The public needs a free press to show how this accounting fraud works. Their signature cover is to divide and destroy the family they victimize.
>
				  <img src=

 

Home
chiefjudgesmith.com
Under construction

Divide and Conquer

Your family or your Country. The patterns are the same. It's uncanny.

2 -

1,475 - 816 = 659
545,820 - 26,917 = 518,903

Walls of confusion and conflict, such as the accounting entanglement 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97, are planted  to cover the disappearance of  big money such as 545,820.43 - 26,917.17 = 518,903.26.  Both are reported as IRD ("Income with respect to decedent.") to the IRS.

The $1,475 - $816 = $659 trail hides the $545,820 - $26,917 = $518,903 trail. Walls of confusion and conflict, such as the accounting entanglement 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97, are planted  to cover-up the disappearance of 545,820.43 - 26,917.17 = 518,903.26.

In 25 years, since 1992, not one authority has made any attempt to expose their accounting or stop them from using our innocent sister. Not one.

What authorities decided to protect the accounting fraudsters instead of the public? Why are the authorities silent? Why are Virginia Senators Mark Warner and Tim Kaine silent? Why is the FBI silent? Why is the Justice Department silent? Why is the Media silent? Is it fear of reprisals? If so, there is good reason. There is no known limit to the fraudsters' power and reach.

Not one authority has made any attempt to expose their accounting or stop them from using our innocent sister. Not one. What authorities decided to protect the accounting fraudsters instead of the public? Why are the authorities silent? Why are Virginia Senators Mark Warner and Tim Kaine silent? Why is the FBI silent? Why is the Justice Department silent? Why is the Media silent? Is it fear of reprisals? If so, there is good reason. There is no known limit to the fraudsters' power and reach. They are ruthless and above the law.








3 - Ignore Deed

My Deed as Trustee is ignored. Not recognizing my Deed as Trustee and not saying why blocked me from selling the Trust property and forced me to pay the real estate taxes until I ran out of money. My Trusteeship was sabotaged from Day One.



























4 - Lawyer fix, Come in

Whatever the fraudsters and their collaborators had our Mother come into the Court to do remains a secret. My best guess is that it is to sign a document prepared by Mr. White under tha guise of a legitiment procedure, that would be exposed at a critical time and be used to justify ignoring my Deed as Trustee. http://www.book8307page1446deed.com










5 - Divide Family

545,820 - 26,917 = 518,903

Secrecy is essential for the fraudsters and fatal to the family.

1992.03.30   (Anthony O'Connell to Edward White) (Copy to Jean Nader)
"I have a few questions I hope you would be kind enough to answer.
1. As you know, the Lynch Limited Partnership plans to pay my Mother's estate $545,820.43 on April 21, 1992. What is your best guess as to when and in what amount(s) you will make distribution(s) to the beneficiaries?
2. The license plates on my deceased Mother's Van expire in April of 1992. Virginia DMV requires a new title with the new owners name before they will issue new plates {The plates cannot be renewed by the co-executors signing for Jean O'Connell). The bank will give the co-executors the title if you simply pay them the interest on the loan. I understand the principal on the loan has been paid and I am guessing that the interest is something in the range of $1200 to $1400. Would you please pay the bank the interest so they will give you the title? What is your decision as to who gets the van and how much will it costs?
3. What is your fee for being co-executor of my mother's estate?
Yours truly, Anthony O'Connell "

 

1992.04.04   (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, copy to Jean Nader)
"I have received your letter of March 30, 1992.
The answers are: 
Question 1. As soon as the money is received, the tax liabilities evaluated and upon consultation with the Co-Executor.
Question 2. Paid. It is not my decision as to what it will cost you, though I have been informed that you know full well.
Question 3.  2 Y % of the receipts into the probate estate if approved by the Commissioner of Accounts.
I would call to your attention that on two separate occasions I drove to Sovran and spent a lengthy period of time on the question of the car loan. I did this in person since: I knew that you had the vehicle, that your sisters wanted you to have it, that the insurance and tags were due to expire soon and I did not want you to be inconvenienced. I could have done all of this by mail and it probably would have taken about three months, knowing the nature of the loan problem. I assumed I was doing you a favor.
Now I receive you letter asking that I "simply pay them the interest" I paid the interest and principal in one check on March 12, received the title on March 22 and mailed it to Mrs. Nader to sign over to you on March 23. Have you any suggestions as to how it could have gone faster?
The information of the commission was given to you previously by Mrs. Nader.
I do not know what your problem is, but in the future, please address all correspondence to Mrs. Nader. [FATAL]
I am trying to be patient with you, but I find that this estate is time consuming enough without having to deal with letters such as the last two that I have received.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"



6 - Use innocent

Mr White sets up my sister to take me to Court. There are at least eight setups in his letter. The CPA Joanne Barnes, who is doing the accounting for the Trust and for the Estate, can make Mr White's scenarios happen. Neither are held accountable. This letter is dated April 21, 1992, one day after the Estate receives $545,820.43 for the full payoff of Lynch Note 1.
1992.04.21.  Full payoff of Lynch Note 1. Our Mother's Estate receives a cash payment of $545,820.43 for the full payoff of Lynch Note 1.
1992.04.22 (Edward White to Jean Nader, in secret) (This is one day after the $545,820.43 payment to the Estate)

(Edward White to Jean Nader, April 22, 1992)
"Enclosed is an agreement which should satisfy Tony as to the car. It cannot be any clearer.
Also enclosed is a preliminary analysis of the estate tax, which should be close to being accurate. I do need to check with Jo Ann Barnes as to a technical question as to whether or not any of your father's trust comes into this. I do not think it does, but there have been many changes in the law since that trust was established. I will have to ask her to bill us for that advice and any other technical tax matters I am not comfortable with. I can do most of the rest of the tax work and save the estate some money.
The executors' commission shown on the analysis is not figured on the value of the realty; however it does not include the 5% commission on the receipts of the estate in addition to the inventory. In order to file that return and the subsequent Fiduciary Income tax return we will need an accounting from Tony from the date of his last accounting to the date of death. If he does not want to prepare it, I will not agree to any preliminary disbursal to him at all, and will seek your approval to file suit against him to compel the accounting, plus damages to the estate for his delay. Since that trust terminated on your mother's death, his final accounting is due now and not in October.
There will be no further explanations or written entreaties to him as far as I am concerned. He has the duty and he will perform it under a court order if necessary. Of course he will furnish that receipt.
The preliminary analysis contains three alternatives on Accotink at the bottom for your consideration.
In the event that we do seek a reduction in the assessment Tony will be given written notice that his prompt cooperation is necessary and that if he fails to cooperate that he is aware of the adverse consequences to the estate and is responsible for them.
As far as further steps are concerned, we have a lot to do. No gift tax returns were filed for 1989 and 1991 which will have to be done. The results of those gifts are factored in under "Unified Credit used for gifts 9,784".
The paper trail in the court and IRS is as follows:
File Estate tax by June 15, 1992
File First Accounting (16 months after qualification but can be sooner)
Ask for posting of Debts and Demands against the estate.
File Fiduciary Income tax returns for period 9/15/91-9/15/92, due January 1, 1993.
File Motion for a Show Cause why distribution should not be made. Submit Show Cause Order.
Request Executor's exoneration letter from IRS and Virginia.
Obtain closing letter from IRS and Virginia as to estate tax returns.
File 1993 Fiduciary tax returns (Sept. 1992-distribution)
File for Order allowing distribution.
Distribute estate.
File Final Accounting.
Normally distribution is withheld until the Order of Distribution is entered. As I indicated the creditors have one year to press claims against the estate. No prudent executor will distribute before that period, the entry of the Order of Distribution and the receipt of the tax closing letters.
Sincerely, Edward J. White
EJW/e
Encl.

JEAN M .O'CONNELL ESTATE TAX ANALYSIS  
   
CASH(?), NOTES, STOCKS & BONDS.  
   
ck Wash Gas Light Co. 8/1/91  
105.00
   
ck Signet 8/5/91  
39.00
   
ck A. G. Edwards 8/15/91  
2,346.63
   
ck Kemper Mun Bond Fund 4/30/91  
162.86
   
ck Kemper Mun Bond Fund 5/31/91  
162.86
   
ck Kemper Mun Bond Fund 7/31/91  
162.86
   
ck Kemper Mun Bond Fund 8/30/91  
162.86
   
Ck Nuveen Fund 3/1/9  
63.00
   
Ck Nuveen Fund 5/1/91  
63.00
   
ck Nuveen Fund 6/3/91  
63.00
   
ck Nuveen Fund 8/1/91  
66.50
   
ck Nuveen Fund 9/3/91  
66.50
   
ck American Funds 9/9/91  
424.76
   
Sovran Bank #4536-2785  
3.310.46
   
First Virginia Bank #4076-1509  
22,812.52
   
Fx Co. Ind Dev Bond  
109,587.00
   
FranklinxVa. Fund 4556.001 sh  
50.507.84
   
Investment Co. of America 3861.447 sh  
65.663.91
   
Kemper Mun Bond Fund 2961.152 sh  
30,396.23
   
Nuveen Premium Inc Mun Fund 700 sh  
6,450.50
   

Washington Gas Light Co. 200 sh

 
6,375.00
   
Signet Banking Corp 198 sh  
6,331.25
   
Lynch Properties note  
518,903.26
 
Travelers Check  
20.00
   
1988 Plymouth Van  
8,000.00
   
Am Funds 5/10/91  
326.60
   
USAA Subscriber savings acct  
25.10
   
SUB TOTAL  
830,599.10
   
OTHER ASSETS  
   
1990 Virginia Tax refund  
1,605.58
   
Debt from Harold O'Connell Trust  
659.97
   
Blue Cross refund  
88.78
   
SUB TOTAL  
2354.33
   
JOINT ASSETS  
   
Hallmark Bank #1107849600  
40,796.81
   
REAL ESTATE  
   
15 acres Fairfax Co. Va. 53.9006% interest  
323,403.60
   
TOTAL ASSETS  
1,197,153.84
   
   
   
DEBTS  
   
Colonial Emerg Phys (med bill)  
10.40
   
Fairfax Circ Ct. letters  
14.00
   
Jean M. Nader probate tax reimb  
1,269.00
   
Sovran Bank Car loan payoff  
1,364.97
   
Checks  
15.89
   
Commissioner of accounts Inventory  
61.00
   
IRS 1991 1040 return  
15,332.00
   
Va. Dept Tax 1991 return  
2,856.00
   
Jean M. Nader, hills pd  
8,559.00
   
Sheila Ann O'Connell-Shevenell, cem bill  
475.00
   
Co-Executors' Commission  
41,529.96
   
Commissioner of Accounts fee for Accounting  
1,048.25
   
TOTAL DEBTS AND EXPENSES  
72,535.46
   
JEAN M. O'CONNELL ES'I'A'l'E TAX ANAI.YSIS [page 2]  
   
TAX COMPUTATION
 
   
GROSS ESTATE  
1,197,153.84
   
DEBTS & EXPENSES  
72,535.46
   
   
ACC 75% ACC 60%
TAXABLE ESTATE  
1,124,615.38
1,043,767.48 995,256.94
TENTATIVE TAX 41% bracket  
396,893.53
363,744.67 343,950.21

Unified Credit before gift comp
192,800
   
Unified Credit used for gifts
9,784
   
UNIFIED CREDIT  
183,016.00
183,016.00 183,016.00
CREDIT FOR VIRGINIA TAX  
40,375.58
35,201.12 32.934.39
NET FEDERAL TAX  
  127.999.82
VIRGINIA TAX  
  32.934.39
---------------------------------------------- ------ ------------ ---------- ---------
TOTAL ESTATE TAXES  
213,877.53
180,728.67 160,934.21
   
   
   
   

 

7 - Lawyer frames me with the CPA's accounting.

1992.05.19   (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, c/o E.A. Prichard, copy to Jean Nader) aka "Blueprint"
"In your letter of May 6 to Jean you asked that I communicate with you with regard to the Harold O'Connell Trust.
I am trying to prepare the estate tax, and as usual in these cases, there are problems trying to understand the flow of debts and income.
I do have a few questions which are put forward simply so that the figures on the Trust's tax returns and accounting will agree with the estate's.
1. The K-1 filed by the Trust for 1991 showed income to your mother of $41,446.00. The Seventh Accounting appears to show a disbursement to her of $40,000.00 plus first half realty taxes paid by the trust for her and thus a disbursal to her of $1794.89. If these two disbursals are added the sum is $41,794.89. This leaves $348.89 which I cannot figure out. It could well be a disbursal of principal and not taxable.
2. The K-1 filed by the Trust showed a payment of $816.00 in interest to the estate. You sent a check in the amount of $1475.97 to the estate. What was the remaining $659.97? Do I have this confused with the tax debt/credit situation which ran from the Third Accounting?
3. On the Seventh Accounting "Income per 7th Account" is shown as $5181.71, but I cannot figure that one out either.
I am of the opinion that the estate owes the trust for the second half real estate taxes from September 15, 1991 through December 31, 1991 in the amount of $1052.35. This is shown on your accounting a disbursed to the heirs. Should this be paid back to the heirs or to the Trust?
I believe that the income received from the savings accounts from September 15 to the date the various banks made their next payment to the Trust (9/30 and 9/21) should be split on a per diem basis, since the Trust terminated on her death. This will be a small amount of course.
Are there any other debts which your Mother owed the Trust?
I realize that Jo Ann Barnes prepared this and if you authorize it I can ask her to help me out.
Please understand that I have no problem with the Accounting, I m just trying to match things up. In the long run, since the beneficiaries are the same, the matter is academic. Please send the bill for the appraisal whenever you receive it. Jean is filing the Fairfax form for re-assessment in her capacity as a co-owner in order to give us a better basis to get this assessment changed and to meet the county's deadline. It will state that the appraisal you have ordered will follow. I think this will be to all of your benefit in the long run.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

8 - Bar cover-up?

1993.11.01  (James McCauley to Anthony O'Connell)
Virginia State Bar
Eighth and Main Building
707 East Main Sheet, Suite 1500
Richmond, Virginia 23219-2803
Telephone: (804) 775-0500
FacsimUe: (804) 775-0501 TDD: 1804) 775-0502
November 1, 1993
PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL
Mr. Anthony M. O'Connell
654.1 Franconia Road
Springfield, Virginia 22 150
RE: In the Matter of Edward J. White
VSB Docket #93-042-0976
Dear Mr. O'Connell: This letter is in response to your certified letter dated September 20, 1993, which was received in this office on September 23, 1993. As you know, the basis for my dismissal of your complaint was the absence of an attorney-client relationship,between you and the Respondent. Nothing you have submitted to me under cover letter dated September 20, 1993 changes my conclusion.
The copy of Mr. White's fee statement shows an entry: "4120 OV A. O'CONNELL." The fact that you had an office visit with Mr. White does not create an attorney-client relationship. I note that the fee statement dated April 16, 1988 is sent to Mrs. Jean M. O'Connell and I believe that your mother is the client in this particular matter, not you.Your original complaint alleges that the Respondent handled your mother's estate incompetently. I do not believe you have standing to complain, because you are not a. client of Mr. White. The second enclosure, a list of your unreturned telephone calls to Mr. White, 'also does not change my conclusion. Unless you can show that you are a client of Mr. White, Mr. White was under no ethical duty or mandate to return your telephone calls. This complaint also boils down to.your word against Mr. White's as to whether he was representing you at the settlement on the real estate transaction. The Bar would have to prove your position by clear and convincing evidence, and1 simply do not see any clear and convincing evidence that Mr. White had agreed to represent you, or that he represented you by his conduct.
Finally, you indicate that Mr. White, over a period of seven years, has made defamatory and divisive statements which you consider to be far more damaging than the issue regarding the real estate settlement. The Code of Professional Responsibility does not proscribe defamatory statements by an attorney, and our office is not the appropriate forum to investigate or prosecute your claim. If you feel that you have been defamed or libeled by the Respondent, then your remedy is to file a civil action, but a Bar complaint is not an appropriate vehicle to resolve that issue.I am truly sorry that I cannot advance your claims .or interest, however, I must stand on my original decision to dismiss your complaint. I trust that you will appreciate my explanation, although you disagree with it.Very truly yours,
James M. McCauley
Assistant Bar Counsel
JMM/dls





 

Wrong premise

I wrote the Virginia Bar in 1992 to stop the lawyer from tearing our family apart in what is supposed to be a fiduciary relationship. The Bar used the premise that our family was already torn apart, and used that to protect the lawyer against accountability. Our family was whole. I wrote the Bar to keep it whole. I believe the Bar's words highlighted in purple create the false premise that our family was already divided when it wasn't.

Anthony OConnell to the Virginia Bar, in part
1992.12.03   (Anthony O'Connell to Virginia State Bar, in part)
"I am writing to register several complaints about Mr. Edward J. White, an attorney practicing in Virginia. Over the past seven years, Mr. White represented my mother on numerous occasions, he was hired by me on one occasion, and he is now acting as co-executor with my sister on my mother's estate. I am a beneficiary of that estate. For seven years I have tried to understand why I became alienated from my mother after trying to work with Mr. White in funding a trust created by my father's will.  After going through my mother's papers after her death in September, 1991, and initially experiencing that same alienation from my sister as she worked with Mr. White as co-executor, I now feel I understand these dynamics."


Virginia Bar to Anthony OConnell
Virginia State Bar
February 10,1993
Personal and Confidential
Mr. Anthony M. O'Connell
6541 Franconia Road
Springfield, Virginia 22150
RE:  In the Matter of Edward White J. White
VSB DOCKET #93-042-0976
Dear Mr. O'Connell:
This letter is in reference to your complaint against the above-referenced attorney received in our office on December 7, 1992. In addition, I acknowledge receipt of your supplemental correspondence dated January 26, 1993, received in my office on January 29. I have concluded my preliminary investigation of your original complaint and wish to advise you that your complaint presents no basis for further investigation by this office for the reasons I shall set out below.
The Respondent did not file a written answer to your complaint. However, Mr. White is represented by counsel in this matter, David R. Rosenfeld, Esquire, and I met with Mr. Rosenfeld and his associate in Alexandria to go over all of the factual matters related to this complaint.
Your complaint alleges that the Respondent served as co-executor of your father's estate along with your mother and that the Respondent allegedly withheld certain information concerning a trust which was set up under your father's will in which you were named as a trustee.
According to your complaint, you retained the Respondent in 1987 to handle a real estate closing and you allege that the Respondent appointed himself co-trustee on the note securing that transaction. Then, the day prior to closing, Respondent allegedly informed you that he was not representing your interests   in this real estate transaction. You have also claimed that the Respondent has handled your mother's estate incompetently.
With respect to your first complaint, it appears that your mother, rather than you, retained the Respondent for legal assistance in her capacity as executrix of your father's will. Apparently, your mother removed you from her will as a co-executor and nominated the Respondent in your place. However, none of these matters fall within the scope of the Code of Professional Responsibility particularly in view of the fact that you and the Respondent did not share an attorney-client relationship. 
Your father's will poured over into a trust which you were nominated trustee. By your own complaint, you admit that you hired another attorney x to look into the funding of the trust, i.e., what distributions the estate would make to the trust. It is my understanding that you came to Virginia to qualify as a trustee. Again, in respect to that matter, there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Respondent, Mr. White.
In the absence of an attorney-client relationship between you and Mr. White, Mr. White was under no ethical obligation to follow any of your directions or instructions nor was he obligated to communicate directly with you. His ethical duties regarding competence, promptness and communication were owed to your mother.
It is my understanding, based upon a reading of your complaint, that the Respondent and your attorney reached an agreement regarding the funding of the trust and the Respondent agreed to cooperate by providing your attorney with a draft of the final accounting of your father's estate.
Your complaint initially provoked a thought on my part as to why the father's estate remained open so long. However, as indicated in your complaint, Mr. White was not retained by your mother until 1985. Thus, while your complaint states that you were not aware of the fact that your father had appointed you as a co-trustee until 1985, and that your father passed away in 1975, the Respondent appears to have notified you of that fact after he had become involved in 1985.
You have also complained that your mother executed a codicil to her will removing you as a co-trustee and naming Mr. White in your stead. I find nothing improper about that particular matter as it was certainly your mother's prerogative to amend or modify her will and it was Mr. White's responsibility to follow her instructions in that regard.
Your second complaint involves an allegation that Mr. White undertook to represent your interests in a real estate inclosing in 1987. By letter dated December 28, 1987, you purportedly asked the Respondent to represent your interests in a transfer of property to the Lynch Properties Limited Partnership. You complain that the Respondent failed to notify you of the closing date which you fortuitously discovered from the purchasers just before the closing. In addition, you point out that the Respondent and another party were named as trustees on the Deed of Trust securing the purchase loan without your knowledge or consent. When you confronted Respondent about this, he advised that he did not represent your interests in this real estate transaction.
My investigation reveals that the Respondent did not serve as settlement attorney for this transaction, In fact, the closing was handled by Coldwell Banker, and the legal instruments for the transaction were prepared under the supervision of McGuire, Woods, Battle & Boothe. I have seen the real estate closing file which was delivered to Mr. Wright by the McGuire, Woods firm, and I am firmly convinced that Mr. White took no part in that transaction other than to perhaps provide informal legal advice to your mother. Your letter of December 28, 1987 is insufficient as a matter to law to establish an attorney client relationship unless there is some evidence that Mr. White did in fact undertake to handle the closing.  Finally, there is no ethical issue raised simply because Mr. White is named as a co-trustee in the Deed of Trust securing the purchase by the Lynch Properties Limited Partnership.
The third complaint involved an allegation that Mr. White allegedly withheld a $75,000 distribution until you agreed to obtain your own legal counsel With respect to this allegation, Mr. White, in his capacity as an administrator or executor of an estate is under no obligation by law to make a interim distribution to you. Whether an interim distribution is made is entirely discretionary and the law requires a distribution to be made only upon the filing of a final accounting. With regard to your allegations of incompetence and delay on the part of Mr. White in handling your mother's estate, I have determined that Mr. White has filed in a timely manner the inventory and first accounting for this estate. No delinquency notices or show cause summonses have been issued. The only possible area of neglect appears to be the late filing of Mrs. O'Connell's income tax return, however, I am advised that Mr. White paid one-half of the accrued interest to the IRS, and that no penalties were assessed. In addition, Mr. White timely requested an extension for filing the decedent's last income tax return and therefore no penalties were involved. As justification for the delay, Mr. White points out that he experienced some delay in obtaining the K-1 from you and your own complaint appears to concede that there was a problem with getting the K-1 to Mr. White.
Based on the foregoing, I see no basis in fact or in law to conclude that Mr. White has engaged in any misconduct in violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Therefore, please be advised that no further action will be taken on your complaint. By copy of this letter to Respondent's counsel, Mr. Rosenfeld, I am advising him of my determination.
Very truly yours,
James M. McCauley
Assistant Bar Counsel
JMM/ge
cc: David R. Rosenfeld, Esquire"

Virginia State Bar
November 1, 1993
Personal and Confidential
Mr. Anthony M. O'Connell
6541 Franconia Road
Springfield, Virginia 22150
RE:  In the Matter of Edward White J. White
VSB DOCKET #93-042-0976
Dear Mr. O'Connell:
This letter is in response to your certified letter dated September 20, 1993, which was received in this office on September 23, 1993. As you know, the basis for my dismissal of your complaint was the absence of an attorney-client relationship, between you and the Respondent. Nothing you have submitted to me under cover letter dated September 20, 1993 changes my conclusion.
The copy of Mr. White's fee statement shows an entry: "4120 OV A. O'CONNELL." The fact that you had an office visit with Mr. White does not create an attorney-client relationship.
I note that the fee statement dated April 16, 1988 is sent to Mrs. Jean M. O'Connell and I believe that your mother is the client in this particular matter, not you.
Your original complaint alleges that the Respondent handled your mother's estate incompetently. I do not believe you have standing to complain, because you are not a. client of Mr. White. The second enclosure, a list of your unreturned telephone calls to Mr. White, also does not change my conclusion. Unless you can show that you are a client of Mr. White, Mr. White was under no ethical duty or mandate to return your telephone calls. This complaint also boils down to.your word against Mr. White's as to whether he was representing you at the settlement on the real estate transaction. The Bar would have to prove your position by clear and convincing evidence, and I simply do not see any clear and convincing evidence that Mr. White had agreed to represent you, or that he represented you by his conduct.
Finally, you indicate that Mr. White, over a period of seven years, has made defamatory and divisive statements which you consider to be far more damaging than the issue regarding the real estate settlement. The Code of Professional Responsibility does not proscribe defamatory statements by an attorney, and our office is not the appropriate forum to investigate or prosecute your claim. If you feel that you have been defamed or libeled by the Respondent, then your remedy is to file a * civil action, but a Bar complaint is not an appropriate vehicle to resolve that issue.
I am truly sorry that I cannot advance your claims .or interest, however, I must stand on my original decision to dismiss your complaint. I trust that you will appreciate my explanation, although you disagree with it.
Very truly yours,
James M. McCauley
Asistant Bar Counsel
JMM/dis

*A civil action would mean taking my co-executor sister to Court also..They arrange an innocent family member to be co-fiduciary for this reason. They want family members contesting each other in Court. In 2012 the B&K law firm used our innocent sister to take me to Court.

See Mr. White's concealed letter of April 22, 1992, to my sister.


9 - Notice

There is no legitimate reason for the notice below.   Out of State people can be ordered to appear in Court for something like " No evidence will be taken at that time as this in only a hearing to establish a schedule for the orderly processing of the case." If they don't appear it is justification to enter any Order against them by default. I am ordered to travel from Arizona to Virginia for this while the accounting, which is the issue, remains concealed and ignored. My not appearing is justification for entering an Order against me.  To expose accounting fraud, expose the accounting. To keep accounting fraud concealed, keep the accounting concealed. Is this basically a generic notice designed to get a default judgment without looking at the evidence?


What is the "In Re: Harold A. O'Connell" about?  Why is my Deed not recognized?


What is the "In Re: Harold A. O'Connell" about?  Why is my Deed not recognized?


What is the "In Re: Harold A. O'Connell" about?  Why is my Deed not recognized?


What is the "In Re: Harold A. O'Connell" about?  Why is my Deed not recognized?


What is the "In Re: Harold A. O'Connell" about?  Why is my Deed not recognized?


10 - Complaint

COMPLAINT
COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Jean Mary O'Connell Nader, by counsel, and brings this action pursuant to § 26-48 and 55-547.06 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended) for the removal and appointment of a trustee, and in support thereof states the following.
Parties and Jurisdiction
1. Plaintiff Jean Mary O’Connell Nader ("Jean") and *Defendants Anthony Miner O’Connell ("Anthony") and Sheila Ann O'Connell ("Sheila") are the children of Harold A. O’Connell ("Mr. O’Connell"), who died in 1975, and Jean M. O'Connell ("Mrs. O'Connell"), who died on September 15, 1991.
2. The trusts that are the subject of this action are: (a) the trust created under the Last Will and Testament of Harold A. O'Connell dated April 11, 1974, and admitted to probate in this Court on June 18, 1975; and (b) a Land Trust Agreement dated October 16, 1992, which was recorded among the land records of this Court in Deed Book 8845 at Page 1449.
3. Jean, Sheila, and Anthony are the beneficiaries of both of the trusts and, therefore, are the parties interested in this proceeding.
Facts
4. During their lifetimes, Mr. and Mrs. O'Connell owned as *tenants in common a parcel of unimproved real estate identified by Tax Map No. 0904-0 1-00 17 and located near the Franconia area of Fairfax County, Virginia and consisting of approximately 15 acres (the "Property").
5. After his death in 1975, a 46.0994% interest in the Property deriving fiom Mr, O'Connell's original 50% share was transferred to a trust created under his Last Will and Testament (the "Harold Trust"), of which Anthony serves as trustee. A copy of the Last Will and Testament of Harold A. O'Connell is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
6. Mrs. O'Connell held a life interest in the Harold Trust and, upon her death in 1991, the trust assets were to be distributed in equal shares to Jean, Sheila, and Anthony as remainder beneficiaries. Although other assets of the Harold Trust were distributed to the remainder beneficiaries, the trust's 46.0994% interest in the Property has never been distributed to Jean, Sheila, and Anthony in accordance with the terms of the Harold Trust.
7. After Mrs. O'Connell's death, her 53.9006% interest in the Property passed to Jean, Sheila, and Anthony in equal shares, pursuant to the terms of her Last Will and Testament and Codicil thereto, which was admitted to probate in this Court on December 10, 1991.
8. Thus, after Mrs. O'Connell's death, Jean, Sheila, and Anthony each owned a 17.96687% interest in the Property, and the Harold Trust continued to own a 49.0994% interest in the Property.
9. By a Land Trust Agreement dated October 16, 1992, Jean, Sheila, and Anthony, individually and in his capacity as trustee of the Harold Trust, created a Land Trust (the "Land Trust"), naming Anthony as initial trustee. A copy of the Land Trust Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated by reference herein. The Harold Trust, Jean, Sheila, and Anthony (individually) are the beneficiaries of the Land Trust.
10. The Property was thereafter conveyed by Jean, Sheila, and Anthony, individually and as trustee of the Harold Trust, to Anthony, as trustee of the Land Trust, by a Deed dated October 16,1992 and recorded on October 23,1992 in Deed Book 8307 at Page 1446 among the land records for Fairfax County.
11. As trustee under the Land Trust, Anthony was granted broad powers and responsibilities in connection with the Property, including the authority and obligation to sell the Property. Paragraph 4.04 of the Land Trust Agreement states, in part, as follows:
If the Property or any part thereof remains in this trust at the expiration of twenty (20) years from date hereof, the Trustee shall promptly sell the Property at a public sale after a reasonable public advertisement and reasonable notice thereof to the Beneficiaries.
12. To date, the Property has not been sold, and the Land Trust is due to expire on October 16,2012.
13. According to Paragraph 9.03 of the Land Trust Agreement, the responsibility for payment of all real estate taxes on the Property is to be shared proportionately by the beneficiaries. However, if a beneficiary does not pay his or her share, the Land Trust Agreement provides: The Trustee will pay the shortfall and shall be reimbursed the principal plus 10% interest per annum. Trustee shall be reimbursed for any outstanding real estate tax shares or other Beneficiary shared expense still owed by any Beneficiary at settlement on the eventual sale of the property.
14. For many years, Jean sent payment to Anthony for her share of the real estate
taxes on the Property. Beginning in or about 1999, Anthony refused to accept her checks because they were made payable to "County of Fairfax." Anthony insisted that any checks for the real estat'k taxes be made payable to him individually, and he has returned or refused to forward Jean's checks to Fairfax County. Under the circumstances, Jean is unwilling to comply with Anthony's demands regarding the tax payments.
15. Anthony is not willing or has determined he is unable to sell the Property due to a mistaken interpretation of events and transactions concerning the Property and, upon information and belief, the administration of his mother's estate. Anthony's position remains intractable, despite court rulings against him, professional advice, and independent evidence. As a result, Anthony is unable to effectively deal with third parties and the other beneficiaries of the Land Trust.
16. In 2007, Anthony received a reasonable offer from a potential buyer to purchase the Property. Upon information and belief, Anthony became convinced of a title defect with the Property that, in his opinion, was an impediment to the sale of the Property. A title commitment issued by Stewart Title and Escrow on April 24,2007, attached hereto as Exhibit C, did not persuade Anthony that he, as the trustee of the Land Trust, had the power to convey the Property. Because of this and other difficulties created by Anthony, the Property was not sold.
17. Since 2007, it appears the only effort put forth by Anthony to sell the Property has been to post it for sale on a website he created, http://www.alexandriavirginial5acres.com
18. Since 2009, Anthony has failed to pay the real estate taxes for the Property as required by the Lhd Trust Agreement. Currently, the amount of real estate tax owed, including interest and penalties, is approximately $27,738.00.
19. Anthony has stated that he purposely did not pay the real estate taxes in order to force a sale of the Property and clear up the alleged title defects.
20. Since the real estate taxes are more than two years delinquent, Anthony's failure to pay may result in a tax sale of the Property. Anthony was notified of this possibility by a notice dated October 26, 201 1, attached hereto as Exhibit D. In addition to the threatened tax sale, the Land Trust is incurring additional costs, including penalties, interest, and fees, that would not be owed if Anthony had paid the real estate taxes in a timely manner.
21. In May 20 12, Jean, through her counsel, wrote a letter to Anthony requesting that he cooperate with a plan to sell the Property or resign as trustee. To date, Anthony has not expressed a willingness to do either, and still maintains that the alleged title defect and other "entanglements" must be resolved before any action can be taken towards a sale of the Property.
Count I: Removal of Anthony O'Connell as Trustee of Land Trust
22: The allegations of paragraphs 1 through 21 are incorporated by reference as if fully stated herein.
23. As trustee of the Land Trust, Anthony has a fiduciary duty to comply with the terms of the trust agreement, to preserve and protect the trust assets, and to exercise reasonable care, skill, and caution in the administration of the trust assets.
24. Anthony has breached his fiduciary duties by his unreasonable, misguided, and imprudent actions, including but not limited to, his failure to sell the Property and non-payment of the real estate taxes on the Property.
25. The breaches of duty by Anthony constitute good cause for his removal as trustee of the Land Trust.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jean Mary O'Connell Nader prays for the following relief:
A. That the Court remove Anthony Minor O'Connell as trustee under the Land Trust Agreement dated October 16, 1992, pursuant to 26-48 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended);
B. That all fees payable to Anthony Minor O'Connell under the terms of the aforesaid Land Trust Agreement, including but not limited to, the trustee's compensation under paragraph 9.01, and all interest on advancements by the trustee to the trust for payment of real estate taxes pursuant to paragraph 9.03, be disallowed and deemed forfeited;
C. That all costs incurred by Plaintiff Jean Mary O'Connell Nader in this action, including reasonable attorneys' fees, be paid by the Land Trust; and
D. For all such further relief as this Court deems reasonable and proper.
Count 11: Removal of Anthony O'Connell as Trustee of the Trust under the Will of Harold A. O'Connell
26. The allegations of paragraphs 1 through 25 are incorporated by reference as if fully stated herein.
27. The terms of the Harold Trust provide that, upon the death of Mrs. O'Connell, the assets are to be distributed to Jean, Sheila, and Anthony in equal shares. Notwithstanding the terms of the Harold Trust and the provisions for its termination, Anthony entered into the Land Trust Agreement in his capacity as trustee of the Harold Trust. As a result, upon the sale of the Property, Anthony can exercise greater control over the Harold Trust's share of the sale proceeds than if the parties held their beneficial interests in their individual capacities.
28, Other than its status as beneficiary of the Land Trust, there is no reason for the continuation of the Harold Trust.
29. On August 8,2000, an Eleventh Account for the Harold Trust was approved by the Commissioner of Accounts for the Circuit Court of Fairfax County and determined to be a final account.
30. Anthony repeatedly and unsuccessfully challenged the Commissioner's determination and requested, inter alia, that the Court and the Commissioner of Accounts investigate a debt of $659.97 that he alleged was owed to the Harold Trust by Mrs. O'Connell's estate. In these proceedings, the Commissioner stated, and the court agreed, that there was no evidence to support Anthony's claims that a debt existed and, if so, that it was an asset of the Harold Trust.
31. Anthony's repeated and unsuccessful challenges to the rulings of the Commissioner of Accounts and the Circuit Court in connection with the Eleventh Account, and his persistence in pursuing his unfounded claims to the present day, demonstrate that he is unable to administer the Harold Trust effectively and reliably.
                   [ See http://www.chiefjudgesmith.com/518903/COMPARE-12TH-ACCOUNTS-40p.pdf ]
32. It is in the best interests of the beneficiaries of the Harold Trust that, upon the sale of the Property, the net sale proceeds be distributed in an orderly and expedient manner. Based on Anthony's actions, he is not the proper individual to fulfill the trustee's duties in administering the Harold Trust.
33. The removal of Anthony as trustee best serves the interests of the beneficiaries of the Harold Trust.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jean Mary O'Connell Nader prays for the following relief:
A. That the Court remove Anthony Minor O'Connell as trustee under the Last Will and Testament of Harold A. O'Connell, pursuant to § 55-547.06 of the Code of Virginia (1 950, as amended);
B. That all costs incurred by Plaintiff Jean Mary O'Comell Nader in this action including reasonable attorneys' fees, be awarded to her in accordance with § 55- 550.04 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended); and
C. For all such further relief as this Court deems reasonable and proper.
Count 111: Appointment of Successor Trustee
34. The allegations of paragraphs 1 through 33 are incorporated by reference as if fully stated herein.
35. Jean is a proper person to serve as trustee of the Land Trust in order to sell the Property on behalf of the beneficiaries of the Land Trust, and she is willing and able to serve in such capacity.
36. The best interests of the beneficiaries would be served if the Land Trust is continued for a sufficient period of time to allow the successor trustee to sell the Property, rather than allowing the Land Trust to terminate on the date specified in the Land Trust Agreement. Each of the individual beneficiaries of the Land Trust is age 70 or above, and it would be prudent to sell the Property during their lifetimes, if possible, rather than leaving the matter for the next generation to resolve.
37. Jean is a proper person to serve as trustee of the trust created under the Last Will and Testament of Harold A. O'Connell, and she is willing and able to serve in such capacity.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jean Mary O'Connell Nader prays for the following relief:
A. That Plaintiff Jean Mary O'Connell Nader be appointed as successor trustee under the aforesaid Land Trust Agreement, with the direction to sell the Property upon such terms and conditions as this Court deems reasonable and appropriate, including, but not limited to, fixing a reasonable amount as compensation of the successor trustee for her services;
B. That the term of the Land Trust be continued for a reasonable time in order to allow for the sale of the Property;
C. That Plaintiff Jean Mary O'Connell Nader be appointed as successor trustee under the Last Will and Testament of Harold A. O'Connell for all purposes, including distribution of the net proceeds of the sale of the Property that are payable to such trust;
D. That all costs incurred by Plaintiff Jean Mary O'Connell Nader in this action, including reasonable attorneys' fees, be paid by the Land Trust; and E. For all such further relief as this Court deems reasonable and proper.


11 - False account

12
Order


IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF FAIRFAX COUNTY
JEAN MARY O'CONNELL NADER, Plantiff
v
ANTHONY MINER O'CONNELL,
Individually and in his capacity as
Trustee under a Land Trust Agreement
Dated October 16, 1992 and as
Trustee under the Last Will and
Testament of Harold A. O'Connell, et al.
Defendants. .
Case No. 2012-13064
ORDER
THIS CAUSE eame on.to be heard upon the motion of the Plaintiff, Jean MaryO'Connell Nader, by counsel, for summary judgment pursuant to Va. Sup. Ct. Rule 3:20; upon the reply to the motion filed by Sheila Ann O'Connell, pro se; and upon the argument of counsel; and
IT APPEARING TO THE COURT as follows:
1. The material facts set forth in the Complaint filed by Plaintiff in this action are
deemed to be admitted by Defendant Anthony M. O'Connelll pursuant to Va. Sup. Ct. Rule
1:4(e);- based on the failure of Defendant Anthony M. O'Connell to deny such facts in the
responsive pleading filed by him, entitled "Response to Summons Served on September 8,
2012.

2. In her Answer to the Complaint and Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment, the remaining party-in~interest, Defendant Sheila Aim O'Connell, agrees with the facts set forth inthe Complaint and the relief requested by Plaintiff.
3. Because there aft no material facts in dispute in this action and the facts alleged in the Complaint support the relief requested therein, summary judgment pursuant to Va. Sup. Ct. Rule. 3:20 on all counts IUleged in Plaintiffs Complaint is appropriate.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:
A. That judgment in favor of Plaintiff Jean Mary O'ConnellNader as to Count l ofthe Complaint be, and hereby is, granted; that Anthony Miner O'Connell is hereby removed as trustee under the Land Trust Agreement dated October 16, 1992, pursuant to Va. Code § ·64.21405(formerly Va. Code § 26-48), effective immediately; and that all fees payable to AnthonyMinor O'Connell under the terms ofthe Land Trust Agreement, including'but not limited to, the
trustee's compensation under paragraph 9~01, and aU interest on advancements by the trustee to .
the trust for payment ofreal estate taxes pursuant to paragraph 9.03; are hereby disallowed and deemed forfeited;
B.'That judgment in favor of Plaintiff Jean Mary O'Connell Nader as to Count II ofthe Complaint be, and hereby is,granted; that Anthony Minor O'Connell is hereby reD;1oved astrustee of the trust created under the Last Will and Testament of Harold A. O'Connell, pursuantto Va. Code § 64.2:-759 (formerly Va. Code § 55-547.06), effective immediately;
C. That judgment in favor ofPlaiIitiffas to Count III ofthe Complaint be, and hereby is, granted; that PlaintiffJean Mary O'Connell Nader is hereby appointed as successortrustee under the Land Trust Agreement and as trustee ofthe trust under the Last Will and Testament ofHarold A. O'Connell; that the term ofthe Land Trust Agreementis hereby continued until further Order of this Court or until the real property held under the Land Trust is sold and final distribution of the net proceeds is made to the trust's beneficiaries, whichever occurs first; and that Plaintiff, as successor trustee Under the Land Trust Agreement, shall proceed forthwith to sell the real property held by such trust as soon as reasonably practicable upon such terms and conditions as she deems appropriate and consistent with her fiduciary
duties; and
D. That Plaintiff is hereby awarded wonable attorney's fees and costs in thi action in the amount of $ l7,504.12, to be paid from the Land Trust at such time as fundsbecome available.
ENTERED this 25th day of January, 2013.
I ASK FOR THIS:
BLANKINGSHIP & KEITH, P. C.·
4020 University Drive .
Suite 300
Fairfax, VA 22030
703~691-1235
FAX: 703-691-3913
By:
Elizabeth Chichester Morrogh, VSB No. 25112
BVMorrogh@bklawva.com
Jennifer L. McCammon, VSB No. 77034
JMcCammon@bklawva.com
Counsel for Plaintiff
A copy teste:
John T. Frey, Clerk
By: ? ? ? ? ? Deputy Clerk
Date: 1-25-2013
Original retained in the office of
the Clerk of the Circuit Court of
Fairfax County, Vlrginia


12 - Seventeen of my responses disappeared after being received by the Court

 1   www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/1-545820-23p.pdf
 2   www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/2-bk467p191-8p.pdf
 3   www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/3-blueprint4p.pdf
 4   www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/4-canweconnectthedots2p.pdf
 5   www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/5-codeofconduct18p.pdf
 6   www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/6-commitments-Individually8p.pdf
 7   www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/7-compute-tax-test35p.pdf
 8   www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/8-exceptions1994disappeared.pdf
 9   www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/9-exceptions2000disappeared.pdf
10  www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/10-overview72p.pdf                          Includes Deed
11  www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/11-percentages12p.pdf            
12  www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/12-precedence17p.pdf
13  www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/13-tax-records94p.pdf
14  www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/14-trust-deed-invisible175p.pdf       Includes complete Deed
15  www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/15-trust-documents42p.pdf              Includes complete Deed
16  www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/16-unknown14p.pdf                         Includes first 3 pages of Deed
17  www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/17-usingIRS15p.p
 all  www.chiefjudgesmith.com/evidence/all-18responses714p.pdf                 Includes multiple copies of Deed   


http://www.659trail.com     
http://www.alexandriavirginia15acres.com   
http://www.book467page191money.com              
http://www.book8307page1446deed.com   
http://www.canweconnectthedots.com                              Best reference     
http://www.canwelookattheevidence.com 
http://www.chiefjudgesmith.com                 
http://www.chiefjudgetrumbo.com
http://www.farm139.com
http://www.fbispringfield.com
http://www.followthetrails.com
http://www.followthetrails2013.com
http://www.inreharoldaoconnell.com
http://www.judgesfairfaxcounty.com      
http://www.removethesecrecy.com  
http://www.stoppedmedicine.com     
http://www.tucsonva.com                             
http://www.unknownlien.com