Dave F.
Former member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2008
- Messages
- 2,335
- Reaction score
- 20,492
Moormans apparently didn't know that BM hot temporary guardianship in Indiana UNTIL Dauly Mail, I believe, contacted them for a statement. Doesn't that imply that none of them, specifically Suzanne's father, was NOT contacted (by BM) PRIOR to that? And AFTER that, the call would be unnecessary because temp guardianship was already awarded, via the oldest daughter...
So.... I'm wondering if guardianship was an assumption but possibly NOT why BM called Suzanne's father.... did BM have OTHER papers he wanted signed? Hmmmm.... did Suzanne own anything in joint tenacity with her father? Like, say, a trust? Could there be other papers we just don't yet know about?
JMO
I am not a lawyer, for sure, but whatever it was, GM refused to sign. If it was crucial to the guardianship proceeding, I would guess that proceeding could not have moved forward so quickly without it being resolved.
If GM controls a trust, land ownership arrangement or any other fiduciary form of which SM is a part, then SM did not control it. BM could not seek to control of something in guardianship that SM did not control prior to her becoming incapacitated. IMO, IANAL