Sacramento Judge Gerrit W. Wood Condoned Corruption in Trust Case Says Decedent’s Daughter

 

Sacramento Superior Court Judge Gerrit W. Wood condoned misconduct in trust administration case says letter from decedent’s daughter

Jamie Lamborn
601 Exchange St.
Sacramento, California 95838

February 9, 2011

RE: The Johnson Revocable Living Trust
Case number 01PR00500/01PR00952

Honorable Gerrit Wood
William R. Ridgeway Family Relations Courthouse
3341 Power Inn Road
Sacramento, CA 95826

Dear Judge Wood:

At our last hearing, June 18, 2010, you instructed Carolyn Young [the trustee represented by Leland Ellison, Esq.] to update the beneficiaries in February 2011 on the one remaining asset in my parent’s trust, a five-acre parcel, and appear in your court again on March 11, 2011.

When you were appointed to the Probate Court, I hoped we would finally have an opportunity for justice.

I have pointed out the numerous unethical and inexcusable acts committed by Carolyn Young as trustee, with attached supporting documentation, in my past filings. You have allowed and ordered Young to stay in place, ignoring the facts I presented and the wishes of the creators of this trust, Mr. and Mrs. Clarence Johnson.

The two accompanying beneficiaries of my parent’s trust, Roberta Jones [my sister] and Jackie Powell [my step-sister, who is living in Oklahoma and is represented by Daniel Spector, Esq.], lack information and considering their social status, I do not hold them responsible for their insistence of Carolyn Young to remain trustee. As you are aware, no doubt, disgruntled siblings are common within the probate court arena. It is called “sibling rivalry” and is brought about, in most instances, from childhood jealously. The judges, representing the Sacramento Probate Court, have refused to recognize this obstacle for its obvious character and, to date, have chosen not to considered the wishes of the creators of this trust and rule accordingly.

The fact you, at our last hearing in June of 2010, allowed Carolyn Young not only to remain trustee, but also continue ignoring taxes and liens accumulating against the one remaining property in trust, in my opinion, is unconscionable.

After learning of the relationship between Tosh Yamamoto, representing me as trustee, and Carolyn Young replacing me as the conservator of my father and trustee of his trust, I sued Tosh Yamamoto. We settled in mediation after I had spent over thirty thousand dollars and I couldn’t afford not to accept his offer.

To my amazement, the court seems to believe what comes from an attorney’s mouth as truth, and continually turns a blind eye, in my opinion, intentionally benefiting the attorneys with predetermined rulings.

During the first hearings on this case, in 2001, I questioned the untruths being included in filings by my opposing siblings. Dave Richardson, Esq., explained to me, “Untruths are expected and accepted in probate filings.” I find this appalling, but true. This complication is needed to reach the intended outcome, which is to forgive any judge sitting where you are for their unjustified rulings, create obscene fees for the attorneys involved and create a reasonable excuse to put the unwarranted fiduciary in place who initiates the planned and intentional depletion of the estate.

Carolyn Young is currently under investigation by the Professional Fiduciary Bureau for alleged crimes she is suspected of committing. After several conversations with local attorneys, I find they too are aware of the large network and corruption involved with the cases appearing in your court room.

The investigation of Carolyn Young by Channel 13, Call Kurtis in 2008, exposed many of Young’s bad behaviors.

Documents filed in the hard copy of my parent’s case, I have found, have been removed or altered with the sole intent of protecting Carolyn Young.

My father, under the care of Carolyn Young as conservator, died a horrific death because he was unfortunate enough to own property and accounts valued, at that time, at near one million dollars.

The fact property in my parent’s trust was transferred back to Carolyn Young as “owner” following the date of sale should have been enough to cause pause for any reasonable court to question this person’s integrity and ethics.

The fraud and corruption I have personally witnessed involving my parent’s trust is not unusual. The Government Accountability Office completed their investigation in 2010 confirming this corruption is living and thriving within the probate courts across the United States.

This report states in part:

A federal investigation into elder abuse has found that probate courts nationwide are failing to protect vulnerable adults from exploitation by the guardians appointed to look after their health and finances. “The GAO is saying that there is a good-old-boy network with courts and judges in some states.”

Justice Clarence Thomas explained it in this simple statement:

Judges do not cease to be human beings when they go on the bench. In important cases, it is my humble opinion that finding the right answer is often the least difficult problem. Having the courage to assert that answer and stand firm in the face of the constant winds of protest and criticism is often much more difficult…The Founders warned us that freedom requires constant vigilance, and repeated action. It is said that, when asked what sort of government the Founders had created, Benjamin Franklin replied that they had given us “a Republic, if you can keep it.” Today, as in the past, we will need a brave “civic virtue,” not a timid civility, to keep our republic.

Justice Clarence Thomas neglected to consider judges “ceasing to be human beings” when it comes to acquiring the riches available by horrific abuses being directed at the vulnerable elders and their intended beneficiaries in our courts.

As creators of this trust, my parents wrote, “When we both have passed, distribute the remaining assets.” My father, Clarence Johnson, passed in 2002, yet Carolyn Young, with the support of the Probate Court, continues in her position as an inept trustee nine years later. Unbelievable!

I find it unnecessary to appear at future hearings to witness, what I see as, predetermined rulings and the ongoing corruption involved. It is my understanding, Carolyn Young and Tosh Yamamoto as a team, have established their secure standing in the eyes of the court. However, it’s my opinion; the court refuses to expose this corruption as witnessed by many citizens inside and outside the probate arena.

I remain convinced of the abusive and obscene activities supported by the decisions of the Sacramento Probate Court.

Jamie Lamborn

cc: Leland Ellison, Esq.
Daniel Spector, Esq.
Carolyn Young
Roberta Jones
Jackie Powell
Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauy
Professional Fiduciaries Bureau
Government Accountability Office

[Written by Jamie Lamborn]

Share and like this page on Facebook!

  3 Responses to “Sacramento Judge Gerrit W. Wood Condoned Corruption in Trust Case Says Decedent’s Daughter”

  1.  

    It’s a sad day when the court decides what to do with a life’s hard-earned money, how it will be spent, and I quote California Superior Court San Luis Obispo County Probate Judge Jac A. Crawford, “Now we will see who gets the lions share of the money.” In this case, the probate court misused their power in regards to the irrevocable trust estate and the trustor’s wishes and further refused to investigate easily proven, known perjury and further that is to the financial benefit of two of its bar members. The “court deemed beneficiaries.” Justice indeed. Or in deed. I see no point in going further with the system. As it turns out that one of the two judges hearing and making decisions on the case, Judge Martin J Tangeman, is appointed to the Judicial Counsel. After all the time, years, money spent, this named trust beneficiary who also happens to be in pro per has been trying to present the court with documented evidence and attorney witness to that evidence who now works for the same judge in the same court on the same case? And was she dissuaded from coming forward? After four years to further have faith in the system where that systems ethics are to be decided by same Judicial Council the judge lacking thereof judicial ethics now sits is beyond my sense of belief. Thank you for hearing me.

  2.  

    Probate has become a profitable business in the judicial arena. I have seen the exact same story in the San Luis Obispo, CA, Superior Court, Paso Robles Probate Division and by Judges Jaq Crawford and Judge Martin Tangman.

    Ignoring terms of trust instrument and ignoring evidence of wrongdoing by court-appointed trustee and attorney which appear to be the same wrongdoing they lied about in petition to remove former named trustee and some actions far worse. Far worse still, the judge continues making predetermined rulings that benefit the Cal Bar member without regard to tutor’s wishes or intent. The first five petitions filed were dismissed because of wrongdoing and not acted on. Then submitted again and making same petitioner trustee? Who has yet to meet bond requirement or receive letters of administration and has some the real property transferred by quit claim deed? Without court supervision? Give me a break. My friend, the deceased, is crying from heaven over the atrocity.

  3.  

    Those who have had poor experiences with this fiduciary may want to leave a complaint and/or a comment at the Better Business Bureau:

    http://www.bbb.org/northeast-california/business-reviews/estate-planning-and-management/young-carolyn-m-fiduciary-services-in-sacramento-ca-33013106

 Leave a Reply