 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re Guardianship of Lauder11/12/2002
. Appellant, Bryan B. Johnson, former guardian for Lucille Lauder and Helen Bryan, and former attorney-in-fact for Helen Bryan, appeals from the October 3, 2001 entry regarding fees and exceptions to accounts filed by the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, Probate Division. For the reasons that follow, we reverse and remand with the recommendation that, upon remand, the trial judge voluntarily recuse himself from further proceedings to enhance the appearance of impartial consideration of the issues.
. In April 1998, appellant received a referral from Linda Kaye, a social worker at Winchester Place Nursing Home, concerning the financial exploitation of two elderly sisters, Lucille Lauder and Helen Bryan. Appellant is an experienced probate attorney who had served as a part-time magistrate for the probate court for nine years. Kaye had become acquainted with appellant because he had served as a guardian for other patients in the facility, and she believed that he had the ability to handle a case of that nature.
. Kaye informed appellant that attorney Karen Bond had taken advantage of the sisters and embezzled substantial amounts of money from them. Kaye also advised appellant that Lucille Lauder was mentally incompetent and in need of a guardian, but that Helen Bryan was mentally competent and desired assistance through a power of attorney. The sisters were in rather dire straits, having recently had their Medicaid eligibility terminated, their nursing home and pharmacy bills unpaid and in arrears, and no assets with which to pay their bills, or to pay an attorney.
. Appellant and an associate drove to the nursing home and interviewed the sisters. They were able to discuss the situation with Helen Bryan but were unable to have a meaningful discussion with Lucille Lauder because of her diminished capacity. Appellant determined that there was reason to believe that Karen Bond had financially exploited both women.
. Helen Bryan executed a durable power of attorney appointing appellant as her attorney-in-fact on April 14, 1998. Appellant filed an application to be appointed guardian for Lucille Lauder on April 16, 1998, and by means of an expedited hearing in the probate court, appellant was appointed guardian of the person and the estate for Lauder on April 20, 1998. At that hearing, appellant disclosed his status as attorney-in-fact for Bryan to the magistrate.
. Appellant pursued concealment of assets actions against Karen Bond and her family in his capacity as both guardian and attorney-in-fact. As part of this litigation, appellant was required to file a land sale proceeding in Lauder's guardianship to sell her interest in a house appellant had recovered from Karen Bond. On August 31, 1998, the probate court approved an agreed judgment entry that allocated litigation proceeds disproportionately between Bryan's power of attorney and Lauder's guardianship. The judge's order specifically ordered appellant to continue to investigate and pursue the concealment of assets action.
. On June 10, 1999, appellant was appointed guardian of the person and the estate for Bryan. Appellant also remained Bryan's attorney-in-fact under the durable power of attorney. Appellant filed an inventory in the guardianship of Bryan on June 11, 1999. The inventory indicated that the assets consisted of a Bank One checking account in the sum of $1,000. At the bottom of the page was a footnote indicating there were other assets managed by appellant as attorney-in-fact that were not part of the guardianship.
. Between April 1998 and June 2000, appellant applied for and received payment of fees from the Lauder guardianship in the amount
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|