Probate Legal Challenges Overview

Estate/Probate with due process and constitutional violations by the opposing attorney and the judge my son Kyle, niece Krystina, and nephew Christopher along with the decedents fiance Hilde currently have a docket number with the Michigan COA as marganilized pro per Appellants. In the lower court the only estate planning document is a * will that intentionally omits the decedents two children Paige and Ryan. Paige introduced the will on May *, *, and though we didn't know it at the time my sister Lisa and I were named primary and secondary Personal Representatives in the will and a trust document was viewed by the judge but not shown to us. Lisa and I were also named as successor trustees.

The attorney for Paige stated in open court that Paige and Ryan were the sole heirs and beneficiaries.The judge stated the same thing. It was never required to be filed. We didn't find out until September that the Trust wasn't signed and was never authenticated. It was told to us the month before that Paige and Ryan were the sole beneficiaries and before they would allow Lisa to be appointed as Personal Representative.

Lisa and I would have to sign an agreement to transfer two inter vivos gifts of necklaces with a total appraised value of *,*.*. The judge signed a stipulated order allowing it but didn't require a motion or for anybody that may inherit instestate if the trust were deemed invalid to be served, and again this was prior to the appointment of Lisa as Personal Representative. Paige and Ryan obstructed the administration of the estate by offering laughable and false inventories as they had sole possession of the apartment for a month after their father died, and there was money transferred directly to Ryan and their mother Sheri that wasn't returned to the estate until a letter of Demand was issued in December and Ryan never returned the money that was tranferred in March *.

In January there was an argument between Lisa and Paige and Ryan because they were demanding as sole beneficiaries (still no trust filed or authenticated) that Lisa waive estate claim to a life insurance policy worth *,*.* two days later they objected to Lisa and filed an ex-parte for her removal claiming interference with the life insurance, a *.* shorfall in the financial inventory that they knew happened in March of * while Ryan and Paige were acting as de facto representatives, and violation of a court order. Part of the Stipulated order was that the Estate was to be supervised and the estate funds were to be deposited into an IOLTA.

The problem was that the form that the attorney fills out for the appointment showed unsupervised, the letter of authority signed by the judge showed unsupervised and the Register of Action showed unsupervised so Lisa simply asked Paige's attorney to seek clarification from the court before she would transfer funds from the secure estate account to the IOLTA.

The court signed an ex parte order temporarily suspending her, and then during a hearing that was noticed for the disqualification of the trust redetermination of heirs and surcharge of Paige and Ryan she permanently removed Lisa without hearing testimony, her accusor was not required to make allegations through testimony, and I was skipped over because I acted "in concert" and was "joined at the hip" with my sister. Again with no motion testimony nothing. At that point Kyle, Christopher, Krystina and Hilde began objecting and demanding that there be a determination of standing and the unsigned trust document be filed so it could be challenged the judge denied that and compelled mediation for all parties without determinationof governing document or standing and shared cost with binding consequences for everybody if they participated or not.

During a hearing in May * Mark Nelson who is Paige's attorney introduced as "a preliminary matter" a signed version of the trust. He had that at least by April *, * and didn't file it or serve it and ambushed pro per litigants in court at an unoticed hearing and the judge accepted it. She did tell Mark he would have to mail it to all parties but didn't require authentication, provenance or explanation of authority used to allow standing for a year with an unsigned document that resulted in the tranfer of hundreds of thousands of dollars in estate property and over a hundred thousand in missing estate property. This was in addition to the judge being notified that one of the people that supposedly signed the document didn't remember it and in fact had a letter from the drafting attorney stating she wasn't there at the time of signing so that "conformed copy" shouldn't even exist.

When an ex parte request was filed to compel the enforcement of michigan law and the motion filing and proper service of both trust documents it was denied. At a subsequent hearing they were told that she had already ruled on it it was done and she had accepted it as an original trust with original signatures she was told that was being contested and she said yeah I know. When objections were made again regarding forced mediation and forced attendance with sharing of cost she said that everybody could decide to attend or not but that it would still be binding and if they didn't participate she refused to clarify if they would lose the right to participate in the case further if mediation failed. She allowed a pro per litigant to be mocked and called a straw man and threatened with legal fees in open court

If they are already pro per on the court of appeals docket what are their chances of success