On September 12, 2014, Denise Rockett filed a complaint against Eugene Nigro, Esq. Nigro was reportedly negligent when handling legal matters in her late husband’s estate. Specifically, the complainant alleges that Denise, as Executrix of her late husband’s estate, was intentionally excluded from major decisions, not properly compensated, and deprived of control over their properties. Nigro allegedly breached his fiduciary obligation and violated Mass.R.Prof.C. 1.4(b), 1.7(b), and 8.4(c).
FACTS
On November 26, 2009, Denise Rockett’s husband, J. Hilary Rockett passed away. In his Will Hilary specifically named his wife as the Executrix of his estate. Additionally, Nigro and Edward J. Rockett, Hilary’s brother, had been assigned as Co-Trustees,
…show more content…
It seems that the feud has been perpetuated by Denise because she wanted control over the entire estate and Trust. Approximately eight different cases have been filed in order to dispute the issues that have arisen from the handling of Hilary’s estate.
Denise was willing to go to great lengths to disrupt the administration of the Trust. There is a report that Denise changed the locks at the Trust premises and disconnected computer servers, removed documents as well as shredded them. According to Edward Rockett, Denise is mentally unstable and even alleges that she is in bad health which resulted in a medically induced coma. Denise represents herself as being married to Hilary for 47 years when in fact this is not true. The couple divorced in 1984 and only remarried in 2008, shortly before Hilary died. She also claims that they worked together their entire marriage. It appears that Denise is trying to gain leverage or sympathy by claiming that they both worked hard to get the company to where it is today, this claim doesn’t appear to be true. In one of the many lawsuits filed between these two parties, the court found that Denise “had not been involved in the day to day operations of the Trust business” and her sons were reinstated as managers to “run the business/es consistent with the terms of the Trust
…show more content…
I am not sure how we could prove/disprove that she did not understand the meaning of papers that Nigro asked her to sign the evening before her husband’s death. She seems to be fairly competent in her complaint. If we decided to pursue this investigation we could potentially prove/disprove whether she received money quarterly from the estate by requesting that Nigro provide us with the information that was given to her attorney. Lastly, I suppose we could also follow up with Nigro as to who he thinks the helpful family member was that assisted Denise in becoming the Registered Agent and
Doris Reed bought a house for $76,000.00 from Robert King. Mr. King and his real estate agent failed to disclose to Mrs. Reed that a murder had taken place in the home ten years ago. Neighbors told Mrs. Reed about the murders and the stigma associated with the house after she moved in. The property appraised in the amount of $65,000.00 with reference to the history of the house. Reed sued King on allegations of misrepresentation for the purchase of the home seeking rescission and damages to terminate the contact.
Issue: Whether public policy forbids the recovery by a plaintiff partner to an unmarried but cohabitating or relationship, from the other partners estate, for services rendered to or benefits conferred upon the other partner through the plaintiffs work in the operation of a joint business when the business proceeds were utilized to enrich the estate of the diseased
Pagan writes a captivating story mingled with the challenges of the Eastern Shore legal system. This book gives a complete explanation backed up by research and similar cases as evidence of the ever-changing legal system. It should be a required reading for a history or law student.
Case name: Peter K. Dementas v The Estate of Jack Tallas, 764 P.2d 628 (1988)
A dentist fits several children with braces. The children are regular patients of the dentist. The results for some of the patients turn out to be unacceptable and damaging. There are children who have developed gum infections due to improperly tightened braces. Some mistakenly had their permanent teeth removed, while others have misaligned bites. A local attorney becomes aware of these incidences, looks further into it, and realizes the dentist has not been properly trained and holds no legal license to practice dentistry or orthodontics. The attorney decides to act on behalf of the displeased patients and files a class action lawsuit. The attorney plans to prove the dentist negligent and guilty of dental malpractice by providing proof using the four D’s of negligence. The four D’s of negligence are duty, dereliction, direct cause and damages.
...who violated Randy’s rights. With such little evidence from the Plaintiff, and the fact that Caruso is not a medical professional, she was not involved in the making of policies and procedures relating to medical matters. Therefore, Caruso did not act with deliberate indifference and was entitled summary judgment, because Plaintiff Parsons failed to provide sufficient evidence on Caruso.
Plaintiff Debra Denise Gregg filed a sexual harassment suit for violations of Title VII, and the District of Columbia Human Rights Act against Hay-Adams Hotel. She sought $1,000,000 in compensatory damages and $1,000,000 for damages resulting from emotional distress and $1,000,000 in punitive damages. Plaintiff Anthony Gregg brought the claim for damages resulting from loss of companionship and consortium in the amount of $1,000,000. The judges dismissed the case on the grounds that the plaintiff’s accounts lacked consortium and that the facts did not support her claims for emotional distress and punitive damage.
In order to seek justice for her perceived loss, Jones filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas against President Clinton and another defendant in 1994 (Motos,
Lisa Genova’s grandmother, who was 85 years old, had been showing signs of dementia for years; but she was a smart and independent woman who never complained, and she navigated around her symptoms. Her nine children and their spouses, as well as her grandchildren, passed off her mistakes to normal aging. Then they got the phone call when Lisa’s grandmot...
The Probate Court appointed Robert Wendland's wife, Rose, as conservator of his person under the Probate Code. Rose sought authorization from the court to remove the feeding tube, thereby starving him to death. Robert's mother (Florence Wendland) and sister (Rebekah Vinson) objected.
Nearly every aspect of law enforcement has a court decision that governs criteria. Most court rulings are the result of civil lawsuit towards a police officer and agency. However, currently, there is no law that mandates law enforcement driver training. When it comes to firearms, negligence by officers has resulted in a multitude of court rulings. Popow v. City of Margate, 1979, is a particularly interesting case that outlines failed firearms training by an agency. In this case, an officer chasing a suspect during a foot pursuit fired at the suspect, striking and killing an innocent bystander (Justia.com, 2017). The court ruled that the agency was “grossly negligent” of “failure to train” (Justia.com, 2017). As a result, nearly every agency requires annual firearms training and has written policy concerning the same. Officers must show proficiency in firearms use every year to maintain their certification. Many states even impose fines on officers for
Twomey, D. (2013). Anderson's Business Law and the Legal Environment, Comprehensive Volume [VitalSouce bookshelf version]. Retrieved from http://digitalbookshelf.southuniversity.edu/books/9781285696683/id/L35-1-7
James McDougal also owned a savings and loan association called Madison Savings and Loan. The Clintons' relationship with McDougals eventually involved them with Madison Savings and Loan. McDougal hired the Rose law firm in w...
Oct 1993. Retrieved November 18, 2010. Vol. 79. 134 pages (Document ID: 0747-0088) Published by American Bar Association
In the text Inheritance, many themes are repeated including inheritance and who will get the farm. To characters like Nugget and Lyle it is more then just about who will receive the assets and property, it is about keeping the farm in the family name and ensuring it stays successful. Nugget has the most right to the farm. His name is on the will, he has a spiritual attachment to the land, and morally he is the best suitor to run the farm. So who has more of right to the farm? Lyle works hard but is not the best farmer, Maureen is simply in it just for the money, Julia is bored with her current job and wants a change in her life, and Girlie believes she has the right to it because it is her land. William just wants the farm as it is his “family’s farm”. Dibs wants the farm out of spite to pay Farley back for his affair and to keep it away from his son Nugget. All characters have partial right to the farm as they have all contributed in some way. However, Nugget has the largest right to the farm spiritually, morally and by the law.