 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re S.H.8/9/2002
No. 5604
I. INTRODUCTION
S.H. was adjudged to be in need of a special conservator in 1997 regarding litigation he was pursuing against Anchorage Refuse, Inc. After we affirmed the appointment of a conservator in 1999, S.H.'s conservator moved to finalize a settlement entered into in 1997. At that time, S.H. petitioned the superior court to terminate the conservatorship, claiming that he was competent to manage his affairs. The superior court denied the petition to terminate, entered the settlement, and dismissed S.H.'s litigation against Anchorage Refuse. S.H. appeals the superior court's refusal to hold a hearing on the need for a conservatorship and its refusal to void the actions of the conservator settling the Anchorage Refuse litigation. Because the conservator entered into the settlement in 1997 and our decision in S.H. I was a ratification of that settlement, we affirm the superior court's entry of settlement and dismissal of the litigation.
II. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS
This case is before us for a second time. It concerns the superior court's actions following our remand in In re S.H. (S.H.I).
A. In re S.H.
After working at Anchorage Refuse, Inc. (ARI) from 1991 to 1993, S.H. sued ARI in April 1995 alleging, among other things, that his fellow employees sadistically mistreated him. His attorneys in that action were from the law firm of Clapp, Peterson, & Stowers (CPS). Between May 1995 and December 1996, CPS attorneys Marcus Clapp and Thomas V. Van Flein grew uneasy with S.H's increasing obsession with the case. S.H. began showing signs of instability, "including irrational behavior, paranoia, inclinations toward gratuitous dismissal of his personal injury suit, a tendency to threaten his own witnesses, the desire to initiate direct and inappropriate dealings with opposition counsel and the judge, and a marked lack of confidentiality."
In 1996 and 1997 psychiatric experts examined S.H. in connection with the ARI litigation and because CPS was concerned with S.H.'s behavior. The majority of these doctors concluded that S.H. had a mental impairment that made him unable to think rationally at times. Only one doctor found S.H. to be capable of dealing rationally with the settlement proceedings.
Mediation between S.H. and ARI began in December 1996, and led to a $500,000 settlement offer by ARI. S.H. refused to accept the offer, however, believing his case was worth $2 million. CPS then filed a "Petition for Appointment of Limited Conservator/Guardian Ad Litem of a Person" due to its belief that S.H. was incapable of handling his affairs. Superior Court Judge Karen L. Hunt appointed Ernest Schlereth to act as S.H.'s attorney in the conservatorship/guardianship proceeding on December 30. In March 1997 Phillip Paul Weidner replaced Schlereth as S.H.'s attorney in the conservatorship/guardianship proceeding.
Master Andrew Brown commenced a hearing on the conservatorship/guardianship petition in July 1997, at which time S.H. requested a jury trial. Master Brown denied the request for a jury trial and issued his report in August after a three-day hearing. He recommended that a special conservator be appointed to act on S.H.'s behalf for the purposes of the ARI litigation and that the costs of that conservator be imposed on CPS. The superior court adopted Master Brown's recommendation and appointed Paul Cossman as S.H.'s special conservator. After reviewing S.H.'s case against ARI, Cossman concluded that it was in S.H's best interests to accept the $500,000 settlement offer and approved the settlement. The settlement funds were placed in the court registry in order to al
Page 1 2 3 Alaska Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|