You’ll need some real maple syrup for this transcript and all the waffles it provides
First, the link to the transcript:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwOGlTS3p2azY0UFU
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwOGlTS3p2azY0UFU
(if link breaks)
1. With respect to the Soldini notices, [entity] says that it is her understanding that [entity2] looked at the issue at the time of appointment of CT and decided she had jurisdiction, and that is why she would not review it on 7/8/11. Very interesting. Except the law is, you can bring up jurisdiction at any time and if it’s notice type subject matter jurisdiction, the case MUST be dismissed. The court is supposed to look at subject matter jurisdiction at any time because it’s sooo important. It’s due process. Sodini. So that means the [entity] is side stepping the following 1) an admission by [entity3] that he never served the 14 day notices; 2) that there was no time between the care plan hearing by Gloria on Nov 22, 2009 and the Hearing to appoint Carolyn on Dec 7, 2012 which would have been inadequate time to prepare the 14 day notices–it was not until 11/22 that the hearing date on the Petition to Appoint was set for Dec 7th (look at the docket, dofus); 3) protestations and affidavits by the 2 sisters they never received 14 day notices; and 3) from time to time [entities] will state that the appointment of a Guardian was not by hearing, but by agreement between the parties. (Waffle no. 1) In this transcript [entity] says Mary was supposed to be in court on Dec 7, but she was not there. (Waffle No. 2) She then waffles on Mary’s need for an atty (p. 23). (Waffle no. 3) Pretty amazing.
2. For some reason the [forum] is ignoring the fact that during a partition or when the motion is made, a party can defeat the partition by showing an accounting []t that the other owner is not entitled to any proceeds owing from the transaction. In this case, the court said they would just split everything 50/50. Gloria protested that she paid an $18,000 down payment, so she is entitled to that back. Then there was argument over whether the $165,000 was just on Gloria’s half, or if it was also on Mary’s half, until someone noted that Mary also signed the mortgage note. Gloria protested that she always paid the mortgage (so one would assume she would get the credit on this), but the [entity] said it would not matter, the mortgage would run against both halves and did not mention any accounting or credit for what Gloria paid, including but not limited to: mortgage, taxes, insurance, repairs, etc. over the years of ownership. Gloria should get credit, but the court didn’t think this was the law. (My question is, who convinced the court of this law).
3. Next, the [fora] goes into lengthy detail as to why a 2-1401 motion to set aside a judgment did not have to be filed. The [forum] said it was only attacking an apportionment agreement, which is only a private agreement between two parties and it has nothing to do with a judgement or order of another [forum]. Gloria responded that the Agreement was part of the Order dismissing the case and it was reviewed by the chancery court, that Mary was represented by her own counsel at the time, but it didn’t seem to matter to the [entity]. She seems to treat the apportionment agreement as a private agreement not heard by the chancery court, nor entered as part of a court order. Other [entities] seem to have convinced her of this. (new stack of waffles, please–that what happens when the [entites] goes to law school by letting [other entities] into the private area reserved for [certain entities] and discussing [matters with entities in that area] there. Duh)
4) Finally, [entity] starts to complaint about being contacted by [certain authorities] (p62) and that the sergeant says he was inundated with 513 emails regarding Mary’s condition and he wants Gloria and “her followers” to be admonished to stop this. He says he investigated several months ago and found nothing wrong with Mary or her living conditions. Now see what the [forum] says. The [forum] does not know who caused all those emails. but Gloria needs to think about this because it will turn into a Chicken Little situation.
BUT not to beat poor little Chicken Little to death,on the very SAME page we have [another entity] going on and on about “a decline” in Mary’s condition and next page’”in the forseeable future” there may be a need for “more skilled care than they can provide..money is an issue. Money is needed to care for Mary.” Another stack of waffles. If all Mary needs is custodial care, then relatives are expected to pay for her care or suck up and do it themselves and Medicare won’t. The [entities] know this. BUT, if her needs are serious and cannot be done by family, then Medicare will pay. Medicare does not require Mary to divest herself of a survivorship interest in a family owned home–only [the entities involved] and CT want this. I know this. Most attys dealing with the elderly know this. The [forum] knows this fer sure. Nursing homes are dangerous places no elder should ever have to go to–unless there is no family to care for her. Now steps in Gloria, she did it for years and she actually promised her mom she would keep her at home until she passed over.
I’m going to say this again, in case [these entities] don’t get it. Gloria cared for her mother for years. Gloria paid the bills. Gloria kept things going. Mary was in EXCELLENT health. She walked every day, she took care of her dog Hannah (okay she did spoil her by giving her inappropriate treats such as chocolate, but hey, I do that too and most vets now say “spoiled pets welcome”). She was still in the garden club and even doing gardening. She swept the street. She visited with the nice firemen at the fire dept. next door, she went to the bank couple times per week (which is when she became enraged that Carolyn removed $4,000 from Mary’s account without her permission and so Mary went downtown to get a protective order against CT, instead what happened is Carolyn got appointed guardian and the rest is history.
Another amazing transcript of Gloria being ignored, mistreated and spent off in [this forum].
On July 11, 2011 the [entities] complained about Gloria’s postings on the regular guardianship blogs–NAGSA, Probate Sharks, etc…… Little did they know what lay around the corner.
First they got the nagging doubts of lay persons. Now they have some real sharks to deal with. Lawyers that write blogs, read transcripts and the most heinous issue of all–WE ASK THE QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ASKED.
The court was wrong. We should ALL BE CALLING FOR AN INVESTIGATION of this [forum] and why is the [forum] saying “don’t do wellness checks” when in fact it is stated in the [forum's] own transcripts that Mary is in decline. She never declined at the home managed by Gloria. She ate gourmet vegan and Gloria always did prompt doctor’s care.
Keep on emailing. Keep on helping Gloria. Sign the petitions that are posted above, write your senators and representatives and tell them NO MORE denying our elderly their due process rights.
Gloria has the Power of Attorney for Health Care of her mother. Not CT, so why did the [forum] ignore this.
The [forum] is wrong. The US Constitution and the Illinois Constitution guarantees each and every one of us the rights to free speech and to cry out when an elderly person is being abused and manipulated to her detriment.
Don’t be cowed by this transcript. It’s not right and it should not have ever happened.
JoAnne
PS–Gloria, with all this waffling by [certain entities], I think your best bet is to bring some maple syrup to [this forum] and just set it out every time they start to knit together their stories for the nth time. Uuugh.
PPS–When they lie, don’t shout out “he’s a liar”, just bring a rug–you know, maybe even one of those doll house rugs. You can get one at Gigis dolls and Sherris Teddy bears. Use a stack of post its, write down each lie, and stack them up on the little rug. When the miscreants start lying, don’t interrupt, just ask when it’s your turn and go thru those little post its on the rug, one by one.
I’m sure [certain entities] are reading this, so when you come in with your little rug and pull out the post its, I bet they never tell the [forum] you have to bring a rug to hold all their little (and not so little) lies, well, because they lie like a R U G.
PPPS–not to beat the making of waffles to death (pun intended), but from this transcript, it is clear that [an entity] is talking to [other certain entities] in the hallway, Scott and Gloria always see them coming from behind [certain entity's] private areas, and it is clear that the [forum] is being spoonfed BS law by [various] miscreants rather than having to actually read cases and make decisions based upon briefing schedules. The law with respect to partitions should have been briefed. The [forum] was often confused by the facts. The [forum] should have set a briefing schedule on 1) the partition; 2) the accounting on the brown house; 3) subject matter jurisdiction, as brought up by Gloria, etc.
This was not done. And when formal briefs are not required, justice suffers.
No comments:
Post a Comment