Agreed. Same here. Even if skinned quail breasts are brought home in a small cooler, that cooler is now exclusively a “bird cooler”. Which is why we have dozens of coolers!
Absolutely. So where was his big ole hunting cooler?
my state only requires an annual accounting - unless it is a "locked" account - which offers the most control as the guardian has to petition the court to spend the money from it and explain why. then the Order is taken to the bank and a cashiers check is given (my experience with Chase bank and a locked account). Somehow, I don't think this IN Judge specified a locked account or any supervision of her assets - IMO.
Isn't that the truth?? I feel like we know hardly anything ...again...
In my state - your POA does not get recorded so the only people that know about it are the two people involved - in this case, if she had a current POA - her attorney in fact would be _________? (Insert who you think she may have had - her dad, brother, her bff?) Now, if her father was named her POA - he would likely know if she told him (He may even have the original document because he would need that to conduct her business -at least in my state). If somehow the husband found out about this - what would he do? She's missing so she can't change her POA. He may call a lawyer and ask what can be done and the lawyer might suggest guardianship. As I've mentioned before, I have never heard of a guardianship granted on behalf of a missing Ward. Also, in my state, a POA does not translate into a guardianship - it's a separate action in the courts (and expensive) - however, if the potential guardian had the POA it certainly helps in convincing the Judge they should be named as guardian - particularly in a contested guardianship. In this case, if the POA had language in it that the POA could be used if the person was missing - a guardianship would not be necessary - our latest POA's do have this language - I am ambivalent about it - I follow too many missing woman who end up dead at the hand of their spouse or SO and I would not want to enable them any further - but that 's just me. Personally, I don't think she had a current POA.
Because the person who the court granted her guardianship to doesnn't seem to have her interests at heart, only his, and may have, in fact, caused her to be incapacitated in the first place. If she had a current POA which did not name her husband as her attorney-in-fact but named another relative of hers - and the husband was aware of this - then yes, IMO he may call that attorney-in-fact named and ask for their support in a guardianship. But I really don't think she did. I think they used POA's for one-time transactions IMO. I do think that after consulting with a guardianship attorney, the husband may have contacted her father to make them aware and ask for consent to avoid having his adult daughter involved. But I also think the Judge may have required him to get the adult daughter's consent because that is how I read the statute - as our attorney's have told me on more than one occasion - you stop when you get to what you need - as in, if the adult child is first as far as notice goes, then you get their waiver and consent or give formal notice. Now if the adult child is unable to provide consent, you go to the next person and that would be a parent.Thank you for your answer. So glad you're here to explain things!
IF she had changed her POA, would this explain why BM would call GM to get POA to declare guardianship, and when GM said no, GM thought the matter was settled and that BM was thwarted, only to be notified later that BM found another way?
I wish the court were obligated to appoint a representative to speak for Suzanne and protect her interests.
Waiting on justice
JMO
Was this a business that deals with homeowners providing a service? If so there are many shady folk everywhere as far as I know. Very interesting comment about "....there may be a lot more to this"...do tell a little more about your experience please , if not at least expand on".... a lot more to this..." and why or what u suspect.
That would be a lot of effort to put forth. I'm going to say his motive is financial and the timing is driven by fear of an arrest.
Can I ask why IYO, he would want to avoid having an adult daughter involved? When someone avoids straight lines there's a reason?
IMO not involving the adult child in a guardianship would prevent that adult child from knowing what was going on - that adult child could object, refuse to sign the waiver of notice and then the Court and the proposed guardian would have to serve the adult child with every petition. In my state, we would call that an adversarial action and then we treat it as we would any regular civil lawsuit and the rules of civil procedure are invoked. In this case, I think he did not want her to know what he planned to do IMO.
