A funny thing happened on the way to the Circuit Clerk's counter last summer. Or did it?
On August 30, 2011, a hearing in the probate of Audrey Feldkamp was held. That was when the lawyers for the Executor, Scott Feldkamp, wanted out of the case. Thomas Schmitt, of Filler & Schmitt, of Marengo, had filed a request to get out of the case and to collect fees owed to them. Judge Sullivan let them out, and the lawyers withdrew their petition for fees.
What was their reason for wanting out? The reason given to the Court was "lack of communication and cooperation on the part of Scott A. Feldkamp making it impossible for the Law Office of Thomas W. Schmitt and Jay K. Filler, Jr. to properly represent him."
Since that time Scott Feldkamp has filed to represent the estates of his father and mother pro se; that is, himself - without an attorney-of-record.
But something else happened on August 30. Woodstock Attorney Mark Gummerson stood with Tom Schmitt in front of Judge Sullivan, and Judge Sullivan asked Gummerson if he was involved.
Gummerson told Judge Sullivan that he represented Jackie Feldkamp (Scott's sister) and that he "believed" he previously filed his appearance.
When Judge Sullivan told him that the Appearance was not in the court record, Gummerson said, "If I haven't, I will."
It seems to me that Gummerson would have checked his files right after court to learn whether he had already filed his Appearance.
He hadn't.
It seems to me that, since he told Judge Sullivan that he would (if he hadn't), then pretty quickly he should have done so.
He hasn't.
As of last Friday there was nothing in the electronic record online to reflect that Gummerson ever filed an Appearance that he represents Jackie Feldkamp. And the last time I asked a court clerk to pull the file and tell me whether the Appearance was in the court file, I was told that it wasn't.
Why is this important?
When the attorneys for the Executor bailed out because of "lack of communication and cooperation on the part of ..." the Executor, then who is telling the Executor what he legally can and cannot do as Executor? Apparently, no one is.
Why is Scott Feldkamp driving his late father's Cadillac on an almost-daily basis? Back in June he owned a car; Sheriff's Department photographers snapped pictures of it in the driveway of the Feldkamp home. Can an Executor use a vehicle that is an estate asset, or should that vehicle be in a garage, preserving its value, until it can be sold in an arm's length transaction at fair market value?
What's the rule about distribution of estate assets before the estate is closed? Can assets of the estate be liquidated and distributed to heirs before the creditors are satisfield? What happened to Mrs. Feldkamp's car? Who is paying for the insurance on Mr. Feldkamp's car? Who is paying the expenses of the Feldkamp home? If Scott is living in the house, must he pay rent to the Estate?
What do you suppose the fair rental value is on a $413,000 home in McHenry County outside Marengo? It's $2,850/month, according to a listing on www.realtor.com by Harmony Real Estate. Would a prospective renter or buyer have to be informed that the house is stigmatized?
Does any distribution require court approval, especially before the settlement date of the probates?
The probates have been transferred from Judge Sullivan to Judge Chmiel, and the next hearing in the John Feldkamp Estate is set for Wednesday, January 25, 9:00AM, in Courtroom 202. The next hearing in the Audrey Feldkamp Estate is not until August 22.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I guess I'm not making the connection you're trying to make or imply by Feldkamp appearing pro se in court. Are you implying that he's mishandling the estate? What does that have anything to do with Mark Gummerson in court, supposively representing the interests of his client?
Gus -
It matters not what you might allege – it only matters what whatever other official Feldcamp heirs might allege to be incorrect.
Legally.
Gummerson would only have to file if he were representing the estate, or by extension, the executor. If he is representing his sister, then there is nothing to file. That is more a civil matter than a probate issue.
As for driving the vehicles, etc., yes. Vehicles are usually considered personal property (not an asset like a house or business), so a few things could happen. One, if the trust/will distributes personal property to an heir, that can be done immediately; alternatively, if distribution of personal property is delayed, than the executor/trustee can use the vehicles, on the estates dime. Remember, the executor is essentially "becoming" or "stepping into the shoes" of the deceased. With that said, abuse is abuse, and can happen.
As for distribution of assets, yes, that is done before an estate is closed. A lot depends on the will/trust documents and the power given to the executor/trustee, and for some estates, the estate tax situation. But for most estate, distribution of assets can begin on day one since there will be no estate tax due.
Creditors on the other hand, have a limited time to file a claim after notice is published. If you miss the window to file, you're out of luck. often when an individual dies during a civil matter, there is a high probability the civil matter will be dismissed at that point since "the guy isn't alive to defend himself" (assuming it was a suit against the deceased). Even though depositions move have been taken, courts are more likely to dismiss or encourage settlement then go forward. And a plaintiff may not want to go forward, since a matter against an estate/trust is a different ball of wax, and they may just take their marbles and go home with their tale stuck between their legs.
Post a Comment