No. 19-410

In Re Richard J. Fields

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2019-09-26
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Relisted (2)
Tags: civil-procedure civil-rights due-process estate-distribution fraud judicial-discretion legal-ethics mental-health probate probate-procedure standing testamentary-capacity will-forgery wills witness-testimony
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity
Latest Conference: 2020-01-24 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Should we ignore a forged initial because our law does not require an initial to make a Will valid? How about people falsifying a will by switching its pages?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED This case relates to a 9 million dollar estate of a 96 year old blind man and his family which had three * mental patients. Within one hour Judge Rita Mella in the New York County Surrogate’s Court gave all Sydney Fields’ estate to the nieces of his third wife . (she predeceased him). After that all the appellate courts rejected my appeal. That is why I am here . looking for justice. Below are questions raised in my Case. Thank you for your attention. ; @ Should we ignore a forged initial because our law does not require an initial to make a Will valid? How about people falsifying a will by switching its pages? Gi) Should we allow lawyers to conceal a person’s psychiatric problem before accusing him and causing him a big loss? (Nine Million , Dollars) (ii) Should we allow a judge to recognize a will-drafter’s affirmations rather than the decedents’ statements which were recorded on audiotape? : (iv) Shouldn't video and audiotapes be mandatory and required by law for Will drafters who ; provide service for blind people? Shouldn't we at least require their Wills being read aloud in front of the witnesses?

Docket Entries

2020-01-27
Rehearing DENIED.
2020-01-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/24/2020.
2020-01-02
2019-12-09
Petition DENIED.
2019-11-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/6/2019.
2019-11-08
Reply of petitioner In Re Richard J. Fields filed. (Distributed)
2019-10-28
Brief of respondent Diana Palmeri in opposition filed.
2019-09-20
Petition for a writ of mandamus filed. (Response due October 28, 2019)

Attorneys

Diana Palmeri
Jules Martin HaasJules Martin Haas, Esq., Respondent
Jules Martin HaasJules Martin Haas, Esq., Respondent
In Re Richard J. Fields
Richard J. Fields — Petitioner
Richard J. Fields — Petitioner