But nonetheless, we persevere on.  Forewarned is forearmed.  It doesn’t necessarily stop anything from happening, but incoming threats are always better identified sooner rather than later.

The terms of the sentence are unusual in that Royal will serve five years on probation prior to serving any prison time. The sentence was passed by Coweta Superior Court Judge Jack Kirby in proceedings Monday morning at the Coweta Justice Center.

On count one of theft by taking Royal was sentenced to 10 years, to serve five years in prison with the balance on probation. Counts two through seven of theft by taking — to which Royal also pleaded guilty — were merged with count one for sentencing purposes.

Royal’s plea of guilt to count eight — false swearing — carried a sentence of 10 years probation, with the sentence to be served consecutive to — or following — the sentence for count one.

The plea agreement calls for Royal to make restitution in the amount of $200,000 to the Hollis estate while serving the probation.

Assistant District Ray Mayer of the Coweta Judicial Circuit acknowledged that the plea allowing Royal to serve probation prior to serving time was “unusual,” but Mayer said the terms “give the estate the best chance to collect restitution, which is substantial.”

As part of the plea agreement, Royal’s defense will file a motion for reduction of sentence, which the court will hold open for five years. If Royal meets the terms of his probation and makes restitution as agreed, the court may then consider the motion for reduction of sentence.

Under the terms of the written plea agreement the five years probation on count one commences immediately. The five years to serve are deferred on condition that Royal complies with all terms and conditions of the plea agreement.

Under that agreement Royal must pay $200,000 to the estate of Edgar Hollis, through counsel, as follows:

Royal must pay “$85,000 on or before May 1, 2012; monthly installments of $1,450 for two years, followed by monthly installments of $1,750 for three years; with the balance of $17,200 to be paid from the proceeds of the sale of Defendant’s (Royal’s) home (Defendant to consent to a lien thereon to said Estate in the meantime) and otherwise as necessary.”

Judge Kirby also granted Royal’s request for first offender status.

Royal was represented Monday by Atlanta attorney Donald F. Samuel.

Following the sentence, Royal released a written statement which read: “I appreciate the opportunity to make restitution and I truly regret the errors in judgment that I made as administrator. I am very appreciative of the support, patience and prayers of my family and friends throughout the legal process. Most of all, I want to thank my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, for indeed being my enduring strength throughout this ordeal. While I realize this is far from completed, it is that same strength that now enables me to move forward.”

Former Newnan resident Edgar Baldwin Hollis died on June 17, 2006. In his will, Hollis bequeathed a home he owned at 32 Nimmons St. to the City of Newnan, with a request that the residence be used as a museum if possible. The will bequeathed funds for operating the museum.

Royal — who had been performing some of Hollis’ personal accounting services — was named executor of the Hollis estate and presented the offer of the home to the city. The will permitted Royal to pay his accounting firm “reasonable compensation” for its services.

After lengthy study and consideration of the cost to restore the home and maintain it as a museum, the City of Newnan declined the offer of the home.

The will also stated that “in the event the City of Newnan is unable or unwilling to accept this bequest… it shall pass to the Newnan-Coweta Historical Society, its successor, or a comparable charitable entity.”

In the ensuing months, Royal made bequests to both the City of Newnan and the Coweta Community Foundation. The City of Newnan returned the sum of $150,000 in July 2009 but civil suits from other interested parties followed.

In January 2009, Fred Blackwell, the trustee of a testamentary trust that was listed as a beneficiary of the last will and testament of Hollis, filed a civil action in which he sought an accounting of the Hollis estate, the removal of Royal as executor, and damages resulting from Royal’s purported breach of his fiduciary duty.

In 2009 the Newnan-Coweta Historical Society filed suit, claiming that the funds from the Hollis estate should rightfully have gone to the society. Some of the funds had already been distributed from the Hollis estate by Royal to the Coweta Community Foundation, which later returned the funds as part of the settlement process.

Following Royal’s resignation in May 2009 from the post he had held since August 2006, the Probate Court of Coweta County appointed local attorney Robert Hancock as temporary administrator of the Hollis estate, and, in December 2009, the court granted the estate’s motion to intervene.

In 2009 Coweta County Superior Court Judge William F. Lee ruled in a judgment against Royal in a related civil case that was partially upheld and partially overturned by the Georgia Supreme Court in 2010.

In originally granting the motions in favor of Blackwell and Hancock, the court found that Royal had breached repeatedly the fiduciary duty he owed the estate and that those breaches supported an award of damages to Blackwell and the Hollis Estate and a forfeiture of any compensation paid to Royal as executor.

In September 2011, Royal was indicted by a Coweta County grand jury on seven counts of theft by taking and one count of false swearing for alleged activities regarding his handling of the Hollis Estate.

It was alleged that after becoming executor of the Hollis estate, Royal began paying himself $2,500 per month for accounting services, a much greater sum than the $225 per month Royal had allegedly been charging before Hollis’ death.

In addition to allegedly charging excessive amounts for administering the Hollis estate, Royal was also alleged to have made improper investments of estate funds, including the purchase of a condominium in Seagrove Beach, Fla., in the name of the Hollis Trust at a cost of $520,000.

It is also alleged that Royal never filed any estate tax or income tax returns on behalf of the estate with the Internal Revenue Service or the Georgia Department of Labor.

Those charges are all concluded with Monday’s guilty plea by Royal.

Attribution:

Royal gets probation, deferred prison sentence
Alex McRae
February 14, 2012
The Newnan Times-Herald
http://www.times-herald.com/local/Royal-gets—probation—-deferred—prison—-sentence—-He-must-also-pay–200-000—-restitution-to-Hollis-estate–2077765

Additional coverage:

Mayo Royal pleads guilty
Alex McRae
February 13, 2012
The Newnan Times-Herald
http://www.times-herald.com/Local/Mayo-Royal-pleads-guilty–2077093

Mayo Royal, who once served as executor of the estate of Coweta native Edgar Hollis, pleaded guilty in Coweta Superior Court Monday morning on eight counts, including seven counts of theft by taking and one count of false swearing.

He was sentenced by Judge Jack Kirby on the first count of theft by taking to five years in prison, five years of probation, and to make restitution of $200,000. The other six counts of theft by taking were merged, and he was ordered by Kirby to serve 10 years probation on the one count of false swearing, with the sentence to run consecutively after other sentences.

As part of the arranged plea deal, Royal will serve the five years probation first while he makes the restitution of $200,000 to the Hollis Estate.

In 2009 Coweta County Superior Court Judge William F. Lee ruled in a judgement against Royal in a related civil case that was partially upheld and partially overturned by the Georgia Supreme Court in 2010. Lee’s decision involved the contested multi-million dollar Edgar Hollis estate, of which Royal served originally as the executor.

In January 2009, Fred Blackwell, the trustee of a testamentary trust that was listed as a beneficiary of the last will and testament of Hollis, filed a civil action action in which he sought an accounting of the Hollis estate, the removal of Royal as executor, and damages resulting from Royal’s purported breach of his fiduciary duty.

Following Royal’s resignation in May 2009 from the post he had held since August 2006, the Probate Court of Coweta County appointed local attorney Robert Hancock as temporary administrator of the Hollis estate, and, in December 2009, the trial court granted the estate’s motion to intervene.

In July 2010, Judge Lee granted Blackwell’s and Hancock’s motions for summary judgment.

In originally granting the motions in favor of Blackwell and Hancock, the Coweta County Superior Court found that Royal had breached repeatedly the fiduciary duty he owed the estate and that those breaches supported an award of damages to Blackwell and the Hollis Estate and a forfeiture of any compensation paid to Royal as executor.

Federal estate tax returns are due nine months after the decedent’s death. There’s a late penalty of up to 25% unless the failure was due to reasonable cause, and not from willful neglect. Reasonable cause requires showing that you exercised ordinary business care and prudence but nevertheless were unable to file on time.

In Freeman v. United States, Freeman was an executor who hired attorney Dennis Byrne to represent the estate. Because Byrne was to handle all administration and tax work, all mail went directly to him, including from the IRS. Byrne assumed responsibility for ensuring that estate tax returns were filed and payments were made.

Unbeknownst to Freeman, Byrne was suffering from physical and mental ailments. These ailments led Byrne to neglect his duties, including filing an estate tax return. Byrne became increasingly difficult to reach and Freeman eventually learned he had embezzled money from the estate.

Freeman ended up with penalties and sought to avoid them by pointing to Byrne’s actions–and inactions.  The IRS abated some of the penalties, but Freeman argued for more, saying Byrne’s serious mental and physical ailments constituted reasonable cause to excuse the late filing. He reasonably trusted Byrne to file the return, but Byrne failed because of his health.

The court agreed with the IRS. The estate didn’t have reasonable cause to file its return after the deadline despite the fact that Byrne suffered from physical and mental ailments.

For more see:

IRS Penalties Despite Accountant’s Mistake

Relying On Tax Advisers May Not Prevent Penalties

No More Laughing At Turbo Tax Defense

IRS Penalties Despite Dead/Embezzling Accountant

Using John Edwards “It Was A Gift” Defense

Robert W. Wood practices law with Wood LLP, in San Francisco.  The author of more than 30 books, including Taxation of Damage Awards & Settlement Payments (4th Ed. 2009 with 2012 Supplement, Tax Institute), he can be reached at Wood@WoodLLP.com.  This discussion is not intended as legal advice, and cannot be relied upon for any purpose without the services of a qualified professional.

Attribution:

‘Sick Lawyer’ Excuse Not Enough To Escape IRS Penalties
Robert W. Wood
February 9, 2012
Forbes.com
http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2012/02/09/sick-lawyer-excuse-not-enough-to-escape-irs-penalties/

When Jeff Baron came to Washington this month, he was wearing a borrowed suit.

Once upon a time, the Internet pioneer — who taught himself computer programming and created innovative software to register domain names — lived the good life in a Dallas suburb.

His company, Ondova, was a cash cow, pulling in $1.5 million in profit each month.

It all started unraveling when Baron, now 44, hired some high-powered Texas attorneys to help manage his holdings, and he was approached by a potential business partner who promised to turn Ondova into the next Google.

Baron admits he was naive and failed to perform due diligence as his lawyers set up an “elaborate” network of businesses offshore and his erstwhile partner turned out to be a convicted felon who sold porn online.

After a lengthy series of legal battles, Ondova was eventually forced into bankruptcy. But it wasn’t until Baron found himself in the Dallas courtroom of U.S. District Judge Royal Furgeson that his real nightmare began.

At a June 19, 2009, hearing in his civil case, Judge Furgeson warned Baron that “failure to comply” with a previous court order to renew Ondova’s domain names would be considered “contempt, punishable by lots of dollars, punishable by possible jail, death. … You are a fool, a fool, a fool to screw with a federal judge, and if you don’t understand that, I can make you understand it. I have the force of the Navy, Army, Marines and Navy (sic) behind me.”

A shaken Baron agreed to give up half of his Internet assets to “buy peace.” In 2010, he signed a Global Settlement Agreement for all outstanding claims against him. “There were 1,500 filings. I complied with the settlement agreement 100 percent,” he told The Washington Examiner.

On Nov. 14, 2010, three days after Baron “mildly” objected to what he characterized as inflated legal bills, Judge Furgeson made good on his threat, issuing an ex parte order that placed all of Baron’s business and personal assets, including his $1.2 million individual retirement account and a $60 million juvenile diabetes trust fund — and incredibly, Baron himself — into receivership. Baron’s former attorney, Peter Vogel, was given “exclusive control over any and all Receivership Parties, which term shall include Jeffrey Baron.”

A Dec. 2, 2010, email to Baron by Barry Golden, Vogel’s attorney, clarified exactly what this meant: “you are expressly prohibited from retaining any legal counsel … you are expressly prohibited from disbursing any Receiver Funds provided to you by the Receiver for anything other than the following daily-living expenses for yourself only: local transportation, meals, home utilities, medical care and medicine.”

According to LawInjustice.com, there are no other reported cases in American history in which a person has been placed in receivership. Baron, as well as his home, car, personal bank accounts and even his clothes, remain under Vogel’s total control.

He can be jailed for contempt if he removes anything from the Northern District of Texas, including the shirt on his back. To seek help from Congress, “I literally borrowed clothes to come to D.C.”, he told us.

On Jan. 31, Dallas attorney Gary Schepps filed an emergency motion in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in an unsuccessful attempt to stop Furgeson’s order to “immediately liquidate $60 million in assets for $0.02 cents on the dollar in pre-arranged secret sales” for two of Baron’s companies, neither of which “was the party to any claim in the District court.”

A former multimillionaire doesn’t get much sympathy nowadays. But if Jeff Baron can be held in this weird form of civil lockdown even though he’s never been charged with any crime and never had any judgments against him, what are you going to do when they come for you?

Barbara F. Hollingsworth is The Examiner’s local opinion editor.

Attribution:

Federal judge puts Internet pioneer in civil lockdown
Barbara Hollingsworth
February 14, 2012
The Washington Examiner
http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/2012/02/federal-judge-puts-internet-pioneer-civil-lockdown/272761

Estate of Denial^® previously posted a World Net Daily story and other information on Baron’s legal plight.  That posting featured descriptions of how Baron’s case centers on a receivership ordered in a Dallas court by Senior U.S. District Judge Royal Furgeson Jr. and notes that through the judge’s order, the court now functionally controls  Baron’s assets, property and life.

Isn’t it interesting how sometimes worlds collide?  Two months after highlighting the Baron case, a post entitled A new law school. Just what Texas needs? discussed plans for the University of North Texas at Dallas College of Law.  The posting also discussed the creation of this law school in a business environment which exhibits constrained economic opportunity for new lawyers.

So here where things get interesting.  A reading of articles published about Baron’s case strongly suggest a court action in which Fergeson is presiding over a systemic, contrived looting of Baron’s assets.

And with regard to the University of North Texas at Dallas College of Law, guess who’s been named the school’s founding dean?  That’s right – Senior U.S. District Judge Royal Furgeson Jr.

With this appointment, the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal, Furgeson’s hometown newspaper, reported:

“Several colleagues have asked me why I would give up a lifetime appointment to take on a start-up law school during these tough economic times, when tuition is rising and demand for lawyers is declining,” Furgeson said in a news release. “But the prospect of pioneering a new law school that addresses these issues head-on was too challenging and exciting to pass up.”

Earlier today, Estate of Denial^® wrote the following strategic communication point addressing our focus:

American property rights and personal freedoms are increasingly threatened as corrupt probate venues and probate instrument abuse (wills, trusts, guardianships, powers of attorney) loots assets and liberties of the dead, disabled and incapacitated.

Jeff Baron’s case illustrates that venues outside probate can create similar outcomes for non-dead, disabled and incapacitated parties.

Texas taxpayers should not have to fear the projected August 2014 UNT Dallas College of Law opening nor its leadership signifying creation of a venue for training future predatory lawyers.

We’ll keep you posted on how those prospects look.

Whitney Houston’s management had barely squelched rumors that the 48-year-old diva and recovering cocaine addict had run out of cash before they had to confirm reports that she was dead.

The latest news is that she fell asleep in the bathtub and drowned after mixing prescription painkillers with alcohol.

Now, it’s the disposition of Houston’s remaining wealth that is becoming the object of public scrutiny — and giving advisors plenty to mull where their own clients are concerned.

If Houston’s lawyers were smart, they ironed out her estate plan a decade ago, the gurus tell me.

Back in 2001, she had just signed the biggest record deal in history — six albums, $100 million in guaranteed royalties — and the signs of her drug use were getting harder to hide.

That combination of massive incoming wealth and rising litigation and mortality risks should have been all the incentive her advisors needed to set up long-term trusts and iron out her will.

Unfortunately, that was also the moment at which her career and personal life started to unravel, so they might have missed their opportunity — and as details come out, we might see the grim results.

A very complicated decade

Part of the problem is that Houston’s last decade was extremely complicated, so the lawyers had less time than we might think to keep her affairs orderly.

When she signed that $100 million contract, she was already carrying her long-time husband, Bobby Brown, and a young daughter.

Her father, who had managed her career up to that point, was slowly dying of heart disease and seems to have been perpetually hurting for cash.

In 2002, he sued her for a round $100 million, claiming he was owed that much for helping her beat marijuana possession charges and negotiate her big record deal.

That suit dragged on well after his death before being dismissed in 2004, robbing Houston’s lawyers of vital time to move that money into an asset protection trust.

As long as the lawsuit was pending, those record company millions were simply too hot to hide — any judge would have considered such a move a blatant attempt to defraud an existing creditor.

Two years of relative quiet followed, but Houston spent a lot of that time in and out of rehab, so any claims she was in “sound mind and body” to sign any estate documents may not hold up without challenge.

Her divorce from Bobby Brown dragged on through most of 2007. Her lawyers were on the ball here: she had a prenuptial agreement cutting him out of her money and any legitimate claim to spousal support.

After that, she drifted out of the limelight. And now she’s gone.

Fighting her father’s example

Given the haphazard way the Houston musical dynasty used sophisticated planning techniques to manage its millions, we might expect to see Whitney’s estate reflect a mix of good and bad advice.

On the positive side, Bobby has no claim on her money, and now that daughter Bobbi Christina is legally an adult — and out of the hospital herself — he can’t try to get custody and the money that goes with that.

And Houston’s father earmarked a $1 million life insurance policy to cover the mortgage on his house, so someone over the years was on the ball there.

Unfortunately, if Whitney and her father used the same lawyers, we can expect fireworks ahead.

John Houston appears to have died without clearly stating whether the life insurance money was meant to go to Whitney — who loaned him the money for the house in the first place — or to pay off his debt to his daughter.

He left behind letters talking about how Whitney made an oral agreement to apply the $1 million toward the loan, but her lawyers successfully noted that nothing like that was spelled out in his actual will.

In November — a full eight years after John Houston died — the case finally wrapped up in Whitney’s favor.

Had the lawyers set up a trust to accept the life insurance proceeds and use them to pay off the loan, his wishes would have been clear and none of the ensuing legal in-fighting would have been necessary.

As the judge noted, it’s impossible to legally determine what the deceased would have wanted, beyond what’s spelled out in the documents.

How much was Whitney worth?

The big question is how much of Whitney’s money the lawyers managed to save.

She died owing Arista three records, so a big chunk of that $100 million from the 2001 contract could be forfeited right away.

Her 10-acre New Jersey property was once appraised as worth $6 million but more recently listed for well under $2 million — barely what she owes in taxes and mortgage payments.

While rumor has it she was calling friends to borrow $100 a few weeks ago, her people insist that she wasn’t hurting for cash.

She’d just wrapped her first movie in 15 years, and as her staff says, she didn’t work for free.

“People get paid to make movies,” they point out.

And estate planners get paid to make sure the movie money lasts. Let’s hope Whitney’s lawyers earned their fees.

Attribution:

Whitney Houston Leaves Behind a Legacy of Music and Estate Riddled With Confusion
Scott Martin, Contributor
February 12, 2012
The Trust Advisor
http://thetrustadvisor.com/news/whitney

Additional coverage:

Whitney Houston’s Estate Expected to Get Boost After Death, But Less Than Michael Jackson
Susanna Kim
February 14, 2012
ABCNews.go.com
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/whitney-houstons-legal-tangles-continue-estate-expected-post/story?id=15573504#.TzrDLsVSS89

Whitney Houston had her fair share of chart-toppers, even posthumously on iTunes and Amazon, and though the superstar’s finances took a hit during her personal struggles, it is still believed to be a substantial estate that will only get larger.

While there were recent reports that Houston was struggling financially, the sales of her music after her death will improve the condition of her estate, as will the fact that she’ll no longer be burning through cash. Michael Jackson sold over 8 million albums in the U.S. alone in the six months after his death, and close to 30 million worldwide.

Although details of her estate and will have not been made public it is believed that her only child, daughter Bobbi Kristina Brown, 18, will be the main beneficiary. Houston had a will and the estate process is ongoing, according to a source familiar with her affairs.

Zach Greenburg, Forbes writer, said Whitney Houston will not match Jackson’s postmortem earnings, but if her music sells even half as well as Jackson’s did, her artist royalties alone could bring the estate more than $10 million in the coming year.

Houston made millions for her roles in “The Bodyguard” in 1992 and “The Preacher’s Wife” in 1996, the latter for which she reportedly earned $10 million. And in 2001, Houston renewed her contact with Arista Records, signing a $100 million deal, one of the biggest recording deals in the history of the music business, Variety reported at the time. The deal called for at least six albums and two greatest-hits compilations. Her comeback album, “I Look to You,” was released in 2009.

Houston is the 20th top-selling artist in the U.S. of all time, selling 55 million records, according to the Recording Industry Association of America. The single, “I Will Always Love You,” from “The Bodyguard”soundtrack is the longest running number one single from a soundtrack album.

Houston’s “Nothing but Love” world tour, from December 2009 through June 2010, was her last. The tour, her first in ten years, grossed millions of dollars.

Keith Caulfield, Billboard’s associate director of charts, said while Houston’s sales will not come close to the financial success of Michael Jackson, who had publishing, song-writing and recording royalties, her greatest hits album will re-enter Billboard’s Top 10 chart possibly this week. Already, 50,000 were sold in the first day or two after her death.

However, Caulfield said it is difficult to estimate how much Houston will receive because how her contract was structured is unknown.

“Certainly, we would expect that her estate won’t be broke,” said Andrew Mayoras, attorney and co-author of the book, Trial & Heirs: Famous Fortune Fights!, even if the reports of her financial struggles were true.

A source familiar with Houston’s financial situation told ABCNews.com that “she was far from broke.”

The surging sales of Whitney Houston’s music may be a large boost to her estate, as with other artists after they have passed away. Jimi Hendrix is an example of an estate which grew from almost nothing into a huge, multi-million dollar venture, said Mayoras.

Houston also completed the filming of “Sparkle,” produced by Sony’s TriStar Pictures, and it is scheduled to be released in September. Houston plays the mother of “American Idol’s” Jordin Sparks in the film.

Andrew Katzenstein, estate lawyer with Proskauer Rose LLP in Los Angeles, said it is difficult to estimate her royalties because her earnings will be multiplied by an unknown formula, possibly dependent on the recent sales of her songs. He also said her earnings could be less with digital distribution, through services like iTunes.

“But she’s an international star, and her music was fantastic,” Katzenstein said.

Like other celebrities, Houston also had public financial and legal tangles, including struggling with drugs and alcohol. After her divorce with R&B artist, Bobby Brown, in 2007, Brown reportedly sued Houston for custody and spousal support.

Bobby Brown said he was “deeply saddened at the passing of my ex-wife.”

“At this time, we ask for privacy, especially for my daughter, Bobbi- Kristina,” he said in a statement. “I appreciate all of the condolences that have been directed towards my family and I at this most difficult time.”

Her stepmother sued Houston over a $1 million life insurance policy from her late father, John Houston.

Houston had lent her father $723,800 in August 1990 for the purchase and renovation of a home in New Jersey in which he lived with his wife, Barbara. When John Houston died in February 2003, he bequeathed all his assets to his widow.

“Although Barbara and Whitney may be considered stepmother and daughter, that relationship never really jelled,” the court filing stated.

Barbara inherited the property, though Whitney owned the mortgage on the house and was the named life insurance beneficiary. But Barbara claimed the life insurance money was meant to repay Whitney for that mortgage. When Whitney refused to credit the life insurance money against the mortgage, Barbara sued in 2008.

Though the case was finally dismissed in December, Houston’s attorney, Bryan Blaney, told ABC News on Monday Houston had planned to file a complaint to have her stepmother evicted from the property.

“It’s no different that it’s her property, or the property of her estate, which would go to her daughter or whoever her beneficiary is,” Blaney said.

Blaney said the complaint was prepared before Houston’s death but it has not been filed for reasons “unrelated to anything of significance.” He said he expects to be updated by her manager.

“I don’t think there will be any reason not to file the complaint,” Blaney said. “I can only tell you there’s a whole lot of things going on with the folks right now in regards to her manager and family members.”

Blaney said he was “devastated” by the loss of Houston, who was a “tremendous” person.

“I always thought it was sad that people would reach out to make her life more difficult than it needed to be,” he said. “I always found her to be a sensitive and nice person and whatever issues she might have had, I can’t comment. I don’t know them.”

Blaney represented Houston to dismiss the charge of drug possession in her suitcase at an airport in Hawaii in 2000.

“I think she became an easy target for tabloids,” he said. “There were instances that were plainly unfair in tabloid editions of her just to sell newspapers.”

Barbara Houston, who declined to comment, continues to reside in the property in Fort Lee, N.J., her attorney, Gilberto Garcia, said.

“It’s a sad thing what happened for everyone involved,” Garcia said of Whitney Houston’s death. “She was a great figure and a great voice. She was a good daughter to her father.”

Garcia said Barbara Houston sent condolences to Houston’s attorney.

“My client is quite shaken up by this,” Garcia said. “I don’t know that the case matters much in comparison to everything that’s going on.”

Mayoras said he assumes Houston used life insurance of some type to protect her daughter, Bobbi Kristina, regardless of reports of any financial struggles.

The state of the multiple Grammy and Billboard music award winner’s finances are unknown at the time of her unexpected death. Her estate will profit from royalties for future sales of her songs, as well as licensing deals for her name, image and likeness.

Ideally, Houston would have set up at least a revocable living trust to provide for her daughter, so she doesn’t receive everything at once, Mayoras said.

“Most people with even a modest amount of wealth use trusts to control how and when their money is passed,” he said. “For example, we would hope Whitney would have spaced out Bobbi Kristina’s distributions over time, so that she would receive a percentage as she reaches certain ages. Most 18-year-olds are not mature enough to handle a substantial inheritance.”

Ideally, Whitney would have named a trust as the beneficiary of any life insurance, Mayoras said. Otherwise the money would go directly to the named beneficiary, possibly Bobbi-Kristina.

Depending on whether updated she updated her documents after her divorce from Bobby Brown, there could be complications if he is named as a beneficiary, Mayoras said.

“Hopefully, she would have taken steps to update her documents to eliminate anything going to Bobby Brown, ” Mayoras said, “unless, of course, she wanted him to receive something. But many people don’t take the time to update their estate planning documents after a divorce.”

Houston did sell a home in Alpharetta, Ga. for $1.19 million in May 2007, shortly after the divorce, for which Houston had received a notice of default. Houston bought the home in 2003 for $1.38 million by taking out a 15-year mortgage for $1.1 million, according to public records. The home was where the 2005 reality television show, “Being Bobby Brown,” was filmed. Houston had a county tax lien on the property for $17,644 in December 2005, according to public records.

Houston had a handful of properties that she unloaded or tried to unload recently. She also sold a house in Mendham, N.J. for $940,000 in January 2010. She also listed another home in Mendham for $2.5 million in 2009, Zillow reported. Houston reportedly owned a home in New Bergen, N.J. that she bought in 1989 for $955,000.

ABC News’ Kevin Dolak and Ross Eichenholz contributed to this report.

William Dilley, 67, of Mentor: After a bench trial that ended Tuesday, Judge Michael Donnelly found Dilley guilty of tampering with records, perjury and attempted theft. The financial adviser changed a 93-year-old Glenwillow woman’s will in 2008 so he would inherit her estate worth about $750,000. The original beneficiaries were friends, the Holy Family Cancer Home and Save-A-Pet. A suit was filed and Dilley falsely claimed there were witnesses to the woman signing the altered will, Russo said. Dilley received a $75,000 settlement in the suit.

This case was heard January 2012 in the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court.

Dauben, the iconoclastic publisher we profiled last March, has been sitting in the Navarro County lockup since he was arrested on molestation charges in December. He filed for indigent representation on December 20, according to this story in the Corsicana Sun. The court claims the paperwork was never received. (That seems odd. At the hearing reported by the Sun, the judge told Dauben his attorney would explain the charges against him.  But at the hearing Dauben had no attorney, which an observer might think the judge would have noticed.) By law, a request for indigent representation is to be answered in 72 hours.

But things get worse. The court clerk for State District Judge James Lagomarsino told the Dallas Voice on February 13 that a repeat request by Dauben had been received, and the court had appointed attorney Steve Keathey to represent him. So reporter David Webb called Keathey’s office:

At first, a member of Keathley’s staff said the attorney had refused the appointment. When asked for details, she revised her statement to say the appointment was never received. Finally, she transferred the call to another member of Keathley’s staff who said, “You’ll have to call the court. We decided we couldn’t handle the case” and quickly hung up when asked for her identity.

Joey Dauben is a controversial figure. He has made a lot of enemies in his years of crusading journalism in Ellis County. On one occasion, local police raided his home and arrested him over a leak he published. He has returned the favor in print on many occasions with accusations of malfeasance at all levels of government. Some of his accusations were on target, others probably were not. Dauben is not shy nor is he necessarily an exemplar of journalistic standards. Nevertheless, he has made a lot of people in local government uncomfortable, and often for good reason.

We are supposed to presume that Dauben is innocent until proven guilty. But for purposes of understanding what’s going on in Judge Lagomarsino’s court, let’s flip over that presumption. Let’s assume Dauben is guilty as charged.

Judge Lagomarsino is not doing himself, the judicial system, or the bar any favors in his handling of this case. Setting bail at $200,000 for someone with no prior convictions is one thing. Mishandling a request for attorney representation — the most basic right of all Americans — might just be an instance of  incompetence. But couple the two together, and one gets the impression that the Judge Lagomarsino is either partially blind or plainly partial.

The bar is implicated as well. The president of the Navarro County Bar Association is Sarah Keathey, whose partner Steve Keathey has apparently declined to represent Dauben.  There are dozens of reasons to decline a case, ranging from conflict of interest to sheer overload of pro-bono work. But a moment’s consideration of the implications that arise with the arrest of a journalist like Dauben — on whatever charges — should require the judge and the bar to consider how this looks to a public already suspicious of cronyism in high places.

If an attorney of repute is unavailable in Navarro County, I should think Ms. Keathey would at this moment be eagerly reaching out to her colleagues, Jeremy Cleverly of the Ellis County bar association and Paul Stafford of the Dallas County bar association, to make sure that Joey Dauben gets the best representation possible.

And I’d hope that Judge Lagomarsino would notice the next time a defendant shows up in his court without an attorney.

Attribution:

Is Joey Dauben Being Railroaded in Corsicana?
Wick Allison
February 15, 2012
D Magazine
http://frontburner.dmagazine.com/2012/02/15/is-joey-dauben-being-railroaded-in-corsicana/

Dauben has recently reported on several abusive probate situations (click here and here).  His instincts on the corruption potential are well-placed.

Estate of Denial^® knows that retribution occurs daily.  We know far too many folks targeted by such actions.  In December 2011, the same week Joey Dauben was arrested, we wrote a column Public corruption to be 2012 election issue that included this observation:

In the last year we’ve seen activists who question government authority or actions have their employment challenged, various licenses suspended and experience increased scrutiny by taxing agents and other regulatory agencies.  From whisper campaigns to strategically feeding the media information to embarrass or discredit critics, these aren’t just “Washington power plays” – they happen in your backyard at the behest of your local government.  Questionable criminal indictments or vigorously odd pursuits of legal infractions also occur.  At Estate of Denial®, those targeted by corrupt probate actions especially – and rightfully – fear retributory responses for speaking against or otherwise confronting illicit conduct.

Within a day of Allison’s post, the Waxahachie Daily Light reported Dauben was suddenly assigned a court-appointed attorney.  Might the “wheels of justice” – especially questionable justice – be sensitive to media scrutiny?

Here are other stories from recent days:

Ellis County Observer website publisher spends almost 2 months in jail without being appointed lawyer

Ellis County Observer Publisher Joey Dauben sits in jail with no attorney for almost two months

Joey Dauben and MORE Lawyers, Lies and Pure Confusion

Ellis County Observer publisher Joey Dauben finally gets a court-appointed attorney (Dallas Voice)

Ellis County Observer publisher Joey Dauben finally gets a court-appointed attorney (CedarCreekLake.com)

While the charges against Dauben are understandably troubling, so also is the way in which this case is being handled.  It has brought far more than Dauben’s credibility into question.  Abuse of legal process, misuse of taxpayer funds, competency of public officials – these issues must be addressed.

We’ll keep you posted on this developing story.

A cynical view of the human race causes one to believe that a certain segment of the population is blatantly corrupt regardless of circumstances and these folks will comfortably use deceit and dishonesty any time, any place to accomplish self-serving their goals.  Other groups, however, react to market and other socioeconomic conditions such that their ethics are more situational.

In that line of thought, economic climates in which people feel less opportunity for income mobility can therefore foster more acts of dishonesty – like estate abuse actions.  Just our thinking…..see what you think.

An aging parent begins to decline.  She needs care.  She comes to depend on her adult child.

Polly is 97 and has only one daughter, Vicky.  Vicky moved in with her mother to become Polly’s caregiver about a year ago.  Recently, Vicky apparently decided that her mother had lived long enough, and she began withholding food from Polly.

Vicky has had a troubled life, with drugs and  alcohol abuse. She doesn’t have much income.  Her mother’s home and assets are worth over $500,000.

Polly’s friend and neighbor noticed Polly’s weight loss. She became suspicious of what was going on and called Adult Protective Services.  APS received complaints from family as well.  APS got involved in the case, and forced Vicky to put her mom in a care facility.  Vicky found the cheapest home she could, and delivered her mother there.  Vicky is mom’s Power of Attorney and she is also the Agent on mom’s healthcare directive.  In other words, she has legal control.

Polly was thin, confused and very frail.  Vicky called Hospice, which began to provide care.  In her neglected condition, Polly qualified as a person eligible for hospice with six months or less to live.

Vicky brought Polly to the care home without bringing any clothing for her.  She told the care facility owner that her mother was dying and “didn’t need any clothes”.  She forbade them to give her mom food.  “Nothing but water” she said.  She told them not to let Polly get out of bed.  “She’s too weak”, Vicky told them.  She told them not to let any other relatives talk to the doctor about Polly.

Vicky was slowly trying to kill her mother.

The facility owner, would have none of it. She also called Adult Protective Services. She was in touch with Polly’s sister, Lorna, 79, who lives out of state, but cares very much about Polly.  Lorna and her daughter sent money for whatever food Polly wanted, and clothes.  Both came to visit.

Then Lorna called AgingParents.com.  “How can they let this woman be in charge of my aunt?”, she wanted to know.  It was a good question.  Trying to starve an elder is clearly elder abuse.  However, we all live with the reality that this kind of abuse can go unpunished and unchanged. Massive budget cuts drastically hampered the state’s ability to stop this. This is what smaller government law enforcement programs look like. There are not enough resources to prosecute elder abusers like Vicky.

If someone is beating an elder, stealing all the elder’s money or doing otherwise dramatic things, Adult Protective Services will make those cases priorities for investigative action. They have to.  In Polly’s case, she was quiet and told the investigators that Vicky was a good daughter and took good care of her. Polly didn’t want her daughter to have any more trouble. After all, the drugs and alcohol had been a lot of trouble in Vicky’s life already.

I suggested that Lorna and her daughter call Polly every day. They have done so. She is steadily improving and is now alert and gaining weight. She’s up in a wheelchair and engaging with other residents in the home.  I advised them to find out if Polly was aware enough of what was going on to make a decision:  did Polly want her sister to take over and help her as her Power of Attorney?

Polly did want Lorna’s help. She is not confused and is much more aware of everything now that she is eating properly and able to be out of bed. The change in her mental status has been amazing.  Soon she will be discharged from hospice care.  She no longer qualifies for it.

Lorna has taken my advice. She and her daughter need to change the power of attorney agent and the healthcare directive agent. They will go to the care home with a notary public, the state “ombudsman” (liaison for communication with state licensed facilities) and new paperwork for Polly to sign.  These important changes will stop the abuse by removing legal control from Vicky.

They will soon be able to ensure that Polly is well attended during this last phase of her life, even if it means moving her closer to Lorna.

It seems incomprehensible that a daughter would intentionally try to starve her mother to death, but that was actually happening.  If it weren’t for the neighbor and her niece and sister, Polly might have simply wasted away.

The takeaway here is to be very careful about whose name you put on your own legal documents appointing a power of attorney and a healthcare agent.  Don’t just assume that your offspring are the most suitable persons.  A history of drug or alcohol abuse is a red flag that an adult child with these problems may not be your best choice.  A professional fiduciary, a younger friend or other relative can do the job when the time comes that you need it.  If your health fails, your life will be in their hands.

Use this post as a reminder to check your legal documents and be sure they are updated and things are still they way you thought they would be when your estate planning was last done.  A review with your attorney is a good idea.

Everyone deserves good care and peace in your declining years.

Until next time,
Carolyn Rosenblatt
AgingParents.com

Attribution:

Slowly Starving Her Mother To Get The Inheritance
Carolyn Rosenblatt
February 10, 2012
Forbes
http://www.forbes.com/sites/carolynrosenblatt/2012/02/10/slowly-starving-her-mother-to-get-the-inheritance/

Erika Rivera, a central New Jersey resident, filed the lawsuit last fall on behalf of then-5-year-old Sofia Bella Gatti. The suit blames Gatti’s widow, Amanda Rodrigues Gatti, for the charismatic boxer’s 2009 death.

Gatti’s body was found in July 2009 at an apartment he, his wife and their son had rented in the Brazilian seaside resort of Porto de Galihnas. Police initially held Rodrigues Gatti as a suspect but eventually released her and concluded Gatti hung himself from a staircase railing using a handbag strap.

That conclusion is disputed by Gatti’s former trainer and others, who commissioned an independent investigation that concluded physical evidence showed Gatti could not have committed suicide.

Attorneys for Gatti’s widow claimed New Jersey wasn’t the proper venue for Rivera’s lawsuit because his death occurred in Brazil and any witnesses would have to travel to New Jersey. On Friday, state Superior Court Judge Glenn Berman granted their motion to dismiss on those grounds. The lawsuit still could be brought in Brazil or Canada, where Rodrigues Gatti resides.

“We believe that we satisfied the requirements to demonstrate jurisdiction,” attorney Anthony Pope, representing Rivera, said in an email Friday. “We will, nevertheless, take counsel with our client and assess the best course of action for Sofia going forward.”

The Italian-born, Canadian-raised Gatti developed a large following in New Jersey, where he lived and trained beginning in the early 1990s. Nicknamed “Thunder,” he fought some of his most memorable fights at Atlantic City’s Boardwalk Hall, including a trilogy of slugfests with fellow 140-pounder Micky Ward beginning in 2002 that endeared him to fans.

His death also sparked a battle over his will. In December, a Canadian judge sided with his widow in a dispute with his family over the boxer’s $3.4 million estate. Gatti’s family argued unsuccessfully that he was duped into signing a will in 2009.

In addition, Rodrigues Gatti sued the New York Daily News, New York Post and Maxim magazine for libel over articles written in 2009 that described her as a former stripper. The sides have reached agreement in the lawsuit and are in the process of finalizing a settlement, her attorney, Mark Casazza, said Friday. Terms were being kept confidential, he said.

“I truly believe that justice has been served today,” Casazza said about Friday’s decision. “Amanda is a young woman who tragically became a widow to her beloved husband and a single parent to their son, Arturo, Jr. What she has been forced to endure since her husband’s passing has been unthinkable. I hope now she can get the closure that she deserves.”

Attribution:

Judge denies Arturo Gatti daughter suit
Associated Press
February 10, 2012
ESPN
http://espn.go.com/boxing/story/_/id/7562716/lawsuit-brought-arturo-gatti-widow-daughter-nixed