Florida Probate Whistle

How does probate fraud happen, and what is the burden of proof? To avoid probate fraud, you need to know what it is, how it may occur, and the possible types of people that may be motivated to act in this manner.

How does probate fraud happen, and what is the burden of proof? legacyassuranceplan.com/articles/wil...

2/2
This includes estate attorneys deliberately offering counsel to the personal representative (PR) and the beneficiary that prioritize the attorney’s own interest over the optimal welfare of the estate, the intended beneficiary, and, ultimately, harms the public’s interest.

Transactional conflicts of interest are apparent throughout the attorneys’ control of the estate administration.
Willing to manipulate facts and the laws to achieve financial benefits through actions that harm the beneficiary. This includes deliberately offering counsel to the PR and the 1/2👇🧵

Florida Justices Study Split from ABA Law School Accreditation Florida became the first state to signal a potential break from American Bar Association accreditation of law schools Wednesday, attacking the national legal group in a court order over its emphasis o...

Florida became the first state to signal a potential break from American Bar Association accreditation of law schools, attacking the national legal group in a court order over its emphasis on diversity.

news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/f...

#9
As per evidence, estate attorneys are *allowed self-dealing with the decedent’s assets during the probate and as such (10A)

8a (iii)
As per the evidence, estate attorneys are *allowed to and, therefore, willing to escalate to harmful retaliations against the decedent’s intended beneficiary in order to silence inquiries (more details later)

#8a
(i)instead of making up for the *confirmed inadequate care+omission throughout the will preparation by a sincere, transparent reply to all inquiries during the probate process re the decedent’s assets (ii) attorneys are *allowed to respond with baseless, legally unsupported objections!?+(8a iii)

#8
Estate attys are willing to exploit/financially benefit from their own professional omissions, which calls for the inquiries in the first place+associated predictable negative consequences *when they continue to *object to providing transparent information sharing to the intended fam-beneficiary

#7
During the probate and estate administration, there is a continued *allowed* display of disrespect to the grieving, named family beneficiary, by a blatant refusal of transparency with the decedent’s assets by the estate attorney and, therefore, the PR of the Estate (breach of fiduciary duty)

#6
The apparent disregard and care for the public, including vulnerable elderly individuals, is evidenced by the *allowed insufficient attention given during the estate planning with predominant focus on fees and invoicing, and then (see #7)

#5c
As per the evidence, estate attorneys have unrestricted freedom to manipulate the facts, the laws according to their self-serving purposes. This is against the public interest.
Facts are nothing but verifiable truth and facts should guide the pursuit of justice. (See #6)

#5b
Facts are nothing but verifiable truth. Based on the evidence, there is a need to establish new, improved standards to better (a)restrict misuse of legal authority, abuse of fiduciary duties feeding expensive legal conflicts and related emotional and financial harm to the public and see #5c

#5a
Facts are real information that lawyers should not be allowed to ignore during estate planning, the probate process and litigation.
Facts should guide the pursuit of justice even if it becomes embarrassing or inconvenient for a lawyer.
Facts are nothing but verifiable truth.
Unfortunately👉5b)

#5. The evidence suggest that the attorneys prefer maintaining legal ambiguities.
Pursuing new legal precedents is apparently undesirable and is *against the lawyer’s financial interest.

🧵3/3
(iv) abuse of legal authority against the public, exploit this susceptibility as the public depends on attorneys for that expertise and are limited to Florida licensed attorneys (v) there is a reluctance to capitalize on opportunities👉facilitate the advancement of laws in the public’s interest

🧵2/3
(ii) willingness to disregard laws, and surpress credible, and substantial evidence to manipulate the process and its outcome (iii) manipulate and ultimately deny the public’s essential right to due process (iv) abuse of legal knowledge and authority against the public and exploit this…🧵👇

#4. The comprehensive and substantiated information and evidence will show a variety of self-serving manipulative STRATEGIES being used to create significant unreasonable *barriers to the public’s right and entitlement to (i) a just, equitable, efficient probate process 1/3🧵

#3. lack of legal oversight…is extensively documented, underscoring the shortcomings inherent in this self-regulatory framework.
Permitting the continuation…poses significant risk to the public safety (waiting for the Florida Bar’s reply-secure an *independent whistleblower investigation)

#2. Concealment of mistakes escalating into intentional misconduct 👉 (i) deception (ii) withholding information (iii) manipulation (iv) incompetence or other embarrassing information accompanied by (v) denial of transparency (vi) refusal of investigation (vii) tampering (viii) spoliation of evidence

#1. The behind-the scenes gamesmanship and its negative impact on the Florida Bar’s ability to (a) engage with the public and (b) care to assess the worth or real damage inflicted by its members’ costly estate planning, probate, and estate administration services to the public

2/2Consequently, the public is also left without any means to pursue malpractice investigations or obtain related legal support (more details/facts will follow - in process)

As per the evidence, the general public is deprived of legal representation and safeguards against attorney misconduct. This problem is particularly evident in cases of apparent bias and deliberately harmful actions that consistently result in serious repercussions. Consequently…1/2🧵

2/2
l believe your self-regulatory organization is performing contrary to to the public interest. The absence of oversight is especially troubling as it compromises professional standards.

🧵/3To paraphrase Ronald Dworkin…again, if the lawschools do not teach ethics seriously, then they do not take the conduct and reputation of lawyers seriously either”
@americanbar.org
@flasupremecourt.bsky.social
@stanfordlaw.bsky.social
@harvardcorpgov.bsky.social
@emorylawjournal.bsky.social

🧵/2
…the profession has been unable to police itsself adequately because its disciplinary system is under-financed and ineffective. “

Teaching Ethics Seriously-Russel G. Pearce (p.739) 🧵
“In fact, the overwhelming consensus is that lawyer’s ethics are declining both in compliance with ethical codes and in commitment to the public good. At the same time, the profession has been unable to police itself adequately because 🧵1/

17/ Repertoire (evidence based)
Lack of ethics continued:
•place their own interests above their client’s and the public’s interest
•ultimately—also refuse to set new precedents👉evolve the laws in the public’s interest
(using *new facts if a later dispute is factually distinct from a previous case)

16/Repertoire (evidence based)
Lack of ethics continued:
•not following the law
•conceal, •manipulate
•suppressing facts if those are inconvenient, compromising and would require to question fellow lawyers
•willing to compromise facts & evidence 👇

15/Repertoire (evidence based)
🪧signs of *denied adequate representation:
(1) Poor communication( it is a professional responsibility but also strategically used 👉diminish fiduciary duties&responsibilities
(2) Incompetence (*allowed&used to offset&deny duties)
(3) Lack of ethics: misplaced loyalty 👇