Ken Ditkowsky’s Reply Brief to his Motion to Dismiss the Complaint filed against him

Posted on March 28, 2012

From Ken Ditkowsky:

I just finished up an edit of the Reply.   I am forwarding this response to the various blogs with the hope that they will post it.   I want to demonstrate that not all attorneys shake in their boots when confronted by a wrongful disciplinary action reasonably intended to inhibit our free speech.  The ARDC case that was filed against me is ‘bogus’ and intended to shut me up.

It is not going to happen as I was called a liar, even though every word I communicated was absolutely objectively true and based upon the information of people who I respect and believe to be credible.

I sent our requests to admit to the ARDC as I wanted to give them an opportunity to admit or deny the facts that I allegedly lied concerning.    The choice was very simple.   Admit that certain facts are true and dismiss the case, or on the hand deny that the facts were true and prove them.   Instead, the ARDC admitted that they never investigated the facts and did not have sufficient information.    Illinois law requires a reasonable degree of due diligence before filing a lawsuit.  It appears that the attorney for the ARDC ignored that requirement in total and just filed a complaint that accused me of being a liar and posted it on the internet.

That scenario suggests something very sinister and wrong!   I do not intend to allow such a scenario to remain in secret or to be covered up.   I also do not intend to allow the Human and Civil Rights of either Mary or Gloria or any of the other aggrieved individuals similarly situated to be just forfeited.   My latest missile is:

BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION

AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION

In the Matter of:                                                            )

                                                                                    )

            KENNETH KARL DITKOWSKY,                )

                                                                                    ) Commission No. 2012 PR 00014

                        Attorney-Respondent,                          )

                                                                                    )

                                                No. 642754                 )

 

ReplyTo Response to Motion to Dismiss Complaint

            Now comes Kenneth Ditkowsky and renews his Motion to dismiss this ARDC complaint by this reply and in support of the motion states:

Prefatory Statement

            Objection is made to the lack of candor that the Administrator’s response to this Motion to Dismiss.    For instance in paragraph 1 the Administrator after fortuitously denigrating the Motion with editorial comment states a fact that is untrue.     The Administrator claims that there are no affidavits in support of the Motion.     In fact there are several.    The affidavit of Gloria Sykes and the affidavit of Scott Evans are both provided in support of the motion.     Had whoever drafted the Response read the Motion, that person would have noted these affidavits.

            Of a more serious nature is the fact that the alleged Administrator’s Response to the Request to Admit is an admission that either no investigation was done prior to the filing of the complaint herein, or the Administrator has not been candid.     If the Administrator in fact, prior to bringing his complaint, had done the investigation required by Supreme Court Rule 137 the administrator would have been able to admit or deny all the facts requested to be admitted or denied by the Request to Admit.   (The Supplemental Motion to Dismiss addresses this issue.)

Reply

            An Attorney and his/her clients are afforded Constitutional Rights and the protections of 735 ILCS 110/et seq.      The protections of the Constitution of the United States of America and the State of Illinois are applicable to even the disciplinary proceedings of the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission.      Cavalier responses to serious issues may be the current vogue in some legal circles, but the issues involved in this proceeding and its related proceedings are indeed serious.     The fact is that the Administrator in his response to the First Wave Requests to Admit  reveals that he “does not have sufficient knowledge to admit or deny ***” the very facts that he must allege in his complaint.    Yet, the Administrator concludes that the respondent lied and then wrongfully published the defamation on the ‘web!’.    Such perfidy is not only chilling, but an admission that this instant complaint is grossly improper and intentionally violative of intent and spirit of Illinois Supreme Court Rule 137[1] and 735 ILCS 110 et seq.    The aforesaid Response to the First Wave Request to Admit  is attached hereto and made part hereof as exhibit A as if set out in detail and incorporated by reference.

The granting of authority to the Administrator was not a grant to run rough shod over the rights of citizens, including attorneys.      Even a cursory examination of the complaint raises the question of the First Amendment applicability.   Count 1 misinterprets words and phrases of an inquiry letter in the most procrustean manner so as to distort the letter’s meaning and seek discipline against respondent for words and phrases that were never communicated.     Such a request coupled with the pejorative averments  that the non-uttered statement was a lie raises ‘red flags’ and suggests an improper motive in bringing the complaint.

The conclusions of the 2^nd count are equally troubling as once again the derogatory ‘name calling’ substitutes for the pleading of facts.    In particular, as the Sodini criterion according to our view of the record in In re: Sykes was never met there are no judicial officials and in particular Guardian Ad Litem Stern and Farenga, approximately two years after their appointment, have no standing in the probate proceedings.    The plenary guardian and her attorney are similarly acting sans jurisdiction.      As the response to the Request to Admit indicates that the Administrator does not have knowledge of such a basic fact, how does the Administrator get the authority to publish a ‘naked statement’ to the public that the respondent is a ‘liar!’

More significantly, all the statements that are alleged to have been made by the respondent are clearly protected statements under the 1^st and 14^th Amendments to the United States Constitution.      The 2-619 Motion is thus appropriate to redress the chilling prospect of a citizen being denied Equal Protection of the Law and his right to the First Amendment protections of protest, speech, and assembly.     It is significant that the Administrator chooses to ignore these basic Constitutional Rights and at the very same time respond to Requests to Admit with:

“The Administrator does not have sufficient knowledge to admit or deny***”

Supreme Court Rule 137 admonishes exactly this type of conduct on the part of the attorney for the Administrator (i.e. bringing a complaint without doing any due diligence or investigation of the facts so as to be able to certify that the facts alleged are true) and 42 USCA 1983 counsels that color of Statute ought not be employed to deny a citizen of his/her Constitutional laws.

735 ILCS 110 et seq. makes it very clear that a legal proceeding cannot be used to silence a citizen.      It may be very inconvenient that Ms. Sykes, Mr. Evans and others have verified by their affidavits the very facts that the Administrator will have to prove false to prove me a ‘liar!’     The Sykes/Evans’ affidavits stand in stark contradiction to the statement of the Administrator in paragraph 1 of his response.     The said affidavits also stand as strong contradiction to the conclusions pleaded by the Administrator.

            It is respectfully submitted that if the attorney for the Administrator had read the Motion before it was responded to, the complaint would have been non-suited.     It is further respectfully submitted had the files of the ARDC and the complaints filed by various friends, relatives, and neighbors of Mary Sykes been reviewed prior to the filing of the complaint filed herein the complaint would never have been filed.     Even in 21^st Century America the objective truth is not a lie, and the publication of the truth – no matter when or where – is not a prevarication.      Similarly, to protect the rights of citizens and to prevent exactly what appears to have happened to Mary Sykes and Gloria Sykes in the Sykes case the legal profession has been very jealous of protecting the First Amendment Rights of the brethren.    As a profession lawyers cannot tolerate the deprivation of human rights and/or civil rights of anyone – including them.

When an attorney demands the investigation of the conduct of such ‘august’ persons as a guardian ad litem and an attorney for a plenary guardian, in a case in which a senior citizen is deprived of her liberty, property, and human rights under extremely suspicious circumstances, such effort should be aided and abetted in the interest of justice – not punished.      This instant reply draws attention to the Affidavits of Gloria Sykes and Scott Evans.     This panel is requested to examine the Court file in the Sykes case and is respectfully requested to take judicial notice of the same.     In the Court file, unless I have misread the docket and the transcripts of Mr. Schmiedel’s statements, the Jurisdictional Sodini notices and affidavits of service are missing.    As they were never sent by the attorney for the plenary guardian *****.   As the Appellate Court of Illinois has noted (in Sodini) these notices are jurisdictional Mr. Stern, Ms. Farenga and the plenary guardian are engaging in their alleged pernicious activities ultra vires.  Right or wrong, I have not waived my First Amendment Rights and any attempt to silence me or diminish my said rights is not only wrongful, but clearly a violation of the policy of the State of Illinois as stated in 735 ILCS 110/5.

Moreover, the Response to the First Wave Request to Admit is a clear admission that Rule 137 was ignored by the attorney for the Administrator in drafting the complaint.     The Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission in being charged with regulating Attorney conduct should be a ‘Cesar’s wife!’    The commission is charged with not only being an example of legal ethics and propriety, but being an example to the profession.    It is respectfully suggested that the complaint, and the two responses are examples of the nadir of the profession rather than the best and, therefore, the complaint filed herein should be dismissed with prejudice.

Wherefore pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-619 this complaint be dismissed, and a complete and through investigation be commenced as to the Sykes case and pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 137 the motivations for bringing this instant complaint in the manner it was filed.[2]

Respectfully Submitted

Kenneth K. Ditkowsky

Attorney number 0642754

Pro se

5940 W. Touhy Ave

Niles, Illinois 60714

847 600 3421

 

---

[1] Had a private attorney acted with such careless disregard the attorney would be subject to sanctions and possible discipline.    Rule 137 even in its most liberal interpretation requires enough due diligence on the part of the attorney drafting a complaint that the attorney (and his client) has knowledge of the basic facts upon which the complaint is founded.    It is respectfully submitted that this is not true in the instant complaint against me.

[2]Calling a practicing attorney a ‘liar’ and publishing the same on the internet is not something that can be taken lightly or ignored.    As the affidavits of Sykes and Evans clearly refute any suggestion that I lied as to anything this is a serious matter and a clear violation of 735 ILCS 110/ and 42 USCA 1983.   On day one the attorney for the Administrator had a duty based upon the ‘traditions of the bar’ (if not an ethical responsibility) to do a full investigate of  the charges that were brought and to have a clear knowledge of the facts upon which the charges were being brought.    In the instant scenario the ARDC has received numerous citizen complaints totally consistent with the statements allegedly made by me.     The Court record is also consistent with the charges that have been made by Gloria Sykes et al.    No one can deny that Mary Sykes was helped by Court employed people to prepare a Petition For A Protective Order.   No one can deny that this Petition was duly filed and never heard.    No one can deny that neither Guardian ad Litem petitioned the Court to voice any complaint as to a possible conflict of interest on the part of the plenary guardian.

 

No one can deny the videos posted by various citizens on the internet, and no one can deny that Mary Sykes in the early videos appears to be perfectly competent.     Indeed, no one can deny that not a scintilla of medical evidence was heard by the Probate Court prior to declaring Mary Sykes incompetent.    Nor can anyone deny the transcripts of August 2009 and August 2010.    Similarly, no one can deny that the 14 day Sodini notices are claimed by the close relatives of Mary Sykes to have not been served and more importantly Mr. Schmiedel has not made a clear statement stating that these vital notices were indeed properly served as required by Statute.     These notices are jurisdictional as they are the protection against vulnerable people being ‘railroaded’ into the loss of liberty and property by dishonest practitioners.   

 

Similarly no one can deny that family members of Mary Sykes have disclosed that the safety deposit box contained valuables and these valuables were never inventoried.    The record is clear that Mr. Stern, and Ms. Farenga failed to alert the Court to this oversight.     Of course, the record indicates that Mary Sykes had many emergency room visits.    The probate record does not reveal any report of these visits by the GAL.      It is respectfully submitted that the record in the probate division upon which the Administrator must rely upon to aver that I am liar suggests that some very unusual events have taken place that are disingenuous and possibly criminal.    THE PROBLEM THAT THE RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST TO ADMIT DISCLOSES  is that the Attorney drafting the complaint apparently was ignorant of these serious factual scenarios.   

Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

Legal Disclaimer–
Although this is obvious, no person in this blog has been accused of any wrongdoing, crime or even arrested unless stated otherwise from a website reporting actual arrests and convictions. We are stating our opinions and we have the right to do this. Only the particular author is responsible for his or her content. (So don’t blame me if you dislike some posts from someone else. This site is newsworthy because it is picked up automatically by many other blogs and is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Illinois State Constitution and violations will be taken seriously with charges under the Illinois Citizens Participation Act. We ARE participating in government here–we are lawyers trying to make a difference to make things better for grandma and grandpa. We don’t care how much money you’re making–directly or indirectly from Probate or a nursing home or home health care wired-in business. Do yourself a favor and get a different job, it’s not worth it.  And if you’re someone filing ARDC complaints against this blog, we are all exercising our rights to disseminate important news to protect the rights of the elderly and respect their wishes.  Again, go get another job–it’s not worth it.

In Rememberance of Mary Todd Lincoln

Posted on March 26, 2012

More than 100 years ago, in Chicago in the late 19th century, Robert Lincoln, the lawyer son of Mary Todd Lincoln, had his mother committed to an insane asylum in Chicago.  Mary Lincoln believed it was because he wanted to gain control  of her fortune.  Nonetheless, the commitment of Mary for one year in an insane asylum and the subsequent trial are a 100 year old struggle between the elderly that want to avoid confinement, and a facility and child that wants to control someone else’s finances:

From Wiki:

After Mrs. Lincoln nearly jumped out of a window to escape a non-existent fire, her son determined that she should be institutionalized.^[26]

Mrs. Lincoln was committed to a psychiatric hospital in Batavia, Illinois, in 1875. After the court proceedings, Mary was so enraged that she attempted suicide. She went to the hotel pharmacist and ordered enough laudanum to kill herself. However, the pharmacist realized what she was planning to do and gave her a placebo.^[26] (Note a good lawyer would have questioned why anyone would assume a quantity of laudanum is assumed to be consumed all at once?  Use of laudanum throughout the day was common for people suffering with paid–as Vicodin, Oxycontin, etc. are used today.  But for the purposes of the trial, she bought it and was going to kill herself with all of it in one dose.)

[Many believe the charges were trumped up, exaggerated, and in some cases, fabricated.  Moreover, the fact that she was a spiritualist and held seances regularly throughout her life, did not help her case.  This is despite the fact it was she who told the President the war would not end until he freed the slaves and that God/dess abhorred slavery.  That prediction came true and within months of freeing the slaves, the war ended.]

On May 20, 1875, she arrived at Bellevue Place, a private sanitarium in the Fox River Valley.^[27] Three months after being committed to Bellevue Place, Mary Lincoln engineered her escape. She smuggled letters to her lawyer, James B. Bradwell, and his wife, Myra Bradwell, who was not only her friend but also a feminist lawyer and fellow spiritualist. She also wrote to the editor of the Chicago Times. Soon, the public embarrassments Robert (who now controlled his mother’s finances) had hoped to avoid were looming, and his character and motives were in question. The director of Bellevue, who at Mary’s trial had assured the jury she would benefit from treatment at his facility, now in the face of potentially damaging publicity declared her well enough to go to Springfield to live with her sister as she desired.^[28] She was released into the custody of her sister, Mrs. Elizabeth Edwards, in Springfield and in 1876 was once again declared competent to manage her own affairs. The committal proceedings led to a profound estrangement between Robert and his mother, and they never fully reconciled.

Mary was confined for only a year and the bad publicity let her go free where she lived out her years far from a son that had her committed.

What about the rest of the Marys?

From the SunTimes today, in honor of Mary Lincoln:

MARY TODD’S DAY IN COURT

BY DAVID ROEDER

Staff Reporter droeder@suntimes.com

Mary Todd Lincoln will get her day in court — two days, in fact — even if it’s 130 years after her death.

The wife of the nation’s 16th president saw her husband killed and buried three of the couple’s four children. Her only surviving son, Robert Todd Lincoln, got her committed to an asylum in Batavia after her behavior became alarmingly erratic, but the decision was overturned a year later.

She died in 1882, broken by grief and suspicious of her son’s motives.

Historians debate whether the 19th century legal system treated her justly in labeling her insane.

To dramatize how changing laws affect the mentally ill, two state agencies are sponsoring mock retrials this fall of Mary’s insanity case.

They will be held Sept. 24 at the Murphy Auditorium, 50 E. Erie, and at the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Museum in Springfield Oct. 1. Monday, actress Pam Brown, portraying Mary, will receive her “summons” to appear those dates. She will be served at 5:30 p.m. at 54 W. Hubbard, site of her original insanity trial. The Lincoln museum and the Illinois Supreme Court Historical Preservation Commission are producing and sponsoring the events. They said funds raised beyond production costs will be used on preservation of historic documents.

Tickets are available for the retrials and other events planned in connection with Mary’s life. Information is available at was marylincolncrazy. com .

The events include a roundtable discussion of mental health issues April 16 at the State Capitol in Springfield and a yet-tobe- scheduled dramatization of the relationship between Mary and her friend and advocate, Myra Bradwell, who helped free her from the asylum. The show will be based on letters they wrote to each other.

Legal Disclaimer–
Although this is obvious, no person in this blog has been accused of any wrongdoing, crime or even arrested unless stated otherwise from a website reporting actual arrests and convictions. We are stating our opinions and we have the right to do this. Only the particular author is responsible for his or her content. (So don’t blame me if you dislike some posts from someone else. This site is newsworthy because it is picked up automatically by many other blogs and is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Illinois State Constitution and violations will be taken seriously with charges under the Illinois Citizens Participation Act. We ARE participating in government here–we are lawyers trying to make a difference to make things better for grandma and grandpa. We don’t care how much money you’re making–directly or indirectly from Probate or a nursing home or home health care wired-in business. Do yourself a favor and get a different job, it’s not worth it.  And if you’re someone filing ARDC complaints against this blog, we are all exercising our rights to disseminate important news to protect the rights of the elderly and respect their wishes.  Again, go get another job–it’s not worth it.

From Gloria Sykes–two new orders of protection in DuPage County

Posted on March 25, 2012

It is kind of amazing when a simple thing like serving a document is so damn difficult.   It has been suggested that the ‘fix’ is in.   How deep does it go!    The profits from systematic elder abuse and financial exploitation must be just out of sight.

What we need is a bill in the legislature to make it open season on the political elite.   Maybe AARP can be talked into getting out of the insurance business and put some effort into getting us a couple of elected representatives who talk straight, act straight and are actually interested in grandma!

Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

From: GLORIA Jean SYKES <gloami@msn.com>
To: kenditkowsky@yahoo.com; Lucinda <michiganadvocacyproject@gmail.com>; GLD <gailwinds2hi@yahoo.com>; Elaine NAsga <elaine@abusiveguardianships.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2012 11:14 AM
Subject: RE: DuPage County received Petitions for orders of protections on Carolyn and Fred Toerpe yesterday early morning and yet, nothing was sent out to have served….

as I just got off the telephone with M at the DuPage County Sheriff’s department in and regarding the two petitions for protective orders against Fred and Carolyn Toerpe received via certified mail yesterday morning by the DCSD at 7:35 am. The documents never made it to M’s officer for dispatch and service. In fact there is no record of either summons!    I faxed her over the summons on Fred Toerpe but must have left my copy of Carolyn Toerpe’s at *** where I was copying and mailing Certified return service on Wednesday. That said, Deputy M. will have Fred served today and will investigate what happened to and why the two summons were not presented to her division yesterday for service today.  I beleive Fred Toerpe’s son, Detective Sheriff Robert Toerpe who works out of DuPage has some clout and maybe is preventing such service. That said, whatever happened, there is no coincidence.  I will be speaking with M on Monday afternoon and if need be, return to the court and get a new copy of service on Carolyn Toerpe and then Fax immediately.  All in all the Toerpes are very impowered and I cannot find anybody to be with me from noon to 2 pm tomorrow and I will not be in the home alone with Fred and Carolyn Toerpe– although I need my property to sustain and litigate and ****.  That said, it’s a war in which I need one battle victory.  So far, I’m swimming up stream and Toerpe and company are holding all of the aces…   Until there is a resolution or a sense that one word I speak is accurate and of substance no one will do this story.  I’ve tried.  Writing the book is a different story all together. That, however can’t be completed unless there is an ending…   right now even the pbulisher won’t publish with an ending that I am homeless, penniless and mumbling how my sister got so much power and empowerment that *****.  Just got off the telephone with .

Gloria Jean Sykes 
Bon Ami Productions, Inc. 
773.910-3310(cell)
773.631-9262 (fax and office line)

Petitions http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/to-return-mary-g-sykes-home-and-to-remove-carolyn-toerpe-as-plenary-guardian/
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/359/248/993/petition-to-protest-the-publication-and-filing-of-a-complaint-against-atty-kenneth-karl-ditkowsky/
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/230/881/491/is-mary-g-sykes-incompetent-watch-the-videos-and-vote/
Videos:
5 at Vimeo.com.  I had to post them because someone kept on taking them down on youtube.com!
http://vimeo.com/user10893323/videos
Legal Disclaimer–
Although this is obvious, no person in this blog has been accused of any wrongdoing, crime or even arrested unless stated otherwise from a website reporting actual arrests and convictions. We are stating our opinions and we have the right to do this. Only the particular author is responsible for his or her content. (So don’t blame me if you dislike some posts from someone else. This site is newsworthy because it is picked up automatically by many other blogs and is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Illinois State Constitution and violations will be taken seriously with charges under the Illinois Citizens Participation Act. We ARE participating in government here–we are lawyers trying to make a difference to make things better for grandma and grandpa. We don’t care how much money you’re making–directly or indirectly from Probate or a nursing home or home health care wired-in business. Do yourself a favor and get a different job, it’s not worth it.  And if you’re someone filing ARDC complaints against this blog, we are all exercising our rights to disseminate important news to protect the rights of the elderly and respect their wishes.  Again, go get another job–it’s not worth it.

Congratulations to the family of Daniel Ross--let's hope that Mary's Justice comes in time for her to enjoy it.

From NASGA, a belated story of happiness for one family member that continued on the fight for others in a conservatorship that just want to go home.  Justice in this case came too late, tho.  If you do not read the entire article, what this state Supreme Court said is that Daniel Ross just wanted to go home and his guardian had to listen to his wishes.

Mary G just wants to go home and have Gloria care for her.  The situation is ridiculous where she is sitting in an unhappy home in Naperville where she was ripped from her home and family, friends, garden club she knew since the 1950's.  Her Plenary Guardian, when she is working, sends her to adult day care where she sits idly with low functioning adults.

Please help her and sign our petitions and see the videos (info below).  She wants to go home. Gloria wants her there and has said she will care for her.  Gloria has now been evicted from the home and all her assets frozen. Mary will be put in a nursing home (mark my words on this) and the house sold and put in a trust Carolyn benefits from.  Don't let this happen.  It's the nadir of our justice system.

Hi Ken,

You may not have ever heard of the Daniel Gross case (an interstate conservatorship involving CT and NY and a massive -and costly- tug of war between the two states – at Daniel Gross’ expense and to his detriment), but you will enjoy this article and appreciate the victory and the weight of such a victory.   See the below article written by Rick Green, reporter for the Hartford Courant, who has followed the Daniel Gross case for several years.  Perhaps you can use it in your advocacy efforts for Mary Sykes.

Dee King (Daniel Gross’ daughter) is a NAGSA member.   We’re all celebrating this victory with her today!

 

http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-green-probate-judge-decision-0324-2-20120323,0,3395932.column

The state Supreme Court stood up Friday for a simple right that matters deeply for all, but especially to the old, sick and disabled.

The job of a lawyer appointed by probate court is to fight for the client, whether he is healthy or a stubborn 86-year-old man.

In a unanimous ruling in the long-running civil rights case of Daniel Gross, the justices ruled that court-appointed lawyers do not have immunity from lawsuits if they abuse their clients. The court also ruled, in a divided opinion, that conservators appointed by probate have limited immunity. The justices also ruled that a nursing home does not have immunity from lawsuits in probate cases.

The ruling has far-reaching implications for our troubled probate court system. It means that a court-appointed lawyer, and to a lesser extent the conservator — who is appointed by probate when a person can no longer live independently — cannot ignore the wishes of a client. The message to probate court is clear: Lawyers and conservators must be held accountable.

For probate courts, this has huge implications because many of the unsettling and outrageous cases I have been writing about for the past six years stem from abuse by conservators and court-appointed lawyers and judges who don't pay enough attention.

Although Gross died in 2007, his civil rights case lived on. The lasting lesson is that the old or disabled — even if they are unwell and cranky — have the same rights as the rest of us.

"It means that if you get a court-appointed lawyer, that lawyer cannot have any doubt that the lawyer's job is to listen to you,'' said Sally Zanger, the Connecticut Legal Rights Project lawyer who represented Carolyn Dee King, Gross' daughter. "It's what the lawyer is supposed to be doing."

Amazingly, that's been the problem in the probate cases I've been telling you about since 2006. Gross' was the first and most heartbreaking case I stumbled upon, when a Legal Aid lawyer told me an unbelievable tale of an old man from Long Island being held against his will in a Waterbury nursing home.

Elderly but still independent, Gross became ill while visiting his daughter in Waterbury. He was hospitalized, and while his children fought over his care and who should control his finances, Waterbury Probate Judge Thomas Brunnock approved his involuntary conservatorship.

Gross wanted to go home to Long Island. He wasn't told of the hearing where he was ordered conserved. His court-appointed lawyer, Jonathan Newman, failed to object to the conservatorship, even though Gross just wanted to leave Connecticut. His conservator, Kathleen Donovan, had him placed in a locked, restricted ward at Grove Manor Nursing Home in Waterbury. His roommate was violent.

Later, when Gross was on a day visit to his Long Island home, he was hospitalized. Donovan brought him back to Connecticut in an ambulance against the wishes of Gross' New York doctor.

In June 2006, Superior Court Judge Joseph Gormley, at a dramatic writ of habeas corpus hearing, ordered Gross freed, declaring that "a terrible miscarriage of justice" had taken place and that the man had been "deprived of his liberty."

King, Gross' daughter, filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against Brunnock, Donovan, Newman and the nursing home. Brunnock, as a judge, could not be sued, but the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals sent the question of immunity for the others back to the state Supreme Court for a ruling. King's lawsuit against Donovan, Newman and the nursing will now go back to federal court.

Newman's lawyer — who argued to the Supreme Court that his client's role was like that of a lawyer for a child — did not respond to my call. A lawyer for Donovan, Richard A. Roberts, said the ruling might mean that conservators and court-appointed lawyers will be forced to go to a judge for every decision they make.

But Fairfield Probate Judge Daniel Caruso, president of the association of probate judges, said that his colleagues will welcome the ruling.

"When the Supreme Court articulates and provides brighter lines as to what is and is not within the bounds of immunity, it helps everyone," he said.

Public-interest lawyers hailed the decision because it provides new accountability to a court system that critics say still lacks oversight.

"Our legal system has safeguards. Even when you are appointed by the court you are accountable for what you do,'' Tom Behrendt of the Connecticut Legal Rights Project told me.

When I reached King, she reminded me of her father's humiliation before a court that was supposed to protect him.

"He was robbed of his humanity at the end of his life,'' King said. "He was used as a pawn. They just ignored him."

We can't change that, but the elderly man's lasting legacy is a powerful one. If you are old or disabled, probate court is a less-frightening place thanks to Daniel Gross.

 

Petitions

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/to-return-mary-g-sykes-home-and-to-remove-carolyn-toerpe-as-plenary-guardian/

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/359/248/993/petition-to-protest-the-publication-and-filing-of-a-complaint-against-atty-kenneth-karl-ditkowsky/

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/230/881/491/is-mary-g-sykes-incompetent-watch-the-videos-and-vote/

Videos:

5 at Vimeo.com.  I had to post them because someone kept on taking them down on youtube.com!

http://vimeo.com/user10893323/videos

Legal Disclaimer--
Although this is obvious, no person in this blog has been accused of any wrongdoing, crime or even arrested unless stated otherwise from a website reporting actual arrests and convictions. We are stating our opinions and we have the right to do this. Only the particular author is responsible for his or her content. (So don’t blame me if you dislike some posts from someone else).  This site is newsworthy because it is picked up automatically by many other blogs and is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Illinois State Constitution and violations will be taken seriously with charges under the Illinois Citizens Participation Act.  We ARE participating in government here–we are lawyers trying to make a difference to make things better for grandma and grandpa.  We don’t care how much money you’re making–directly or indirectly from Probate or a nursing home or home health care wired-in business.  Do yourself a favor and get a different job, it’s not worth it.


    

 

 

From Ken Ditkowsky–why Sykes is such an important case–it counters “the system”

I am very close to putting together the links that exist between the nursing home cases and the Elder Abuse cases. the key is as follows:

The nursing homes (no call rehabilitative care) are set up as profit generating machines; The nursing home cabal has a strict regime of operation. A particular unit operates for about ten years, then it changes its structure and continues on as a new operation. even the limited partners change/

to augment the profits and regulate the cash flow, each nursing home is serviced by a series of cabal owned companies – such as ReHab Assist. The satellite companies are under contract to provide all the essential services – nursing , transportation, pharmacy, rehab, social service, cleaning, utilities, etc. Each satellite company appears to be independent, but its real ownership is the Cabal. The officers are paid large salaries to look the other way as fine tuning of cash flow occurs.

The cabal to avoid detection has its own currency. The most obvious is nursing home beds. They have a fixed value. I was told that for outsiders it is $2500.00, however for cabal members $1000.00. Because patterns emerge and the United States of America has a tendency to prosecute medicare and medicaid frauds to make any informant or ’turncoat’ appear to be a ‘nut’ and unreliable a 2nd personal currency is used. My informant was not aware of what the 2nd currency was currently but he knew it existed.

By accident, I discovered the 2nd currency. The best way to describe it, is to say that it is opportunity. For instance, a share of the ‘loot’ in the Sykes case is an opportunity. Someone on the inside, makes a Guardianship in the Sykes case available to Stern or Farenga. For their valuable services they are offered a fee. They will pay a referral fee of x dollars. This referral fee will be paid to a particular entity. If one of the cabal as an example wishes to contribute to a political campaign the contractor makes the campaign contribution. Similarly, other purchases can be arranged, and the cabal member directing the transfer totally undisclosed.

The 2nd currency traffics in ‘supervised visitation,’ ‘nursing home placement,’ ‘appointments by the Court’, etc.

I am not privy to the operation, I just happened to stumble upon it. My first clue was the depositions of A & W, and the 2nd clue was a statement that Adam Stern made. What cinched it was Cynthia Farenga’s desperate ‘Gloria did’ nonsense that is raised every time there is the possibility that ‘loot’ from the Sykes estate is in sight.

Scott, with your background, I would appreciate it if you in your spare time cross check my analysis. I know large sums of money were moved in the N. Draiman Bankruptcy so that they could avoid sharing with the trustee. Eric Rothner’s wife wants a divorce – he is not going to share with her – at least not in public. He has to therefore move funds. Morris Esformes’ ex-wife is married to W (or A & W). W was a left behind Chemist, recruited (according to legend) to take her off Esformes hands.

I am part of the knot hole gang. I have 50 years of experience as a voyeur and have had the opportunity to discuss my thoughts with *****. I am be 100% wrong, but I do not think so as the attempt to silence me has been disproportional. Of course it could be a coincide

Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

Legal Disclaimer--
Although this is obvious, no person in this blog has been accused of any wrongdoing, crime or even arrested unless stated otherwise from a website reporting actual arrests and convictions. We are stating our opinions and we have the right to do this. Only the particular author is responsible for his or her content. (So don’t blame me if you dislike some posts from someone else).  This site is newsworthy because it is picked up automatically by many other blogs and is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Illinois State Constitution and violations will be taken seriously with charges under the Illinois Citizens Participation Act.  We ARE participating in government here–we are lawyers trying to make a difference to make things better for grandma and grandpa.  We don’t care how much money you’re making–directly or indirectly from Probate or a nursing home or home health care wired-in business.  Do yourself a favor and get a different job, it’s not worth it.

Another (sigh) bogus attorney Disqualification–this time from the ARDC.

FROM JOANNE DENISON:

This is in response to my informing Mr. Ditkowsky that I was contacted ex parte by Ms. Lea Black at the ARDC regarding an interview for the complaint filed against ME by Cynthia Farenga. I had, in a previous phone conversation informed Ms. Black that Mr. Ditkowsky would be representing me. She said that was not possible because I might be a witness in the case against KD. But this makes no sense whatsoever. Illinois law on disqualification is clear you must 1) have a jury which might be confused when a lawyer/witness testifies or 2) there must be such a gross internal conflict between the attorney and his client such that the attorney might provided testimony that is biased–that is, there must be something like malpractice on the atty’s part, or some similar egregious action where the atty might tell a different story so he won’t be charged with a tort or crime arising out of the atty-client relationship. There is no such conflict arising here. Ms. Black is just plain wrong. KD and I are on the same side and fighting for Mary. I have no potential cause of action against KD.

To tell client they cannot have free choice of counsel is one of the most egregious torts that can occur.

I am completely sickened by the use of “atty disqualification” as a bogus tool to impede justice.

FROM KEN DITKOWSKY

It is outrageous that Ms. Black should have contacted you directly, when she is aware that I am representing you. She may not approve, but, it is not her position to dictate who can represent you and who cannot.

The question is how we handle the complaint. The Motion to Dismiss that I am filing today addresses the situation as it is so horrendous and is another reason for the dismissal of the frivolous complaint filed against me.

The series of cover-up and outright intimidation attempts that are so obvious in the Sykes case are indicative of political corruption. Exactly how deep this thing goes is hard to anticipate but it has to be addressed. It appears to me that Ms. Black as an attorney for the ARDC was and is well versed in the fact that her conduct was going to produce a fire storm. The question is why, and whether or not this was a diversion or just arrogance. The issues in are just too important to be taken off center stage. As I state in my Motion – the attorneys are minor players – what society has to do is seize onto the miscreants and force them to reveal the ‘roots’ of the criminal enterprise.

For instance, the ‘million dollars’ that has not been inventoried in Sykes – who shared in the ‘loot!’ What political operatives shared? Why has there been no ARDC investigation of Farenga, Stern and Schmiedel? Why are they immune? Why is law enforcement so impotent?

The Sykes case and the other Elder Abuse cases are ‘big time’ criminal enterprises as not only are substantial sums of money involved, but they involve the more heinous crimes — separation of an individual from his/her human rights! Many of the nursing homes, day care centers are 21st Century National socialist death camps! Read Scott Evan’s description of the facility that he observed Mary Sykes housed! I’ve personally observed some of the Morris Esformes facilities - I watched dignity be taken from human beings as they were allowed to lie in their own urine!

Everytime I hear one of the political elite worry about Grandma’s social security check I think of Adam Stern, Cynthia Feranga, and Peter Schmiedel and the incident that Mr. Evans describes in his affidavit! It is indeed interesting that complaining about the unjust enrichment of ***** is a unethical act for attorneys according to the Illinois Supreme Court’s Attorney Registration and Discipline Commission complaint against me and Ms Black’s indiscretion documented by her unauthorized communication with Ms. Denison.

Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

Legal Disclaimer--
Although this is obvious, no person in this blog has been accused of any wrongdoing, crime or even arrested unless stated otherwise from a website reporting actual arrests and convictions. We are stating our opinions and we have the right to do this. Only the particular author is responsible for his or her content. (So don’t blame me if you dislike some posts from someone else).  This site is newsworthy because it is picked up automatically by many other blogs and is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Illinois State Constitution and violations will be taken seriously with charges under the Illinois Citizens Participation Act.  We ARE participating in government here–we are lawyers trying to make a difference to make things better for grandma and grandpa.  We don’t care how much money you’re making–directly or indirectly from Probate or a nursing home or home health care wired-in business.  Do yourself a favor and get a different job, it’s not worth it.

Be sure to sign all the petitions we have for Mary and watch the videos

Today, please take some time to sign all the petitions for Mary. One new Petition is where you watch videos of her bowling, talking about what she wants, and tell us if you think she 1) is incompetent, 2) must sell her home and live at Carolyn’s in Naperville, 3) money from the home goes into a trust fund that Carolyn controls and will benefit from.
Oh, and Gloria’s assets are still frozen past the 1401 deadline to attack her Lumberman’s funds. Those should be immediately released. The GAL’s and Probate court have no reason to hold them any longer.
Petitions
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/to-return-mary-g-sykes-home-and-to-remove-carolyn-toerpe-as-plenary-guardian/
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/359/248/993/petition-to-protest-the-publication-and-filing-of-a-complaint-against-atty-kenneth-karl-ditkowsky/
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/230/881/491/is-mary-g-sykes-incompetent-watch-the-videos-and-vote/
Videos:
5 at Vimeo.com. I had to post them because someone kept on taking them down on youtube.com!
http://vimeo.com/user10893323/videos

Legal Disclaimer--
Although this is obvious, no person in this blog has been accused of any wrongdoing, crime or even arrested unless stated otherwise from a website reporting actual arrests and convictions. We are stating our opinions and we have the right to do this. Only the particular author is responsible for his or her content. (So don’t blame me if you dislike some posts from someone else).  This site is newsworthy because it is picked up automatically by many other blogs and is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Illinois State Constitution and violations will be taken seriously with charges under the Illinois Citizens Participation Act.  We ARE participating in government here–we are lawyers trying to make a difference to make things better for grandma and grandpa.  We don’t care how much money you’re making–directly or indirectly from Probate or a nursing home or home health care wired-in business.  Do yourself a favor and get a different job, it’s not worth it.