Sunday, October 15, 2017

Why is the Actual FACTS and Documentation not really a Factor in the Simon Bernstein Estate Case? Why is Robert Spallina and Donald Tescher NOT in Jail? Changes to a Trust? Deceased CLOSING estates? Judges who don't seem to care ???

FROM Donald Teschers filing to the Florida Bar AGAINST Robert Spallina. 

"Notwithstanding the foregoing, as I have adequately provided for them during my lifetime, for purposes of the dispositions made under this Trust, my children, TED S. BERNSTEIN ("TED") and PAMELA B. SIMON ("PAM'), and their respective lineal descendants shall be deemed to have predeceased the survivor of my spouse and me, provided, however, if my children, ELIOT BERNSTEIN, JILL IANTON and LISA S. FRIEDSTEIN, and their lineal descendants all predecease the survivor of my spouse and me, then TED and PAM, and their respective lineal descendants shall not be deemed to have predeceased me and shall be eligible beneficiaries for purposes of the dispositions made hereunder.

Source and FULL Bar Complaint Filing AGAINST Florida Estate Ex-Attorney Robert Spallina by Donald Tescher his former partner.  Why they are not BOTH in JAIL is beyond me.

"Simon Bernstein ("Simon") and Shirley Bernstein ("Shirley"), husband and wife,
were clients of Tescher & spallina, P.A. (the "Firm") and were the principal
responsibility of Spallina. On May 20, 2008, Simon and Shirley executed estate
planning documents (Wills and Revocable Trust Agreements) that were essentially
reciprocal in nature providing for sub-trust(s) for the surviving spouse with the
surviving spouse serving as trustee.

2.  Shirley died on December 8, 2010, and her estate is administered in Palm Beach
County, Florida (Estate of Shirley Bernstein, 15th Circuit Court, Case No.
502011CP000653XXXSB, Probate Division IY). Simon was the personal
representative of Shirley's estate and trustee of the Shirley Bernstein Trust
Agreement dated May 20, 2008 (the "Shirley Trust") and Trustee of the subsequent
continuing Family Trust for his benefit until his death on September 12, 2012.

3.   A First Amendment to the Shirley Trust ("First Amendment") was executed by
Shirley on November 18,2008. It is this document or its substitution that forms the
basis of this Complaint.

4.   Both the Simon Bernstein Trust Agreement dated May 20,2008 (the "Simon Trust")
and Shirley Trust contain a special definition of "children" and lienal descendants."
Their son, Ted Bernstein ("Ted"), and their daughter, Pamela Simon ("Pam"), and
their respective lineal descendants were deemed to have predeceased the survivor of

Simon and Shirley "for purposes of dispositions under this Trust." See Exhibits "A-

5.   Both the Simon Trust and the Shirley Trust contained a special power of appointment
over the sub trusts to permit a special power of appointment over the sub trusts to
permit the surviving spouse to change the distribution of the sub-trust assets among
Simon's and Shirley's lineal descendants.

6.   The First Amendment to Shirley's Trust, executed on November 18,2008, removed
a specific gift to Matthew Logan (Ted's step-son). An unexecuted copy of this
document is attached as Exhibit "B". It should be noted that after initial searches an
original executed document or copy of an executed document has not yet been
located. The only original executed First Amendment that has been located contains
a second change to Shirley's Trust removing the language, "and their respective
lineal descendants" from the definition paragraph referred to in number 4 above.
(Exhibit "C").

7.   At some time in the April-May 2012 time period it has been represented to me by
Spallina that a conference call was held with the participants including Simon, Ted,
Pam, Eliot Bernstein ("Eliot"), a son, Jill Iantoni ("Jill"), a daughter, Lisa Friedstein
("Lisa"), a daughter, and Spallina. During that call Simon advised all of his children
that he intended to leave the entire Bernstein estate in equal shares, in trust, for his
ten (10) grandchildren and that all of Simon's and Shirley's children were in

8.   Subsequent to the family conference call a new Will and Trust were prepared for
Simon and executed on July 25,2012. The Simon Bernstein Amended and Restated
Trust Agreement (the "Simon 2012 Trust") limited the definition of lineal
descendants to exclude his children but did not exclude any of the ten (10)
grandchildren so that as to Simon's estate, all grandchildren share equally in his
estate (Exhibit "D").

9.    The new will executed by Simons on July 25, 2012, (Exhibit "E") exercises his
power of appointment over the sub-trust(s) in Shirley's Trust in favor of his "then
living grandchildren" and to add those assets to the trusts created for his
grandchildren under the Simon 2012 Trust.

10.    Simon died on October 12, 2012, and his estate is currently being administered in
Palm Beach County, Florida, under Case No. 502012CP004391XXXXSB, Probate
Division DC Donald R. Tescher and Spallina were appointed the personal
representatives of the state of the successor trustees to Simon under the Simon 2012
Trust. Ted Bernstein was the designated successor personal representative of
Shirley's estate and successor trustee of the sub-trust(s) under the Shirley Trust.

11.    In January of 2013 a copy of the alleged fabricated First Amendment in the form
attached hereto as Exhibit "D" was provided by Spallina to Christine Yates, Esquire,
of Tripp Scott, P. A., as counsel to Simon's three (3) minor children. To the best of
my knowledge, there has been no other dissemination of this document other than it
appearing as an exhibit in an Emergency Petition to Freeze Estate Assets, Appoint
New Personal Representatives, Investigate Forged and Fraudulent Documents
Submitted to this Court and other Interested Parties, Rescind Signature of Eliot
Bernstein in Estate of Shirley Bernstein and More dated May 6,2013, filed by Eliot,
pro se. (the "Eliot Emergency Petition")

12. Although I do not have personal knowledge, I have seen photographs of my office
computer network screen that raise serious issues regarding when the alleged
fabricated First Amendment was prepared.

13. In connection with my self-reporting to The Florida Bar (Complaint No. 14-11693),
it may be alleged, although untrue, that I had knowledge of all of the events described
herein and/or that I breached my fiduciary duties as a co-personal representative and
co-trustee by not involving myself in this client matter."

Source and Full Document

Sunday, October 8, 2017

So Why Was Ted So Mad about this eMail and who looks at this post so much on my Blogs?

Oldie But a Goodie


Ted Bernstein eMail:

"Alan - I want Eliot's deposition scheduled as soon as you can notice him.  We can discuss the strategy once he is served. I want to go through each claim with you and/or John to determine the legal necessity to respond.  If any reply is necessary, the record must be straight with respect to each. 

This is a rambling, filled with contradictions that need to be exposed for what they are.  If John does not want to tangle with Eliot, remove John immediately. I am sorry to be this blunt, but I do not want to address the John issue again. 

If he is not 100% in support of me as trustee, including how I have protected myself with trust assets and will continue doing so as necessary, and being aggressive and forceful, if need be, with eliot, remove him as counsel.  

I do not want to spend another unnecessary dollar with counsel that is not going to zealously defend me as trustee and protect trust assets.

I cannot be more decisive re this and I say this with no animosity - simply for efficiency sake and my best interest. 

Eliot is in default of production.  Let's serve notice on him that he is in default.

I want Eliot to produce everything he has with respect to these cases, including:

Documents he refers to having that provide trusts for him and/or his children.

Agreements he has signed with my father and mother, together or separately.

All correspondence between him and my parents, together or separately concerning anything he has referenced in his ramblings through this one.

Anything and everything pertaining to iviewit, including his harassment of Jerry Lewin, Al Gortz of Proskauer and their firms. 

I want court proceedings, lawsuits, all correspondence to him and from him including paper and electronic, including video tapes and electronic interviews.

History of incidents at st. Andrews school.

All correspondence with bill Stansbury. Everything related to Feaman / Stansbury

All bank accounts, credit cards, sources of income, loans and gifts.

All correspondence with anyone he has shared estate details.

All correspondence of every type with: walker, puzzio, SAHM, Diana banks, Scott banks, NACLERIO, Dietz, Gefen and every person on his email distribution list. If he doesn't comply, I want all of them deposed.

Everything in which he has mentioned my name including emails, phone calls, letters, complaints to whatever agencies he has made complaints including police, federal, state, regulatory.

Everything and anything he is doing that we are not yet aware of such as online web site attacks.

Everything connected to crystal cox concerning me and anyone else he is extorting and harassing together with her.

Manceri filed production requests. If it is possible to hand eliot a subpoena for his deposition at tomorrows hearing, that would be great. 

I also want feamans deposition taken in connection with this case and what he is doing with Eliot. 

If mediation is scheduled and you feel this is better done after the mediation, I am okay with that. If it is not, let's take his depo.

How much is in Feaman trust account that has been stolen from us? 

I want an accounting. 

Has any money been used for Stansbury defense thus far?

If we are scheduled for mediation, will this be revealed? If we are not, I want to know ASAP what is in account, I want all statements and any expenditures. 

I'm sure I will think of more.

Ted Bernstein"
Originally Posted At

Saturday, October 7, 2017

Guardianship Town Hall Meeting in West Palm Beach Florida on September 26 2017

Eliot Bernstein at 56 minutes advising victims of Court Corruption to file criminal complaints against Judges and Attorneys involved in Court Orchestrated Predatory Guardianship.

AAAPG PBC Town Hall September 26, 2017 moderated by Dr. Sam Sugar

Thursday, October 5, 2017

JP Morgan mismanaged the administration of the estate of Max Hopper and got a 4 BILLION Dollar Verdict. JP Morgan also mismanaged the Estate of Simon and Shirley Bernstein out of Boca Raton, South Florida. JP Morgan is NOT above the LAW.

"Bank found by jury to have mismanaged estate of Max Hopper

JPMorgan Chase & Co. was ordered by a Dallas jury to pay more than $4 billion in damages for mishandling the estate of a former American Airlines executive, but the verdict will probably be knocked down on appeal.

Jo Hopper and two stepchildren won the probate court verdict over claims that JPMorgan mismanaged the administration of the estate of Max Hopper, who was described as an airline technology innovator in a statement issued by the family’s law firm.

Large punitive damages verdicts like the one in the Hopper case are often scaled back because the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled they can’t be disproportionate to actual damages. In this case, the jury awarded less than $5 million in actual damages.

The bank said it acted in a professional manner and in good faith on Hopper’s estate and is “highly confident” the jury verdict won’t stand under Texas law.

“Clearly the award far exceeds any possible interpretation of Texas tort reform statutes,” Andrew Gray, a spokesman for the bank, said in an emailed statement. “There has been no judgment entered by the court based on this verdict.”

Max Hopper, who pioneered a reservation system for the airline, died in 2010 with assets of more than $19 million but without a will and testament, according to the statement. JPMorgan was hired as an administrator to divvy up the assets among family members.

Putters, Wine

“Instead of independently and impartially collecting and dividing the estate’s assets, the bank took years to release basic interests in art, home furnishings, jewelry, and notably, Mr. Hopper’s collection of 6,700 golf putters and 900 bottles of wine,” the family’s lawyers said in the statement. “Some of the interests in the assets were not released for more than five years.”

"The nation’s largest bank horribly mistreated me and this verdict provides protection to others from being mistreated by banks that think they’re too powerful to be held accountable," Jo Hopper said in the statement.

The court’s verdict form shows jurors awarded $8 billion in punitive damages against the bank. Alan Loewinsohn, attorney for Jo Hopper, said in an interview there may be duplication of some of the damage findings. As a result, he said, the punitive damage award could end up being “somewhere between $4 billion and $8 billion.”

Loewinsohn said he asked the jury to take into account the bank’s worth and asked them for $2 billion in punitive damages. “I believe they used that figure for the other parties in the case as well,” he said.

Fiduciary Duty

The jury found that the bank committed fraud, breached its fiduciary duty and broke a fee agreement, according to court papers.

At the lower end of that range, the jury’s award would erase almost two-thirds of the $6.6 billion profit that JPMorgan generated globally during the second quarter.

And it would rank high among the largest sanctions ever levied against the bank -- somewhere between the $2.6 billion it agreed to pay in 2014 for allegedly failing to stop Bernard Madoff’s Ponzi scheme, and a $13 billion settlement it reached with government authorities in 2013 for its handling of mortgage bonds that fueled the financial crisis.

The verdict form shows jurors were advised to consider factors including “the net worth of JPMorgan.” Indeed, the bank has a stock market value of about $330 billion.


For Case Filings and Research Go To

FBI widens insurance fraud probe of South Florida attorneys


South Florida attorneys, take note: the FBI is watching.

And police sources said more arrests are coming as part of a multiagency investigation into alleged insurance fraud by personal injury attorneys.

The revelation follows the Sept. 6 arrests of five South Florida personal injury attorneys in an insurance fraud sting led by the Broward Sheriff's Office.

Ongoing investigation

Now, the feds have joined the fray and will lead a broader effort involving several law enforcement agencies.

"This is still an ongoing investigation and there will be more arrests made in the future," said Detective Kristy Frederick, the Broward Sheriff deputy who led the local investigation with Detective Mike Freeley.

Broward deputies teamed with the Fort Lauderdale Police Department, which is part of the Organized Crime Unit in the Sheriff's Office, and with the Department of Financial Services, National Insurance Crime Bureau, the Office of Statewide Prosecution and the Broward State Attorney's Office.

New details emerging

Meanwhile, new details are emerging about those already caught in the first wave of the sting.

"I have all five of the attorneys that were arrested on audio and video taking monetary kickbacks," Frederick said.

Arrested were attorneys Vincent Pravato and Mark Spatz of Davie, Adam Hurtig of Fort Lauderdale, Alexander Kapetan Jr. of Lighthouse Point and Steven Slootsky of Boca Raton.

Most face a slew of felony charges over allegations they paid for referrals from tow truck drivers, auto repair employees and others with access to car accident reports.

Prosecutors allege the lawyers then used these referrals with two medical practices — Margate Physicians and Broward Spine Associates in Plantation — to make fraudulent motor vehicle tort and personal injury protection, or PIP, claims.

Both medical practices closed last year, but Frederick said no charges are pending against staff.

One of the defendants, Hurtig, reportedly had a fee-splitting agreement that diverted some of his clients' settlement funds, according to court documents in support of the arrest warrant.

Hurtig, of the Hurtig Law Group, was admitted to the Florida Bar in 1997 and has no disciplinary history in the past 10 years.

Long-term fraud against insurance carriers

But investigators allege he participated in a long-term fraud against clients and insurance carriers that led to 14 felony charges against him. He faces 11 counts of patient brokering and one count each of money laundering, organized scheme to defraud and unlawful use of a two-way communication device.

"Attorney Adam Hurtig not only engaged in the illegal solicitation and brokering of his clients, but … he took the criminal activity further by misappropriating his clients' settlement funds," Frederick wrote. "Hurtig took part in an ongoing course of conduct with the intent to defraud his clients, whereby he engaged in an undisclosed split-fee arrangement with Broward Spine Associates and/or Margate Physicians, and covertly accepted a portion of his clients' settlement funds as kickbacks."

Hurtig allegedly used money from his clients' settlements to pay their medical bills, but Broward Spine Associates and Margate Physicians secretly returned half to the attorney, according to investigators.

Fort Lauderdale defense lawyer Bruce A. Zimet represents Hurtig. He did not respond to requests for comment by deadline.

Using PIP insurance coverage to enrich themselves

"This investigation revealed that several legal and medical professionals throughout South Florida have been using the PIP insurance coverage to enrich themselves by exploiting victims of motor vehicle accidents," Frederick wrote.

Investigators say in most cases, the personal injury lawyers paid accomplices $500 to $1,500 per client to refer "unsuspecting vehicle accident victims" to make insurance claims.

Related: Fraud is not a cost of doing business — and emerging tech is here to prove it

None of the arrested attorneys has any history of disciplinary action in the last 10 years, according to their Florida Bar records.

Slootsky, of Steven E. Slootsky P.A., was admitted to the bar in 1985. He faces 15 felonies: organized crime to defraud, unlawful use of a two-way communication device, three counts of solicitation and 10 counts of patient brokering.

Spatz, of Simons & Spatz, was admitted to the bar in 1987. The 13 felony charges against him: communications fraud, unlawful use of a two-way communication device and 11 counts of patient brokering.

Kapetan, of Wites & Kapetan, has been a member of the bar since 1999. He faces 10 felonies: conspiracy to commit patient brokering, unlawful use of a two-way communication device and eight counts of patient brokering. His attorney, Eric Schwartzreich of Schwartzreich & Associates in Fort Lauderdale, said Kapetan committed no crime.

Pravato, of Wolf and Pravato, was admitted to the bar in 1996. He faces three felonies: communications fraud, unlawful use of a two-way communication device and patient brokering.

The organized crime unit in the Sheriff's Office and the Division of Investigative & Forensic Services investigated several attorneys from May 2015 to December 2016. The alleged fraud reportedly yielded more than $521,000 during that period."


Sunday, October 1, 2017


Brian O'Connell Depositions in the Julian Bivins Florida Guardianship Case

209-1 - Brian O'Connell Deposition

362-18 - Brian O'Connell Deposition

362-20 - Brian O'Connell Deposition

316-1  Brian O'Connell Direct Examination

Click Below to Review Docket in

Ex Florida Attorney Robert Spallina Bar Complaint Documents; Why is Robert Spallina and Donald Tescher Not in JAIL? Where is the Authorities in Southern Florida Guardian, Probate and Estate Mass Corruption?

Florida Estate and Probate attorneys FORGE Documents to Close Trusts and yet face no Jail time and the Court continue to uphold Orders by rogue Judge (Judge Martin Colin) who enabled all of this.

Donald Tescher Files Bar Complaint in Florida 
against Robert Spallina
January 15th 2014

Judge Martin Colin Aided and Abetted these Acts in my Opinion. Why is there No Accountability in all of this? No Jail Time ? Where is the Oversight? Where are the Authorities?

Below is the Revocation filing for Robert Spallina, Florida State Bar

"B. The Florida Bar File No. 2014-50,885{15E)
1. Petitiorier added a paragraph to his client's Trust Amendment
after the client was deceased in an effort to comply with the
client's wishes.

2. The Trust Amendment was presented to the Court by another
attorney at which point Petitioner admitted to his wrongdoing."


Court Hearing Regarding Deceased Signing Documents

September 17th 2017 Hearing

"THE COURT: So final disposition and the
 order got entered that Simon, your father ‐‐


22 THE COURT: ‐‐ he came to court and said I
23 want to be discharged, my wife's estate is
24 closed and fully administered.

25 MR. ELIOT BERNSTEIN: No. I think it
1 happened after ‐‐

THE COURT: No, I'm looking at it.

3 MR. ELIOT BERNSTEIN: What date did that
4 happen?

THE COURT: January 3, 2013.

6 MR. ELIOT BERNSTEIN: He was dead.

MR. MANCERI: That's when the order was
8 signed, yes, your Honor.

9 THE COURT: He filed it, physically came
10 to court.


12 THE COURT: So let me see when he actually
13 filed it and signed the paperwork. November.
14 What date did your dad die?

15 MR. ELIOT BERNSTEIN: September. It's
16 hard to get through. He does a lot of things
17 when he's dead.

18 THE COURT: I have all of these waivers by
19 Simon in November. He tells me Simon was dead
20 at the time.

21 MR. MANCERI: Simon was dead at the time,
22 your Honor. The waivers that you're talking
23 about are waivers from the beneficiaries, I
24 believe.

25 THE COURT: No, it's waivers of
1 accountings.

2 MR. MANCERI: Right, by the beneficiaries.

3 THE COURT: Discharge waiver of service of
4 discharge by Simon, Simon asked that he not
5 have to serve the petition for discharge.

6 MR. MANCERI: Right, that was in his
7 petition. When was the petition served?
8 THE COURT: November 21st.

9 MR. SPALLINA: Yeah, it was after his date
10 of death.

11 THE COURT: Well, how could that happen
12 legally? How could Simon ‐‐

13 MR. MANCERI: Who signed that?

14 THE COURT: ‐‐ ask to close and not serve
15 a petition after he's dead?  "

Click to Read Full Hearing Transcript and source of above quote, the above starts on page 14

SEC Criminal Complaint Documents in Bar Complaint

Why is JUDGE MARTIN Colin and the JUDGES who protected him NOT in Jail? Why are Judges in South Florida Courts continue to protect Corruption and enable further victimization in the Florida Guardianship Program, Florida Probate Courts, Florida Estate Courts ?

Friday, September 29, 2017

Julian Bivins through his attorney J. Ronald Denman of The Bleakley Bavol Law Firm Tampa, Florida Files for a New Trial, it seems to pursue further justice in the Oliver Bivins Guardianship case. This New Trial fling is specifically in regard to Defendant Keith Stein.

Motion for New Trial as to STEIN Defendants

“Plaintiff, JULIAN BIVINS as Personal Representative of the ancillary Estate of Oliver
Wilson Bivins (“the Estate”), by and through undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 59, hereby files its Motion for New Trial as to only Keith Stein, Beys Liston Mobargha & Berland, LLP f/k/a Beys Stein Mobargha & Berland, LLP, and Law Office of Keith B. Stein, PLLC n/k/a Stein Law, PLLC (collectively, the “Stein Defendants”) and in support thereof provides the following Memorandum of Law.”

Source of above quote and Full Motion for New Trial as to STEIN Defendants. READ IT ALL

Memorandum of Law and TONS of Good Information for you to KNOW

A Look at the Complaint and  Allegations of  Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Professional Negligence regarding the professional services of Keith Stein.

“The Law Offices of Keith B. Stein, PLLC n/k/a Stein Law, PLLC (hereinafter,
"Stein Law Firm") is a professional limited liability company doing business in Palm Beach
County, Florida with its principal place of business in New York. Keith B. Stein is the sole
member of the Stein Law Firm.”

“Stein, Beys, and Stein Law Firm committed tortious acts in Palm Beach County, Florida which resulted in the causes of actions under this complaint causing injury to the Estate of the Deceased Ward in Palm Beach County, Florida. Stein, Beys, and the Stein Law Firm expected or should reasonably have expected to have consequences in Palm Beach County, Florida because they each derived substantial revenue from the legal services they provided Rogers and Kelly from New York to Florida.”

“In or about October 2012, Rogers also engaged Keith Stein of Beys to partition the
808 Lexington property (“New York litigation”).

Prior to initiating the partition action of 808 Lexington, Stein, who was not a
litigator, had only prepared, at best, one prior partition action in the course of his more than two
decades of practice.”

“143.  Stein represented both Rogers and Kelly in their capacity guardians for Oliver Sr.
with the full knowledge and understanding that Oliver Sr. was the intended beneficiary of his legal services.

144.   During the guardianship, Stein undertook to provide legal services to the guardianship. At all times Stein held himself out as competent in the areas of law for which he was retained to provide representation.

145.   Stein was required to exercise the same legal skill as a reasonably competent
attorney and to use reasonable care in determining and implementing a strategy to be followed to achieve the guardianship’s goals.

146.    In the course of handling legal matters for the guardianship, Stein negligently failed
to act with the degree of competence generally possessed by attorneys in the State of Florida who handle similar matters. The guardianship paid Stein a substantial amount of money for the sole purpose of representing the guardianship.

147. Stein was negligent and/or committed malpractice in the following ways:

(a) By failing to perform proper due diligence of the value of 808 Lexington and 67th Street,
Ocean Boulevard or the London Property to properly evaluate the fairness of the New York

(b) By failing to advise the guardianship regarding the clear discrepancy in the values of
the properties involving in the New York Settlement;

(c) By advising the client to enter into the New York settlement against the best interest of
the guardianship;

(d) By failing to advise the guardianship to take action against Oliver Jr. to collect rents
and taxes owed by the Estate of Lorna or Oliver Jr.;

(e)  By failing to advise the guardianship to ensure that rental income from 808 Lexington
was used to pay down the Beachton mortgage;

(f)  By failing to arrange for commercially reasonable substitute financing for the Beachton
mortgage, as opposed to preventing such an alternative unless it also included financing to
cover attorney’s fees for himself, his firm, and the guardians and their other counsel;

(g)  By failing to pursue action against Beachton to have its mortgage deemed satisfied or

(h) By failing to advise the guardianship regarding the usurious interest charged by

(i) By charging and taking from the guardianship excessive attorney’s fees;

(j) By taking large sums of money under the guise of retainers without accounting or
documentation therefore; and

(k) By failing to account to the Court or to Julian regarding the failure to comply with the
terms of the Global Settlement Agreement as the closing agent.

148. As a direct and proximate result of Stein’s negligence and/or malpractice, the Ward
sustained damages. “

“O’Connell, Crispin, Ciklin, Stein, Beys, and the Stein Law Firm (“Counsel for
Rogers”) represented Rogers, in his capacity as guardian for Oliver Sr., in connection with the
New York Settlement and thereafter.”

“O’Connell, Crispin, Ciklin, Stein, Beys, and the Stein Law Firm represented Kelly
(“Counsel for Kelly”), in his capacity as successor guardian for Oliver Sr.”

“Beys Liston Mobargha & Berland, LLP f/k/a Beys Stein Mobargha & Berland, LLP
and The Law Offices of Keith B. Stein, PLLC n/k/a Stein Law, PLLC are vicariously liable for the
negligence of their attorneys including Stein.”

“WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, JULIAN BIVINS, as Personal Representative of the ancillary
Estate of Oliver Wilson Bivins, deceased, requests the Court award damages against Defendants Rogers, O’Connell, Crispin, Ciklin, Stein, Beys, and the Stein Law Firm and such other relief as the Court deems just and proper, including an award of attorneys’ fees and costs against Defendants.”

Source, Amended Complaint, Read the Full Complaint to get an idea of STEINS role.

READ ALL OF THESE DOCUMENTS FOLKS. It will help you to get a deeper understanding of the Issues that so many Face in the Florida Guardianship Courts.

Entry 419, Motion for a New Trial, Memorandum of Law
STEIN Defendants Motion in Opposition of New Trial



Ongoing Document with Court Filings and information regarding this case.

Thursday, September 28, 2017

JULIAN BIVINS v. GUARDIANSHIP OF OLIVER BIVINS. the 16.4 Million Dollar Landmark Florida Estate, Guardian, Probate Case that Opens Up Details of South Florida Predatory Guardianship



Bivins v. Rogers et al


The Complaint

Original Complaint

Exhibit 1

AMENDED Complaint


Here is a Document with over 600 pages of court filings in the case that led to Florida Attorneys Brian O’Connell and Ashley Crispin receiving a 16.4 Million Dollar VERDICT against Them.

More Coming Soon

Florida Judge, Judge Martin Colin along with Probate Attorneys, Guardians and More involved in massive widespread Guardianship Abuse

Ashley Crispin and Brian O'Connell, Florida Attorneys funding legal action against Heirs with their own money it seems. Where is the Department of Justice on all this? Where are the Arrests?

Using Money from your Father's Estate to SUE You, his Children? Pretty Sick Indeed.

"Mr. O’Connell and Ms. Crispin also filed lawsuits against both of Oliver Wilson Bivins Sr.’s children and funded the litigation through the substantial assets of their incapacitated father."

Source of Quote

Wednesday, September 27, 2017

Guardianship reform advocates look to police for help

"After nearly three hours of grievance and outrage over Florida’s guardianship system Tuesday night, the group of activists and victims had seemingly gotten nowhere.

“It seems to me that we have a problem and no method to reach a solution,” said Dr. Sam Sugar, co-founder of Americans Against Abusive Probate Guardianship, who organized the town hall about guardianship in West Palm Beach.

But Sugar had an idea. He turned to panel member Anthony Palmieri, chief guardianship investigator for the Palm Beach County Clerk’s office, and asked: Would Palmieri arrange a meeting with Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw?

“The sheriff needs to hear what went on here tonight,” Sugar said.

Palmieri laughed and said he’d try.

If there was a common theme at Tuesday’s forum, it was that law enforcement has been largely absent as families say they watch local guardians bilk their loved ones’ estates.

“I would like to hope that we could sit down with Ric Bradshaw and tell him how important these issues are,” said attorney Greg Coleman, a former president of the Florida Bar who is now on the state’s Judicial Qualifications Commission. “Maybe he and his senior staff just don’t know.”

In other states, notably Nevada, police and prosecutors have made multiple arrests of guardians and lawyers accused of abusing their authority over incapacitated seniors. With complete control over a senior’s assets, guardians and lawyers can use the senior’s estates to pay themselves for unnecessary work.

Palm Beach County has not made any arrests.

The Palm Beach Post has reported extensively on cases in which family members of wards claim guardians and lawyers are taking advantage of their loved ones but few involved complaints made to law enforcement. The Post’s series, Guardianship: A Broken Trust, details conflict of interest and claims of favoritism involving former Circuit Judge Martin Colin and his wife, Elizabeth “Betsy” Savitt, who works as a professional guardian.

A federal jury recently awarded $16.4 million against the lawyers of professional guardians to a multimillionaire ward for running up “unnecessary and excessive fees.” The case came from Colin’s courtroom, where the judge lavished praised upon the lawyers. They are appealing the verdict.

State Rep. Emily Slosberg, D-Delray Beach, who was on Tuesday night’s panel, said it was “incredible” that Savitt is still allowed to work as a guardian.

“It’s unbelievable. And something has to be done about it,” she said.

But the problems with Florida’s guardianship system go beyond a lack of criminal enforcement.

“Really, the system itself just needs to be blown up,” Coleman said, and replaced with something that is “more fair, transparent and equitable.”

The Post’s investigations were done by reporter John Pacenti, who joined Slosberg and Coleman on the panel. He said others have suggested reforming the system by capping lawyer’s fees in guardianship cases and requiring lawyers to represent the ward instead of the guardian.

Being a guardian “used to be pro bono, charitable work,” Pacenti said. “It wasn’t about money. Somehow that changed.”

Only one person pushed back from the anti-guardianship tone of the event. Scott Greenberg, a past president of the Florida State Guardianship association.

He disputed, as he said, Sugar’s characterization of guardianships as a “fraudulent, unstoppable engine designed to steal people’s money.”

“There is unbelievable wonderful work performed by professional guardians across this state and across this nation,” Greenberg said.

Several members of the audience stood up, pointing and shouting at Greenberg about how bad guardians had ruined their families and their estates.

Greenberg then challenged Sugar to a debate on Greenberg’s radio show. Sugar accepted.

What The Post Found

The life savings of seniors under guardianship flowed into the household of a former judge and his wife, who is a professional guardian. The series prompted extensive changes in the way guardianship is conducted in Palm Beach County. Read the series at


More information