True Story: Guardian collects $$ before Judge approves them

Who participates in guardianship/equity abuse?

To help determine more specifically who it is that participates in the problem of “guardianship/equity-­abuse,” the Committee will review and document -­- for the Commission and the general public -– actual people and organizations that routinely benefit from the problem.

The Adult Guardianship Study Commission has issued strict requirements for secrecy in all public discussions concerning guardianship:

New Mexico’s Cast of Characters:

Attorney A (“A” is for Avarice): Involved in all seven of the originally-listed cases in Message #4. In six out of seven of the cases, Attorney A is chosen by the presiding Judge to represent the court and administer court-seized assets, a large part of which is ensuring Attorney A invoices the court-controlled entity(ies) whose property has been seized by the court and will be sold off at discounted prices to ensure 1) there are only sufficient funds to pay Attorney A and related professionals for their services, which 2) leaves the rightful owners of the assets too impoverished to defend themselves from further court plundering. Attorney A is Darryl W Millet.

Attorney B (“B” is for Barratry): Involved in Blair Darnell conservatorship/trusteeship, RC Gorman Estate, Betty Skupaka conservatorship/trusteeship, Jack A Herrmann conservatorship/trusteeship, Sue A Smoot trusteeship. Attorney B’s primary responsibility in these five cases is to draft the Order for the Judge’s signature that names Attorney A to his court-appointed position(s) of power.  Attorney B is Gregory MacKenzie.

Attorney C (“C” is for Chigger, because once under the “skin” of your family/entity, it’s very difficult to get rid of): Involved in Blair Darnell conservatorship/trusteeship, Sue A Smoot trusteeship, as well as the so-far tightly-sequestered civil tort case brought by the Estate of Annette Rosenstiel, to which attorney Greg MacKenzie is opposing counsel. Attorney C is Dan Pick.

Attorney D (“D” is for Disingenious): Attorney D has engaged in what appears to be staged litigation occurring over the past 10 years involving Attorney A and Attorney C in multiple cases.

Attorney E (“E” is for Egregious): Attorney E, Henry “Hank” Messinger, only had one client, but in this case one client was more than enough to spark intra-half-sibling rivalry within his client’s family, following the death of his client, world-famous Navajo artist RC Gorman.

Guardianship Corporation A: Involved in many of New Mexico’s most wealthy guardian/conservatorships – Decades, LLC.

Judge A: Appointed to serve by then-Gov Richardson, Judge Denise Barela-Shepard signed Greg Mackenzie’s Order to appoint Darryl Millet to be the successor Trustee of the Sue A Smoot Revocable Trust. By no means is Judge Barela-Shepard the only District Court judge in New Mexico who has worked with this pair of attorneys, Millet and MacKenzie.

Judge B: Appointed to serve by then-Gov Richardson, Judge Alan Malott has permitted Darryl Millet to conduct over 18 months civil litigation (not guardianship related) in his court – creating the opportunity for the attorneys to charge untold amounts of fees — then finally dismissing the case thru Summary Judgement citing res judicata as the primary dismissal reason. Judge Malott is also the presiding judge in the Annette Rosenstiel civil tort case, in which the mere mention of ‘guardianship’ was sufficient to sequester the entire civil tort case and keep it from the public.  Judge Mallot also routinely has served with Attorney Greg MacKenzie (during the time Greg MacKenzie represented defendants in cases in front of Judge Malott), Guardian Nancy Oriola, and Guardian Mary Galvez in multiple professional groupsforums concerning guardianship.

Judge P: Appointed to serve by then-Gov Richardson, Judge Paternoster (formerly of the Taos District Court, now retired) could find no evidence of Attorney Hank Messinger ‘milking the case for attorneys’ fees’ even though Messinger had created a pitched battle between half-siblings by attempting to disinherit the youngest half-sibling because her parents (named in RC Gorman’s will to receive 1/4 share of his estate) were deceased.  Judge Paternoster listened to arguments for five years as to whether or not disinherit the youngest half-sibling, void the terms of RC Gorman’s Will, so he could divide the estate 3 ways, instead of 4, as RC Gorman wrote in his Will.  This is the power of Judges: allow their courtroom to be used for staged litigation that ultimately does very little to change anyone’s legal position, but instead enriches the attorneys by awarding the hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees that should never have been earned, because the matters should never have been subject to litigation — IF Judge Paternoster had done his job, and issued obvious rulings to divide the estate four-ways according to RC Gorman’s wishes as expressed in his Last Will & Testament — on the first day of probate.

  • Posts about WHO participates in equity abuse: