a document called:
"Testimony of Commissioner Dorothy L. McMath:
San Francisco Conservatorship Procedures"
Commissioner McMath was the probate commissioner in San Francisco for 10 years from 1998 until 2008...BSK (before sue kaplan). I could not locate a date on the document, but it is very useful and most informative.
As I read the thirteen page pdf file, I was once again reminded of Bruce Feder's blatant disregard for my grandmother's legal rights. Enough said. You be the judge...no pun intended.
Testimony versus Reality...
 |
| Icing on the Cake! |
What I plan on demonstrating is the dramatic difference between what the commissioner testifies to with regard to San Francisco's conservatorship procedures versus the cruel reality of the situation which is the fact that Bruce Feder allowed my grandmother's legal rights to be violated over and over again for nearly two years.
Here's the icing on the cake...he wants to be paid over $25,000 for breaching his fiduciary duties! This is a prime example of why I am a strong believer of pay based on performance.
Testimony - Commissioner McMath
Reality - Bruce Feder
"A contested temporary hearing often alerts the Court to the need for independent counsel for the conservatee. San Francisco practice is to appoint counsel for the conservatee immediately."
For months there was no record of Feder ever even being appointed to represent my grandmother. One day the order just miraculously appeared. Even the court clerks were mystified. The phony paperwork supposedly made Feder the court appointed attorney before there was ever a hearing. Normally, the appointment is made at the time of the hearing.
"Appearances at Hearing. (1) Conservatee. Except in three situations, the proposed conservatee must be produced at the hearing. Exceptions are: Conservatee is out of state when served and is not the petitioner; conservatee is medically unable to appear and a physician or licensed psychologist completes a declaration describing the disability; or the proposed conservatee tells the Court Investigator that he or she does not want to attend the hearing. Sec 1825. The court investigator's report quotes the conservatee's statement regarding his or her wish to attend. Sec 1826. San Francisco policy requires strict compliance. An allegation that the conservatee would not understand the proceedings is not sufficient to excuse the conservatee's appearance. If the conservatee does not specifically state unwillingness to attend, and the doctor's declaration does not support medical inability, the Court will require the conservatee's attendance and will continue the hearing if the conservatee is not present. The court may make an exception, however, if the conservatee is represented by court-appointed counsel who reports that a conservatee in a recent interview told counsel that he or she did not want to attend the hearing. The Court may accept counsel's request to waive the conservatee's appearance."
Catherine DeMartini never attended a conservatorship hearing even though her primary care physic an of many years completed the required court paperwork and stated that she COULD attend the hearing. Bruce Feder knows or should have known that my grandmother had that right yet he ignored her rights. It was not about my grandmother. It was and is about Bruce Feder being part of a group of attorneys and other so called professionals who steal from the elderly and disabled in San Francisco.
"if the petition is requesting authorization to administer dementia medication..."
I included this quote to point out that my grandmother was on HALDIPRO which is an anti psychotic medication used to treat Alzheimer's patients. At no time during the conservatorship did Bruce Feder make the court aware of this. Instead, he violated my grandmother's rights AGAIN. Neither conservator....thomas or adler....ever petitioned the court for permission to have anti-psychotic drugs administered to my grandmother which is just one more blatant violation.
"Role of Court appointed Counsel. Court appointed attorneys are expected to inform the Court of the wishes, desires, concerns and objections, of the (proposed) conservatee. If asked by the Court, the attorney may give his or her opinion as to the best interests of the (proposed) conservatee. San Francisco Superior Court Rules Rule 14.93.U.4.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, Bruce Feder did NOTHING to protect my grandmother. Instead, he turned the other way as thomas, orly, adler and siracusa broke every rule. The day of the mediation on October 19, 2009, Bruce Feder said that the April 2009 documents were "A JOKE." Shouldn't he have reported that to the court? He is driven by greed just like the rest of them!
"The San Francisco Probate Department relies heavily on court-appointed counsel to help parties, such as contentious families and conservatees opposed to the appointment of a conservator, find alternatives that will protect the conservatee's interest while maintaining the maximum independence and privacy of the conservatee and will relieve mistrust among family members."
Bruce Feder did nothing to help the situation. If anything, he made it worse. He never even met with my uncle! The first time I met him was at the mediation. He could care less about our family let alone relieving mistrust among family members!
"The order appointing counsel in a problem conservatorship may authorize counsel to take action, such as filing a petition to remove the conservator if counsel determines such action to be appropriate."
Remove the conservator? Never. They are all part of the same probate court scam! They are on the same team. None of them care anything about the people they are supposed to protect. It is all about lining their pockets!
Is it a surprise that the document disappeared from the file? DEFINITELY NOT!
