Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #12

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Seattle1 said:
Exactly, which makes the petition so bizarre.
Click to expand...
No they don't automatically have that right. I have to resign papers yearly for access to my husbands medical records. I never remember when it's up. At Kaiser's suggestion , last time I signed, and complained, they said get a lawyer and make it permanent. No, you don't have the right to your spouses name. You can't buy property with your spouse based on just signing their name ...you need a POA. Crazy, IMO not to have one.
 
Murphy1950 said:
No they don't automatically have that right. I have to resign papers yearly for access to my husbands medical records. I never remember when it's up. At Kaiser's suggestion , last time I signed, and complained, they said get a lawyer and make it permanent. No, you don't have the right to your spouses name. You can't buy property with your spouse based on just signing their name ...you need a POA. Crazy, IMO not to have one.
Click to expand...
I can't believe that a 2 x cancer survivor did not have POA. Did she revoke it? Seems to me that if SM didn't have POA in place, she had a reason. JMO
 
gitana1 said:
I need more details. Who is SM? Step mom? Who lives where? Guardianship of whom?
Click to expand...
@gitana1
SM - missing mom Suzanne Morphew
resides in CO with husband owns home jointly with him there
joint property is in Indiana
husband brings guardianship in Indiana June 1 (docketed June3) together with Petition to sell property (presumably the property they own jointly in IN)
she's been missing since May 10
CBI, FBI and sheriff searching for her

ETA Link to IN courts- sometimes you have to manually search for the case as the direct link "times out"
Indiana Supreme Court public access case search - MyCase
 
Last edited:
Ultra Violet said:
I had not heard before that funds must be withdrawn within 30 days. I wonder if you are confusing the 30 days with another platform?

jmo

According to the *** web site under “Common Questions”:

Are there any deadlines or time limits?

No, never. With ********, there are no deadlines or time limits. Your campaign will remain live until you choose to turn off donations or remove the campaign altogether. Most organizers leave their campaigns active indefinitely to refer back to the kind comments and support they received.

​
Click to expand...
I have the correct platform. The campaign can go on forever, I'm talking about the time frame of withdrawing funds.
  • You or your beneficiary must make your first withdrawal within 30 days of receiving your first donation, or incoming donations will be paused.
  • Your donations will be automatically refunded if your withdrawals are not completely set up within 90 days of receiving your first donation.
 
Seattle1 said:
I can't believe that a 2 x cancer survivor did not have POA. Did she revoke it? Seems to me that if SM didn't have POA in place, she had a reason. JMO
Click to expand...
I agree...seems like she would. Could be a sibling has the POA....maybe Barry and the sib are on the outs. Who knows? I can't imagine why you wouldn't have a POA/will/ etc. At one time, I know more costly, and people were not as familiar with the docs, I think that's changed dramatically in the last 20 years. Heck half the forms are online, so you need find a notary, no big deal. It's a great peace of mind, IMO, if something happens to you, to have someone you trust, freely able to handle things. I was my Mil's' POA over her own children, and she loved her kids....
 
Tate123 said:
OK in another bizarre twist related to finances..
BM has now been added to the G** page as a "Team Member" possibly allowing him to withdraw directly.
Click to expand...

I can't speak to the specifics in this case, but a few years ago I was asked to start a FundGoMe campaign for a family member who'd suddenly become a widower. We didn't know it at the time, but the site is very very particular about the who, when, how, why, etc., when it comes to folks being on the approved "owner" page (it's now "team"). We only found out our mistake when I tried to transfer it all over into his name.

All that to say, I'm sure the rules are even more stringent now, but it could be a matter of legal accountability (on the site's part) to have his name directly connected.

jmo
 
10ofRods said:
Wow - what a great post. Many thoughts arise in my mind after reading this. I'd suspect the results will be termed "inconclusive" until Suzanne is found.

The difficulties you outline are so concerning. Even if scent led them to the South Arkansas and then down toward the dam, it would still be so difficult to locate a body. Summer may change some things, though. Investigators must have to have nerves of steel, this situation would be driving me crazy.
Click to expand...

Underwater body recovery has to be incredibly hard and dangerous for the divers, then you think of the weight of the equipment they must be wearing. I get the creeps just thinking about what's underwater moving around. I would think just because a dog can smell remains at an incredible depth, doesn't mean the divers can safely get to it. I believe you're right, if water plays a role in a recovery here, the summer months might be key.
 
gitana1 said:
I need more details. Who is SM? Step mom? Who lives where? Guardianship of whom?
Click to expand...

Yay! @gitana, so glad you've shown up here on SM's thread!

Long time no see...hope all is well in your neck of the world.

Some quick case background:

SM = missing mom/wife, who was reported missing on 05/10/20 (Mother's Day).
BM = husband.
They currently reside in Colorado.
They formerly lived in Indiana, and may or may not still own a home there.

BM has filed a petition for Guardianship of SM as of 06/01 in Indiana.
BM also filed a motion for sale of real estate in Indiana on 06/01.
SM went missing in Colorado.

Link to court filings in IN:
Indiana Supreme Court public access case search - MyCase

I note there is also a Motion to Waive Hearing filed on 06/01 as well.
Again, SM went missing on 05/10.

Your thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Good afternoon all. Normally I am simply a lurker on this site. However, I signed up today due to an interesting question. As an attorney, I thought I would give some guidance and reference material for the jurisdictional question of guardianship. In short, the answer as to which court ultimately does have jurisdiction in this case is "that all depends." The question is addressed in the Uniform Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Jurisdiction Act, which has been adopted in some form by both Colorado and Indiana. I have included a link to the statutory language in both states:

https://law.justia.com/codes/colora...ode/article-14.5/part-2/section-15-14.5-201/; and

2011 Indiana Code :: TITLE 29. PROBATE :: ARTICLE 3.5. UNIFORM ADULT GUARDIANSHIP AND PROTECTIVE PROCEEDINGS JURISDICTION ACT.

This site has a good example question on the issue: Adult Guardianship Jurisdiction - Where to File - Fleming and Curti, PLC.

As to the question of jurisdiction for property, real estate (real property) transactions require in rem jurisdiction. This means that as a general rule, jurisdiction is determined by location of property.

I hope this helps!
 
Tate123 said:
What is interesting about BM being added to the G** page at the 11th hour is that funds MUST be withdrawn in 30 days and we are approaching that date. Donations have dwindled down to nothing at this point, the last being a week ago. When he saw he'd gotten the most he will probably get... his name was put on for a quick cash grab. IMO
Click to expand...
If someone donated and changes their mind, can they get their money back?
 
AugustWest said:
Good afternoon all. Normally I am simply a lurker on this site. However, I signed up today due to an interesting question. As an attorney, I thought I would give some guidance and reference material for the jurisdictional question of guardianship. In short, the answer as to which court ultimately does have jurisdiction in this case is "that all depends." The question is addressed in the Uniform Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Jurisdiction Act, which has been adopted in some form by both Colorado and Indiana. I have included a link to the statutory language in both states:

https://law.justia.com/codes/colora...ode/article-14.5/part-2/section-15-14.5-201/; and

2017 Colorado Revised Statutes :: Title 15 - Probate, Trusts, and Fiduciaries :: Colorado Probate Code :: Article 14.5 - Uniform Adult Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Jurisdiction Act.

This site has a good example question on the issue: Adult Guardianship Jurisdiction - Where to File - Fleming and Curti, PLC.

As to the question of jurisdiction for property, real estate (real property) transactions require in rem jurisdiction. This means that as a general rule, jurisdiction is determined by location of property.

I hope this helps!
Click to expand...
Welcome! So glad you joined. Thank you.
 
TxGidget said:
The county tax assessor still has the home in the Morphews name, and they are still responsible for the taxes. So it could not have sold. An address lookup has the name of a tenant currently living at the address.
Click to expand...

I think it was brought up somewhere before that the house was under a land contract with someone, so listing a tenant would make sense.
 
AugustWest said:
Good afternoon all. Normally I am simply a lurker on this site. However, I signed up today due to an interesting question. As an attorney, I thought I would give some guidance and reference material for the jurisdictional question of guardianship. In short, the answer as to which court ultimately does have jurisdiction in this case is "that all depends." The question is addressed in the Uniform Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Jurisdiction Act, which has been adopted in some form by both Colorado and Indiana. I have included a link to the statutory language in both states:

https://law.justia.com/codes/colora...ode/article-14.5/part-2/section-15-14.5-201/; and

2011 Indiana Code :: TITLE 29. PROBATE :: ARTICLE 3.5. UNIFORM ADULT GUARDIANSHIP AND PROTECTIVE PROCEEDINGS JURISDICTION ACT.

This site has a good example question on the issue: Adult Guardianship Jurisdiction - Where to File - Fleming and Curti, PLC.

As to the question of jurisdiction for property, real estate (real property) transactions require in rem jurisdiction. This means that as a general rule, jurisdiction is determined by location of property.

I hope this helps!
Click to expand...
Welcome to WS! and thank you. Interesting the attorneys in my office say jurisdiction is where the Ward resides - they bring an action there and then use the Letters of Guardianship in the state where the real property is when and if it's sold and title needs to be conveyed. We just had this happen involving Florida and New York - but perhaps CO and IN have specific rules. it's all interesting - what are your thoughts on determining incapacity on a person who cannot be examined because they are missing? I'm not finding a precedent so far.
thanks
JMO
 
AugustWest said:
Good afternoon all. Normally I am simply a lurker on this site. However, I signed up today due to an interesting question. As an attorney, I thought I would give some guidance and reference material for the jurisdictional question of guardianship. In short, the answer as to which court ultimately does have jurisdiction in this case is "that all depends." The question is addressed in the Uniform Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Jurisdiction Act, which has been adopted in some form by both Colorado and Indiana. I have included a link to the statutory language in both states:

https://law.justia.com/codes/colora...ode/article-14.5/part-2/section-15-14.5-201/; and

2011 Indiana Code :: TITLE 29. PROBATE :: ARTICLE 3.5. UNIFORM ADULT GUARDIANSHIP AND PROTECTIVE PROCEEDINGS JURISDICTION ACT.

This site has a good example question on the issue: Adult Guardianship Jurisdiction - Where to File - Fleming and Curti, PLC.

As to the question of jurisdiction for property, real estate (real property) transactions require in rem jurisdiction. This means that as a general rule, jurisdiction is determined by location of property.

I hope this helps!
Click to expand...
Welcome and thank you.
 
AugustWest said:
Good afternoon all. Normally I am simply a lurker on this site. However, I signed up today due to an interesting question. As an attorney, I thought I would give some guidance and reference material for the jurisdictional question of guardianship. In short, the answer as to which court ultimately does have jurisdiction in this case is "that all depends." The question is addressed in the Uniform Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Jurisdiction Act, which has been adopted in some form by both Colorado and Indiana. I have included a link to the statutory language in both states:

https://law.justia.com/codes/colora...ode/article-14.5/part-2/section-15-14.5-201/; and

2011 Indiana Code :: TITLE 29. PROBATE :: ARTICLE 3.5. UNIFORM ADULT GUARDIANSHIP AND PROTECTIVE PROCEEDINGS JURISDICTION ACT.

This site has a good example question on the issue: Adult Guardianship Jurisdiction - Where to File - Fleming and Curti, PLC.

As to the question of jurisdiction for property, real estate (real property) transactions require in rem jurisdiction. This means that as a general rule, jurisdiction is determined by location of property.

I hope this helps!
Click to expand...

Tremendously helpful information, thank you so much!

I'm reading the "Jurisdiction" section right now:
2011 Indiana Code :: TITLE 29. PROBATE :: ARTICLE 3.5. UNIFORM ADULT GUARDIANSHIP AND PROTECTIVE PROCEEDINGS JURISDICTION ACT :: CHAPTER 2. JURISDICTION

SABBM:
IC 29-3.5-2-3
Jurisdiction of Indiana courts; criteria
Sec. 3. A court of this state has jurisdiction to appoint a guardian or issue a protective order for a respondent if:
(1) this state is the respondent's home state;
(2) on the date the petition is filed, this state is a significant connection state and:
(A) the respondent does not have a home state or a court of the respondent's home state has declined to exercise jurisdiction because this state is a more appropriate forum; or
(B) the respondent has a home state, a petition for an appointment or order is not pending in a court of that state or another significant connection state, and, before the court makes the appointment or issues the order:
(i) a petition for an appointment or order is not filed in the respondent's home state;
(ii) an objection to the court's jurisdiction is not filed by a person required to be notified of the proceeding; and
(iii) the court in this state concludes that it is an appropriate forum under the factors set forth in section 6 of this chapter;
(3) this state does not have jurisdiction under either subdivision

(1) or (2), the respondent's home state and all significant connection states have declined to exercise jurisdiction because this state is the more appropriate forum, and jurisdiction in this state is consistent with the constitutions of this state and the United States; or
(4) the requirements for special jurisdiction under section 4 of this chapter are met.
As added by P.L.178-2011, SEC.10.

IC 29-3.5-2-4
Special jurisdiction
Sec. 4. (a) A court of this state lacking jurisdiction under section 3(1) through 3(3) of this chapter has special jurisdiction to do any of the following:
(1) Appoint a temporary guardian in an emergency as permitted by IC 29-3-3-4 for a term not exceeding ninety (90) days for a respondent who is physically present in this state.
(2) Issue a protective order with respect to real or tangible personal property located in this state.
(3) Appoint a guardian or conservator for an incapacitated or protected person for whom a provisional order to transfer the proceeding from another state has been issued under procedures similar to IC 29-3.5-3-1.
(b) If a petition for the appointment of a guardian in an emergency is brought in this state and this state was not the respondent's home state on the date the petition was filed, the court shall dismiss the proceeding at the request of the court of the home state whether dismissal is requested before or after the emergency appointment.
As added by P.L.178-2011, SEC.10.

The significant connection state is defined in the article code as:
(15) "Significant connection state" means a state, other than the home state, with which a respondent has a significant connection other than mere physical presence and in which substantial evidence concerning the respondent is available.
_________________________

So, if I'm reading the jurisdiction criteria correctly, it looks like BM is filling in IN on the basis that it's a "significant connection state."

What's unclear is whether or not BM is asking for an emergency appointment, i.e., temporary for 90 days, or not.

If he's filed for an emergency appointment, what would trigger a court of the home state requesting dismissal of an emergency appointment?

JMO.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 65 more.
Total: 1,227 (members: 66, guests: 1,161)

Online statistics

Members online
66
Guests online
1,161
Total visitors
1,227
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,610
Messages
18,126,885
Members
231,103
Latest member
maxnum
Back
Top