A form is guide as to the basics. (These are Ken’s comments on WestlawNext – HORNER–PPE, § 50:22. Citation to compel accounting and settlement—Forms—Petition for citation, available at any law library. Chicago has a great public and free law library on the 29th floor of the Daley center).
I am suggesting that this form be used by an ‘interested person’ to require the guardian/executor or other appointed individual to account. For instance, in the Sykes case I am suggesting to Gloria/Kathy/Aunt Jo/Aunt yo and/or other interested persons to ask for an accounting for Carolyn. For instance, the petition should disclose:
1) We know that Mary was a millionaire. She had inherited from her husband and from Albert Biddy gold coins worth at this point in time over a million dollars. We also know that she had a safety deposit box that also had Gloria’s name on it and this safety deposit box was drilled by Carolyn. (This is the safety deposit box that Cynthia Farenga testified that neither she or Adam Stern went to observe and Carolyn had free rein over it). We also know that Mary had money of her own, and in particular there were funds that she had in a mattress. Finally there was jewelry, antiques etc.
2) Under Illinois law being appointed a guardian does not create a forfeiture of the ‘ward’s assets’ but it places the guardian in a fiduciary relationship to the ward. Ergo, there is not only a statutory duty to account for all of the assets, but a common law duty. The published form provides a guide as to what should be said and is an acknowledgement that even those persons (including guardians and guardian ad litem) who are governed by Title XIa of the Probate act have to comply with this duty.
The time to take off the gloves is right now. There is no reason for the State of Illinois and the United States of America not to collect the taxes due created by the taxable event of the plenary guardian not inventorying assets that she obtained in the raid on the safety deposit box, the house etc. One has to be an idiot not to be suspicious of the fact that neither the plenary guardian or the two Guardian ad Litems have not made application for fees – why should they – over a million dollars of assets have not been inventoried. The Wizard of Oz has not made the million dollars disappear. It is logical that the two guardian ad litem and the plenary guardian who are trying desperately to vitiate the First Amendment Rights of persons (including me) who have spoken out have some ‘role’ in the non-inventory of the substantial assets.
Ken Ditkowsky
