Re: In re Doris M. Rich, Case No. P34215

Dear Judge Smith,

The annexed bank statements were obtained with great difficulty by Doris M. Rich. The reason for the difficulty is that Myrna Rich and Neel Rich have been stealing her mail and purloining her bank statements and therefore she has not had access to the information about her accounts.

I do not believe that anyone would read the enclosed bank statements without coming to the conclusion that Myrna Rich has been stealing money from her mother, Doris M. Rich.

The fact is that Doris M. Rich has monthly rental income of $5020 from all of her houses and property. Yet, since the date of your last court order, none of this $5020 monthly has gone into the bank account of Doris Rich, even though your court order specifically states that the money is to go into that account. Instead, the money is obviously going to the personal checking account of Myrna Rich. Note that Myrna Rich pays no expenses. All of the expenses of maintaining the household shared by Doris M. Rich and Myrna Rich are paid by Doris M. Rich. In short, Doris, the mother, pays all of the expenses, whereas Myrna, the unemployed daughter, takes all of the income.

This has obviously been going on for a long time. The difference here, however, is that because of your court order, Doris Rich no longer has sole signing authority over her own checking accounts. Instead, the signatures of Myrna Rich and Mr. Carmichael are sufficient. Previously, it was the sole decision of Doris Rich to decide whether to subsidize and support her daughter. Now, it is not.

I realize that the danger in my writing this letter is that the court will conclude that this proves that Doris Rich is in the need of the appointment of a conservator. However, the fact is that it is Myrna who is petitioning for a conservator. I have found out that Neel and Myrna paid equal amounts to hire Mr. O'Hara at their attorney. It was just a strategic decision to list Neel's name as the petitioner.

In short, Neel and Myrna are claiming that the very fact that they have been successful in stealing money from their mother in the past proves that a conservator should be appointed by the court so that this theft will take place in the future with the approval of the court.

It is clear that under the doctrine of "unclean hands", this entire petition should be dismissed and the full rights should be restored to Doris M. Rich.

Very Truly Yours,

Samuel H. Sloan

Copy to: John D. O'Hara
Beth Rhea
Robert K. Bolt
Robert Kroll
Albert M. Lavezzo
Carmichael Accounting
Arden Van Upp
Doris M. Rich