than a foster parent might be.

“You can have a parent who has done everything and is at wit’s end,” she said. “Isn’t there something that needs to be created that allows parents like that to maintain authority while the government helps the child?”


From FB: Honest Cal. Judge bucks the system, overturns jury verdict for state and finds that interviewing children at school without parent’s knowledge or presence violates their rights per se.

When you thought all the judges were against you in court and just out to make friends, clout and wealth, an honest judge comes along:

In a rare move, a San Diego federal judge reversed a jury verdict that had cleared county social workers of fault for their conduct in an investigation into child abuse allegations against a family.

U.S. District Court Judge Roger Benitez also concluded that a longstanding county policy allowing investigators to interview children at their school without the consent of parents or a court order was at fault.

That conclusion could have large implications for the county, potentially allowing families subjected to similar treatment over the years to sue the county, lawyers said.

The ruling came in the lawsuit filed by Sara Dees and her two young daughters, each of whom was caught up in a brief investigation by Child Welfare Services workers in 2013.

They contended that a county social worker violated their rights when she questioned both the children, then 9 and 5, at their school without the knowledge or consent of the parents in early 2013.

In February, after a week long trial, a jury found in favor of the county.

But last week, Benitez reversed that decision – a step judges do infrequently. In a 20-page ruling Benitez concluded that “the clear weight of the evidence does not support the verdict.”

He then took a further step and said he would set a date for a new trial – one to determine how much in monetary damages the county would have to pay. A hearing to set that date is scheduled for Thursday.

The ruling also has potentially larger impact. The judge concluded that a county policy in place for years that allows social workers to conduct interviews at schools of children suspected to be abuse victims – or their siblings, who were not victims – was the underlying cause that led to the violation of the family’s rights.

That part of the ruling could open the county to lawsuits from children and their families who, over the years, have been interviewed at schools without a social worker getting a court order, warrant, or consent from the families, or in instances where there was not an immediate threat to the safety of the child — known as an “exigent circumstance.”

San Diego, along with other counties, routinely conducts such interviews, said Donnie Cox, the Oceanside lawyer who represented the family. He said while state law allows such interviews San Diego County uses it more aggressively than most other counties.

“This has broad implications,” Cox said. “It potentially exposes the county to liability in all those cases where they interviewed a child where there were not exigent circumstances, a warrant, court order, or imminent danger of injury to a child.”

County Communications Director Michael Workman said the county planned to appeal, and declined further comment because the case was still ongoing.

The lawsuit centered on a short investigation by social workers in February and March, 2013. Dees lived with her two young daughters, her husband Robert Dees and his two daughters from a previous marriage in San Diego.

It started on Feb. 7, 2013 when Child Welfare Services got a investigative referral that Robert Dees had taken naked photos of his 11-year-old daughter, Benitez wrote. The girl said she wanted the photos taken to document her physical appearance as it changed during puberty.

In addition to investigating the circumstances of the 11-year-old, social workers also sought to find out if Sara Dees’s two younger children were also in danger of abuse, court records say.

Nothing came of the referrals, however. By Feb. 21 San Diego police, who had opened an investigation, had closed it and told county social workers that both the police and District Attorney would not be pursuing any case.

“That should have been the end,” Benitez wrote. “It was not.”

Five days later social worker Caitlin McCann went to the school where Sara Dees’s two young daughter attend, he wrote. She spoke to the older child for about five minutes.McCann testified at the trial she made the visit to make sure the children were okay and to “wrap up” the investigation.

McCann did not ask for consent from Sara or the children’s father to speak with them, Benitez wrote. One of the children became upset and was screaming down the hallway “CPS is here, CPS is here” after the interview, he recounted.

County policy says that when interviewing children at school who are either the alleged victims of abuse or siblings, parental consent is not needed.

While McCann said she was checking on the status of the kids, Cox said the technique is often used to “dig up evidence” against parents.

The investigation was closed three weeks later, with all allegations determined to be unfounded. But Sara Dees sued, alleging the nonconsensual interviews violated the rights of her children, and her own rights to parent her children under the 14th amendment — a legal doctrine known as familial rights.

While the jury sided with the county, Benitez saw it differently. He ruled that the child’s rights were violated during the interview because she was effectively “seized” under the law — unable to leave, not free to decline to speak with McCann.

“A reasonable nine-year-old child who is called out of class by school officials for the purpose of meeting with a social worker who has already disturbed the child’s family life, and who is not advised that she may refuse to speak with the social worker, will feel compelled to talk to the social worker and remain there until dismissed,” he wrote.

Interviewing the children — identified by their initials “L” and “G” in court records — without permission of parents and with no indication they were in danger also violated Sara Dees’s rights, he wrote.

“The evidence is clear that McCann purposely went to the one place she knew she could find L or G and question L or G without Sara knowing,” he wrote. “Because of the County’s policy, that place was the children’s school.”

Shawn MacMillan, a lawyer who frequently represents parents in suits against county social workers, said the county has been on notice since 2010 that school site interviews are problematic. A federal appeals court held in 2010 that such interviews without a warrant, court order or parental consent were unconstitutional.

“They’ve known that this is a potential problem for a long time, and they’ve done nothing about it,” he said.

from Joanne;

Thank goodness, an honest judge. But currently I have a client who did nothing wrong and yet DCFS took his newborn son away, and is now falsifying records, making sh** up and trying to make an honorably discharged veteran and licensed CNA look like a dope field and drug addict by twisting reports and stories.

He is supposedly a drug addict and in need of treatment because:

  1.   He has a drink twice a year.  On New Years eve and on his birthday.
  2.    He tried marjuana and didn’t like it in high school.
  3.    He has not done any drugs for over 20 years
  4.    He believes that social drinking is not a problem for others; but he does not engage n it.

On this basis, DCFS has represented to the Juvenile court that he is a “risk factor” for his newborn son and that he has to have routine drug drops (waste of taxpayer money) addiction and general counseling and parenting classes.

THIS is where your BS tax money goes to:  twisted psychopathic DCFS workers that are trying to cover up crimes against fathers.


Guardian ad Litem not immune to suits

Another great article on how GALs have no absolute immunity and are amenable to suit for perjury, perfidy, fraud, etc.

How Child Protection Services Buys and Sells Our Children

Autumn Destiny DeShawna Thomason, Carly and Sara Louvelle Texanna Wifawn held hostage by Jackson County Ga DFCS

Guardian ad litems and Appointed Counsel are not protected by immunity. In Wiederholt v Fisher, 485 N.W. 2d 442, 169 Wis. 2d 524 (1992) “In child custody matter, guardian ad litem does not represent child per se; rather, guardian ad litem’s statutory duty is to represent concept of child’s best interest.” When those guardian ad litems don’t bother to meet the minium standards – they become subject to liability. (Collins v Tabet, 111 N.M. 391,806 P 2nd 40 (N.M. 1990)

In other words when a Guardian ad litem just goes through the motions and does not really work the case they can and should be held liable. Most Guardians don’t work for the child, they work for Child Protection Services.
According to Bonds, 64, N.M. at 345,328 P. 2nd at 599the appointment…

View original post 343 more words

From CS: the Tort of Expectation of Inheritancy–great article

Click to access newtorts.pdf

what are the elements of Expectation of Inheritancy?

The claim of Tortious Interference with Expectation of Inheritance (West Palm Beach, Florida) sometimes called “Intentional Interference with Expectation of Inheritance” (Boca Raton) affords individuals an opportunity to pursue legal action if another party uses fraud or otherunlawful methods to prevent them from obtaining an inheritance.

What are the Five Elements of an Intentional Interference with an Inheritance? To have a sufficient legal claim for Interference with an Inheritance West Palm Beach, the court will examine a number of factors when determining the validity of tortious, or wrongful, conduct.


  1. The existence of an expectancy. If another party was able to use fraud or another method of tortious interference (Aventura) to change a will and it revoked your inheritance, you must be able to prove that prior to this interference, you had an expectancy as a beneficiary.
  2. The other party was intentional when interfering with this expectancy. It can be difficult to prove what the state of mind of the defendant was in when interfering. Consult with your Florida probate attorney to understand how this element can be proven.
  3. How they interfered was tortious in natureTortious acts include the other party committing frauddefamation, or abusing their fiduciary duties as well assuppressing, forging, or altering a document or will in any way that affects what the deceased is or is not distributing to beneficiaries.
  4. You would have received the inheritance or gift without the interference. You must demonstrate to the court that the other party aimed their tortious actions at the testator, or person who created the will, and this caused interference with the final wishes and true intent of the will or document.
  5. There are damages involved in the case. Damages in Tortious Interference with Inheritance (West Palm Beach / Deer Field Beach) cases can include the value of the property you may have received if the interference had not occurred.

From GG: Attorney Must Use Good English–by Order of Court

Just when you thought you heard it all–

I can’t even imagine what was going on with this

CASE NO. 17-23078-CIV-ALTONAGA/Goodman
THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion with
Memorandum of Law to File a[] Second Amended Complaint [ECF No. 26]. Being fully
advised, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion [ECF No. 26] is GRANTED. The
Court notes Plaintiff’s proposed Second Amended Complaint [ECF No. 26-1] is replete with grammatical errors, including improper punctuation, misspelling of words, incorrect conjugation of verbs, and lack of apostrophes when required for possessive adjectives; sentence fragments; and nonsensical sentences. The proposed Second Amended Complaint is also an eyesore, with its formatting errors and spaces. These are some of the issues Defendant Miami Beach Healthcare Group Ltd. pointed out the Amended Complaint suffered from, in its Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint [ECF No. 23].
Plaintiff’s counsel is permitted to file a second amended complaint as a separate docket
entry by November 14, 2017, so long as he certifies the pleading has been reviewed and
approved by a teacher of the English language — such certification is to be included in the notice Case 1:17-cv-23078-CMA Document 28 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/02/2017 Page 1 of 2
CASE NO. 17-23078-CIV-ALTONAGA/Goodman
of filing the second amended complaint. Should these issues persist in Plaintiff’s filings,
Plaintiff’s counsel will be referred to the Florida Bar for counseling and any other action the Florida Bar deems appropriate.
Defendant Miami Beach Healthcare Group Ltd.’s Motion to Dismiss Amended
Complaint [ECF No. 23] is DENIED as moot. Defendants shall file a single, combined
response to the second amended complaint, or separate answers, as appropriate, within the time permitted by the Rules.
DONE AND ORDERED in Miami, Florida this 2nd day of November, 2017.
cc: counsel of record
Case 1:17-cv-23078-CMA Document 28 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/02/2017 Page 2 of 2

From Ken Ditkowsky–Elder Abuse and the Prosecutor’s Resource

Great publication on proscuting elder abuse may be found at:

Click to access The%20Prosecutor%27s%20Resource%20-%20Elder%20Abuse%20(2017).pdf

Here are some excerpts:

Elder abuse cases often call on prosecutors to utilize investigative and prosecutorial skills that cross over many areas of specialty, including fraud and other financial crimes, child abuse and neglect, domestic violence, and sexual abuse. Crimes of elder abuse often co-occur, so it is not uncommon for a case to include theft crimes along with abuse and/or neglect as well as infliction of emotional or psychological abuse. In some cases, financial exploitation may be the motive for other forms of abuse or neglect. Understanding the potential connections between forms of abuse may help prosecutors create stronger, more comprehensive cases, and also address the full spectrum of perpetrators’ behaviors.1 As a result, prosecutors must not only be alert to indications of all forms of abuse that may be part of an overall pattern of abuse or neglect, but must also collaborate with other prosecutors and professionals who have expertise in relevant areas. Elder abuse cases are different from other kinds of cases in their complexities and frequent recurring issues, including: dynamics between the parties; commission
by multiple perpetrators, settings of abuse; issues of health and mortality; current and prior decisional capacity;types of evidence; establishing causation; dealingwith elderly defendants, and ageism. Many outside entities, such as Adult Protective Services (APS), the Long-Term Care Ombudsman (LTCO), aging services, and licensing and regulatory agencies, may conduct separate concurrent investigations; interview victims,   perpetrators, and witnesses; collect evidence; or initiate cases.
This Prosecutors’ Resource is designed to assist with investigating and prosecuting cases involving abuse, neglect, and financial exploitation of an older victim. Due to the prevalence of elder abuse committed by individuals known to the
victim who are often in a position or relationship of trust, this Resource will focus on cases involving nonstranger perpetrators.2  Additionally, this Resource will briefly address abuse committed in facility settings but will focus primarily on abuse committed within the community where older adults reside and abuse most often occurs. Much of the information, however, is applicable to cases no matter the setting.3
This Resource will define and identify elder abuse and will provide strategies and tools for prosecutors to assist in evaluating, investigating, charging, prosecuting, and resolving cases intended to protect victims from further harm and hold offenders appropriately accountable. It is divided into two parts:
Part One: Overview of Elder Abuse provides foundational knowledge needed to handle an elder abuse case. It begins by defining elder abuse, including the various forms and co-occurrence of crimes. Part One further discusses the characteristics of elder abuse victims and perpetrators, the aging body, and issues of competency and capacity that will all inform prosecutors’ decision-making in cases and interactions with victims.
Part Two: Prosecuting Elder Abuse discusses strategies for working with older victims in elder abuse cases and addresses the individual steps and considerations for prosecuting elder abuse cases, beginning with the initial interview and investigation (including strategies for charging) through sentencing.
Table of Contents
1 For example, a beneficiary under a will may act to hasten the victim’s death, or a theft of assets could leave the victim with insufficient funds to pay for food, medicine, or utilities.
2 “[S]trangers accounted for only about 8% of recent emotional mistreatment episodes, compared to 25% by romantic partners/ex partners, and 18% by children or grandchildren and the rest by acquaintances;” family members accounted for 76% of the physical abuse committed against older adults; “family members accounted for 52% of the most recent [sexual] assaults (spouses 40%), and strangers accounted for
only 3%.” Ron Acierno, et al., Prevalence and Correlates of Emotional, Physical, Sexual, and Financial Abuse and Potential Neglect in the United States: The National Elder Mistreatment Study, 100(2) Am. J. Pub. Health 292-97 (2010).
3 Abuse committed within a facility can be perpetrated by family, friends of the victim who visit, or by those associated with the facility—staff, volunteers, and other residents.
Current as of April 2017
The Prosecutors’ Resource
© 2017 AEquitas. All Rights Reserved.
1100 H Street NW, Suite 310, Washington, DC 20005
Part One: Overview of Elder Abuse
A. Defining Elder Abuse
Elder abuse has been defined as “physical, sexual or psychological abuse, as well as neglect, abandonment and financial exploitation of an older4 person by another person or entity, that occurs in any setting, either in a relationship where there is an expectation of trust and/or when an older person is targeted based on age or disability.”5 This definition distinguishes between illegal acts that happened to be committed against older persons and those where there is a unique relationship or dynamic between victims and their abusers or where an older person is targeted.
Elder abuse occurs in a variety of forms and acts, committed against older adults, by one or more individuals, corporations, and other entities, in any location in which the elder may be located, including the elder’s home, community setting, or a facility. Perpetrators may commit abuse:
• In a relationship in which there is a societal expectation of trust, such as caregivers, family, intimate partners, fiduciaries, faith community members; and/or
• When the elder is targeted because of a real or perceived vulnerability, such as frailty, cognitive impairment, or physical disability (and therefore less likely to report, fight back, understand what has happened, or be a credible witness). This category includes some scams where there is proof the victim was targeted because of these  characteristics.
This Prosecutors’ Resource uses the term “elder abuse,” but some jurisdictions categorize these cases as those involving “vulnerable, dependent, or impaired” adults.6 Individual jurisdictions define elder abuse quite differently; some do not have a specific crime of elder abuse, while others consider all crimes against elders to be “elder abuse,”  irrespective of the relationship between victim and suspect.
The following forms of abuse will be addressed throughout this Resource:
• Physical abuse
• Sexual abuse
4 Marie Therese Connolly, Bonnie Brandl & Risa Breckman, The Elder Justice Roadmap: A Stakeholder Initiative to Respond to an Emerging Health, Justice, Financial and Social Crisis 3 (2013), [hereinafter
Elder Justice Roadmap]. The Roadmap definition does not define a specific age for when a person becomes “elderly.” Federal law, however, uses several different ages for “elder” status; for example, The Older Americans Act uses age 60; Social Security uses age 65; the Office on Violence Against Women’s Later Life grants program uses age 50. 42 U.S.C.A. § 3002; 42 U.S.C.A. § 1396d; Grant Programs, Department of Justice, (last visited Aug. 10, 2016). United States jurisdictions and tribes use a variety of ages for their laws as well, and still some jurisdictions do not use an age-based definition at all for crimes and reporting laws. Instead, these jurisdictions use a “vulnerable adult” standard for all adults age 18 and older. Vulnerable adult (also called at-risk; dependent, and impaired adult)
statutes typically apply when the person has a significant developmental, cognitive, or physical disability which affects the person’s ability to meet basic needs and/or protect legal rights. Still others may require age 60 or older and vulnerability. See, e.g., N.Y. Penal Law § 260.31; Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 9A.44.010; Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-111.
5 Elder Justice Roadmap, supra note 4. This Roadmap definition is not a legal definition but a framework for understanding and differentiating elder abuse from all crimes committed against older persons.
6 Definitions vary across jurisdictions and prosecutors should review statutes in their jurisdiction. See, e.g., Ala.Code § 13A-6-191, Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 53a-320, Fl. Stat. Ann. 825.101, 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/17-56 (defining elderly, elder, or older as person/adult as someone who is 60 years of age or older); Cal. Penal Code § 11174.4, Ga. Code Ann. § 16-5-100, N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 14-32.3, Tex. Penal Code Ann.
§ 22.04 (defining elderly, elder, or older as person/adult as someone who is 65 years of age or older); Alaska Stat. § 11.51.220, D.C. Code
§ 22-932, Idaho Code Ann. § 18-1505, Minn. Stat. Ann. 609.232, Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 609.232 (defining vulnerable adult, generally, as someone who is 18 years or older and who, because of a physical or mental impairment, requires assistance). Prosecutors should also look to mental condition, emotional frailty/stability, physical status, financial situation and level of dependence, access to medical care, living situation, provider of food and daily needs, etc.
Current as of April 2017
The Prosecutors’ Resource
© 2017 AEquitas. All Rights Reserved.
1100 H Street NW, Suite 310, Washington, DC 20005
• Emotional/psychological abuse
• Neglect
• Abandonment
• Financial exploitation
Because of the complexity and challenges involved in financial exploitation, those cases will be discussed in more detail in the next section as well as throughout this Resource. Domestic abuse in later life frequently occurs and may incorporate all of the forms of abuse listed above. It will be discussed throughout this Resource. Prosecutors should remember that elder abuse can be perpetrated by an intimate partner, family member, or third party.
1. Financial Exploitation
Financial exploitation, also referred to as financial abuse, is defined as the “illegal or improper use of an elder’s funds, property, or assets.”7 It includes acts or a taking for which the victim is unable to give legal consent or of which the victim is unaware; abuse of a fiduciary relationship; and situations in which a victim’s consent is the result of fraud or deceit, coercion, threats or violence, manipulation, subterfuge, duress, or undue influence.8 Financial exploitation typically includes a process consisting of a series of events rather than a single incident. When there is not an existing
relationship of trust between the victim and suspect, there may be a period of “grooming” prior to the taking (e.g., “sweetheart scams”). Other forms of abuse may include specific methods used (e.g., use of physical abuse to accomplish
the taking or obtaining of the victim’s “consent”) or outcomes (e.g., caregiver takes victim’s money and neglects victim by not providing needed medications or medical care). Financial abuse frequently co-occurs with other forms of elder abuse, making it critical to screen for other crimes and forms of elder abuse.
Jurisdictions vary considerably in how they criminalize financial exploitation crimes. Some states have enacted specific financial exploitation crimes for acts against elder or vulnerable adults.9 Other states have created sentence enhancements or aggravators that increase sentences when financial crimes are committed against elders and/or
vulnerable adults.10 Whether special crimes or enhancements have been enacted, financial exploitation crimes can usually be prosecuted under a state’s various theft crimes.11
Financial exploitation is the most common form of elder abuse12 and can involve many kinds of conduct committed by a wide array of offenders. The United States Government Accountability Office has suggested the categories in Table 1 to illustrate the breadth of financial abuse.13
7 Types of Abuse, National Center on Elder Abuse, (last visited Aug. 3, 2016).
8 Candace J. Heisler, Elder Abuse, in Victims of Crime 161 (R. C. Davis, A.J. Lurigio, & S. Herman eds., 2013).
9 See, e.g., Ala. Code Ann. § 13A-6-195; Idaho Code Ann. § 18-1505; 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/17-56.
10 See, e.g., Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13-702; Nev. Rev. Stat. § 193.167; see also Carolyn Dessin, Financial Abuse of the Elderly: Is the Solution a Problem?
34 McGeorge L. Rev. 267, 289 (Winter 2003).
11 Margaret M. Landrey& Monique C.M. Leahy, Proof of Elder Abuse in Civil and Criminal Actions, 118 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 3d 297, §18 (Aug. 2016).
12 Shelly L. Jackson & Thomas L. Hafemeister, University of Virginia, Financial Abuse of Elderly People vs. Other Forms of Elder Abuse: Assessing Their Dynamics, Risk Factors, and Society’s Response (Aug. 2010),
13 U.S. Government Accountability Office National Strategy Needed to Effectively Combat Elder Financial Exploitation (Nov. 2012), This Resource primarily focuses on the first type of offender: family members, friends, in-home caregivers, legal guardians, representatives, payees, etc. For additional information on financial abuse committed by financial service providers
and strangers, please see Appendix C. Additional Resources.
Current as of April 2017
The Prosecutors’ Resource
© 2017 AEquitas. All Rights Reserved.
1100 H Street NW, Suite 310, Washington, DC 20005
TABLE 1. United States Government Accountability Office, Examples

From Joanne;

Very interesting the article does not talk about probate court or probate court abuse, abuse by lawyers stealing from the elderly, making up false allegations in court to put false money in the estate; allowing the elderly to be drugged illegally with psychotropic meds in nursing homes, etc.

From Ken:

On Friday, November 3, 2017, 7:16:53 PM CDT, kenneth ditkowsky <> wrote:
What is being done to the elderly as a matter of course is that once the miscreants get their hands on them, they are doped up, isolated and denied even the basic human rights as their assets are stolen.
Rape is a terrible crime.   It used to carry the death penalty as it was so dehumanizing, however, *****.   Now it has become a akin to a ‘social disease’ and a Harvey Weinstein et al can get away with it for years, and then *****.    The dehumanizing of the elderly for the profit of the cadre of nursing home operators is deplorable, but as so many of the criminals are part of the POLITICAL and JUDICIAL ELITE hardly a ripple of outrage is heard. Remember how reluctant the Sun-times and the Tribune were to report the billion dollar medicare theft of Philip Esformes.
The same newspapers harp day after day concerning some silly statement that a politician utters and for days carried stories about some drunk 18 year old who wandered into a freezer at a local hotel.   The theft of  BILLION DOLLARS of Medicare funds was ****!   Seth Gillman’s Medicare hospice thefts were also barely mentioned, and there was no mention of the attempted intimidation by the IARDC when it became a rumor on the ‘street’ that Gillman was co-cooperating with the FBI.  The obvious attempt to silence him apparently was unimportant – only a few ELDERLY LIVES were at stake!
On Friday, November 3, 2017, 6:26:37 PM CDT, <> wrote:
Your mother taught you that the best place to hide something is on the center of the dining room table!   Years ago when I complained about the touchy behavior of one of the few men in an aerobics class, (in the ninth decade of his life) , you commented, the dirty old man was once the dirty young man. The clergy have been part of the harrassment and rape culture, as well as the people the clergy loves to excoriate!

From FB: Karen Federighi may have been released from Guardianship

There have been several posts on FB announcing that Karen Federighi may have been released from a wrongful and abusive guardianship where evil relatives were involved in Miami Dade, Florida, a hotbed of guardianship abuse and corruption.

You will recall that Teresa Tozzo Lyles had a mother, Carmen Tozzo who was murdered in probate there. She is still fighting for justice for her mother.

Karen was told by many to get to Canada or to Mexico and keep on sending the judge evidence of her competence.  She was an experienced nurse with a Masters in Nursing, holding 2 jobs, age 57, one job was teaching young nurses.

An abusive and wrongful guardianship ruined all that.

She was advised by many to flee the country, there would be no justice as long as she was here. She fled to Mexico under cloak of night.  They took her passport and driver’s license.  They got her fired from her jobs.  These people are pure evil.

Now she has to get back to the US without a passport or driver’s license.  Please pray for her.  The guardianship has been dismissed.  I don’t know if she is still at risk.

I am trying to get copies of her court papers.

Keep on praying.