Preview
RETURN DATE: , 2019 _ SUPERIOR COURT
EDWARD WERNER COOK, : JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TOLLAND
V. : AT ROCKVILLE
GEORGE PURTILL, SUCCESSOR ADMINISTRATOR : FEBRUARY 28, 2019
APPEAL FROM PROBATE COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF TOLLAND-MANSFIELD IN RE ESTATE OF ADELMA
SIMMONS
COMPLAINT
On January 31, 2019 the Probate Court for the District of Tolland-Mansfield issued the decree
attached hereto as Exhibit |.
The plaintiff is severely aggrieved by this decree.
This decree was timely Moved to Vacate by the Plaintiff.
The lessons of history show this probate court either ignores or denies motions from the
plaintiff hence the necessity to appeal this ruling.
The court is attempting to seize personal property with due process and contravening the
constructional guaranties against such actions, and more specifically, Amendments 4, 8, and 14.
This decree will eviscerate the intent of the will in favor of other parties who should not have
any standing in the will and will prevent the decedent from archiving her final wishes.
7 The decree from the probate court is based on hearings, some of which were on the record and
some not.
8. The probate court erred in constitutional compliance on protection of property.
9. The probate court erred in law.
10. The probate court erred in fact.
The Plaintiff appeals from the decree of the probate court and prays that this court grant such relief as is
proper.
Dated at Coventry on February 28, 2019
\p--— PLAINTIFF
Edward Werner Cook, pro se
aon
ro
mo
2am
tae eo
=o.
Sey
4S
coe
=o
amy
TT OLVAGSOIZIG:
DECREE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
PC-160 REV. 3/03
COURT OF PROBATE
COURT OF PROBATE, Tolland - Mansfield Probate Court DISTRICT NO. PD25
ESTATE OF/IN THE MATTER OF
Certifie iu
Adelma Grenier Simmons, late of Coventry (05-031)
ee
Chief Clerl
At a court of probate held at the time and place of hearing set by the Court, togetl SO iamoes thereof, as of record
appears, on the petitioner's application for Addendum to Motion for Findings of Contempt, Imposftions of Sanctions and Further Orders/
Approval/Instruction re: Action by Fiduciary Motion for Order for Rights to Personal Property
PRESENT: Hon. JohnJ. McGrath, Jr., Acting Judge
After hearing at the court in Tolland, at which were present Mr. Cook; Attorney Purtill; Attomey Gano, and which hearing was
recorded and under oath, the court finds as follows:
1 Attorney Purtill, currently the court appointed administrator of the estate, has requested an order of the court with respect
to use and occupancy due from Mr. Cook for his residency and use of the estate’s real property located in Coventry,
Attorney Purtill testified that Mr. Cook was in possession of the entire premises during the period of time from May 9.
2018 until January 7, 2019. He further testified that the appraised property in accordance with the town records is over
$400,000. The property consists of sixty +/- acres, a home and outbuildings. Mr. Cook occupied or utilized all of the
property despite the fact that he had only a life use of the residence. Attorney Purtill offered into evidence a report from
the town assessor in which he offered the opinion that the fair market rental value of the property would be “in the range
of $3,500 per month”. The court accepted the report into evidence. Attorney Purtill testified that based upon the value of
the property he would estimate the fair rental value to be approximately $3,360 per month.
Mr. Cook objected to the amount of use and occupancy being requested but did not offer any evidence of an Sony
rental amount. He did not deny being in possession of the property during the period of time in question. 7
During testimony on this issue it was.disclosed that Mr. Cook did not in actuality reside on the premises dugg thie
of time. He had another residence in New Britain but still kept animals, livestock and many items of person: rope oe
the estate property. His actions demonstrate a deliberate attempt to delay the fiduciary’s efforts to take contro anda Ao
possession of the property and begin to clean the property which is reported to be in very poor condition. ThSprope eS
according to the fiduciary, was uninsurable due to the animals being present and the condition of the property ae
The court finds, based upon the totality of the circumstances that a fair use and occupancy to be paid by Mrggook ates
the time specified by the fiduciary is $3,500 per month. Mr. Cook is ordered to pay to the fiduciary the totalise and’
occupancy within ten days of this order.
The fiduciary has further requested an order from the court finding Mr. Cook in contempt of court for his failure to file a
final financial report for his activities as executor of the estate. prior to his removal by this court on May 8, 2018. Mr.
Cook has not, to this date, filed the report. He has now filed an “Objection to Motion on Final Accounting”. He explained
that his former attomey, Gary Attmore, who is now deceased, was working on the financial report at the time he died. Mr.
Cook testified that the firm at which Attorney Attmore worked was going to prepare the report. The court has received no
confirmation of this fact from the firm. No appearance in lieu of Attorney Attmore’s has been filed.
The court will request that the clerk contact the firm at which Attorney Attmore worked to determine whether the firm
remains. involved in this matter and if so when the court might anticipate the report to be filed. The court will inform
counsel and interested parties once the court receives the firm’s response, at which time the court will enter appropriate
orders or schedule a hearing, as it determines necessary.
The fiduciary has requested a determination by the court whether the contempt fine ordered by the court in response to
Mr. Cook’s knowing and deliberate refusal to comply with a court order, should become property of the estate or revert to
the probate court administration. The court finds that the funds are due to the estate and are much needed due to the poor
physical condition of the property as well as the expenses of administration and outstanding expenses for which the estate
is responsible.
DECREE
PC-160 TIOCVIASOIZIGGS
DECREE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
PC-160 REV. 3/03
COURT OF PROBATE
COURT OF PROBATE, Tolland - Mansfield Probate Court DISTRICT NO. PD25
ESTATE OF/IN THE MATTER OF
Adelma Grenier Simmons, late of Coventry (05-031)
4. The fiduciary has requested orders from the court in order to remove debris and personal property from the property. He
has outlined a detailed plan which the court adopts as reasonable with the caveat that due to the State of Connecticut’s
involvement, as represented by Attorney Gano from the Attorney General’s office, the state has a continuing interest in
the potential value to a charitable entity, if one is to be created, and therefore must be consulted with respect to the
destruction or distribution of property belonging to the estate. To further clarify this point, the court adopts the
recommendation of the Attorney General’s office that if any personal items or memorabilia is given by the fiduciary to a
family member, the estate or its successor, shall retain ownership rights including publication rights or resale rights,
In reference to the issue of personal property the court continues to be concemed about the rights to any intangible
property which may be owned by, or should be owned by, the estate, specifically but not limited to publications,
copyrighted material or other items including “Caprilands Press” or “Caprilands Institute”. Therefore the court orders that
Mr. Cook turn over to the fiduciary within fifteen days of this order any material he may have in his possession or under
his control, whether or not they are at the farm property or elsewhere, relating to any intangible or intellectual property
relating to Caprilands or to Adelma Simmons.
The COURT FURTHER ORDERS AND DECREES that:
The specific proposals set forth by the fiduciary as listed in number 11, “a.” thru “g.”, of his January 15, 2019 filing
entitled “Motion for Order for Rights to Personal Property”, including any amendments or modifications, if any, in his
later filing with the court shall be permitted. Mr. Cook shall cooperate with the efforts of the fiduciary.
All other orders of the court set forth above are confirmed and made an order of this court.
ow
cS
Dated and signed in Windham, Connecticut, this 31st day of January, 2019. Oram
ae
A)
Ue 55
oc
i 228
Pa
JohndéMcGrath, Jr., Presiding Judge
ERTIFICATION
in the Probate
The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the above decree was mailed on 0 1/31/19 to the following as provided
Court Rules of procedure, section 8.2:
Name and Address
—TTDCViASOI1ZI GOS
DECREE
PC-160
DECREE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
PC-160 REV. 3/03
COURT OF PROBATE
'
COURT OF PROBATE, Tolland - Mansfield Probate Court DISTRICT NO. PD25
ESTATE OF/IN THE MATTER OF
Adelma Grenier Simmons, late of Coventry (05-031)
Attorney George M. Purtill, Purtill & Pfeffer, P.O. Box 50, South Glastonbury, CT 06073
Eric Trott, Director of Planning and Development, Town of Coventry, 1712 Main Street, Coventry, CT 06238
Edward W. Cook, 15 Laurel Road, New Britian, CT 06052
Nelson Keith Simmons, 603 Meadowdale Road, , Altamont, NY 12009
Karen Gano, AAG, Office of the Attorney General, 55 Elm Street, PO Box 120, Hartford, CT 06141-0120
dk SZZS
do F. Riv era, CI Terk
J
eQuw
mS
co
QM
ovary
20 ¢_29
cme
4
os
ee =
Pa
DECREE TIDCVIASOIZICES
PC-160
Other Documents
All self-represented parties. must have an account with E-Services and submit an
appellate access form (JD-AC-015), unless exempt from electronic filing pursuant to
P.B. § 60-8. In addition, the following appellate documents must be e-filed unless an
exemption has been granted. Within 10 days of filing the appeal, you must file the
following papers pursuant to P.B. § 63-4 (a):
4 A preliminary statement of the issues intended for presentation on appeal
2 A transcript order form (JD-ES-038) properly completed by the court reporter with
an estimated delivery date or a certificate stating that no transcript is necessary
or a list of the specific date(s) of transcripts delivered prior to the filing of the appeal
You also must order an electronic version of the portions of the transcript deemed
necessary for presentation of the appeal. See P.B. § 63-8 (a)
A docketing statement in accordance with P.B. § 63-4 (a) (3)
A preargument conference statement in most noncriminal cases. See P.B. § 63-
4
A constitutionality notice. This document is required only in any noncri "Bre ay
cases in which you are challenging the constitutionality of a state statute
document should state (a) the statute being challenged, (b) the name and ad
of the party bringing the challenge, and (c) whether the trial court uphel
constitutionality of the statute.
a SS
hessber
Ee
482
he 2
so
A sealing order notice identifying the date, time, scope, and duration of the Bin 5
Se
order and including a copy of the order. This notice is required in matters in which Se
there is protected information, documents are under seal, or disclosure hasebeen BS
limited.
The appellee has 20 days to respond to these papers pursuant to P.B. § 63-4
Amendments to any of these documents, except the certificate regarding
transcript, may be made without the court's permission until that party's brief is filed
See P.B. § 63-4 (b).
Case Manager
After you have filed the appeal, you will receive a letter from the Office of the
Appellate Clerk with additional information, including the name of the case manager for
the appeal. Case managers, as officers of the court, must remain neutral and therefore
cannot provide legal advice for any case on appeal.
10
TTDCEVIASO)\ 2161
Preview
RETURN DATE: , 2019 _ SUPERIOR COURT EDWARD WERNER COOK, : JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TOLLAND V. : AT ROCKVILLE GEORGE PURTILL, SUCCESSOR ADMINISTRATOR : FEBRUARY 28, 2019 APPEAL FROM PROBATE COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF TOLLAND-MANSFIELD IN RE ESTATE OF ADELMA SIMMONS COMPLAINT On January 31, 2019 the Probate Court for the District of Tolland-Mansfield issued the decree attached hereto as Exhibit |. The plaintiff is severely aggrieved by this decree. This decree was timely Moved to Vacate by the Plaintiff. The lessons of history show this probate court either ignores or denies motions from the plaintiff hence the necessity to appeal this ruling. The court is attempting to seize personal property with due process and contravening the constructional guaranties against such actions, and more specifically, Amendments 4, 8, and 14. This decree will eviscerate the intent of the will in favor of other parties who should not have any standing in the will and will prevent the decedent from archiving her final wishes. 7 The decree from the probate court is based on hearings, some of which were on the record and some not. 8. The probate court erred in constitutional compliance on protection of property. 9. The probate court erred in law. 10. The probate court erred in fact. The Plaintiff appeals from the decree of the probate court and prays that this court grant such relief as is proper. Dated at Coventry on February 28, 2019 \p--— PLAINTIFF Edward Werner Cook, pro se aon ro mo 2am tae eo =o. Sey 4S coe =o amy TT OLVAGSOIZIG: DECREE STATE OF CONNECTICUT PC-160 REV. 3/03 COURT OF PROBATE COURT OF PROBATE, Tolland - Mansfield Probate Court DISTRICT NO. PD25 ESTATE OF/IN THE MATTER OF Certifie iu Adelma Grenier Simmons, late of Coventry (05-031) ee Chief Clerl At a court of probate held at the time and place of hearing set by the Court, togetl SO iamoes thereof, as of record appears, on the petitioner's application for Addendum to Motion for Findings of Contempt, Imposftions of Sanctions and Further Orders/ Approval/Instruction re: Action by Fiduciary Motion for Order for Rights to Personal Property PRESENT: Hon. JohnJ. McGrath, Jr., Acting Judge After hearing at the court in Tolland, at which were present Mr. Cook; Attorney Purtill; Attomey Gano, and which hearing was recorded and under oath, the court finds as follows: 1 Attorney Purtill, currently the court appointed administrator of the estate, has requested an order of the court with respect to use and occupancy due from Mr. Cook for his residency and use of the estate’s real property located in Coventry, Attorney Purtill testified that Mr. Cook was in possession of the entire premises during the period of time from May 9. 2018 until January 7, 2019. He further testified that the appraised property in accordance with the town records is over $400,000. The property consists of sixty +/- acres, a home and outbuildings. Mr. Cook occupied or utilized all of the property despite the fact that he had only a life use of the residence. Attorney Purtill offered into evidence a report from the town assessor in which he offered the opinion that the fair market rental value of the property would be “in the range of $3,500 per month”. The court accepted the report into evidence. Attorney Purtill testified that based upon the value of the property he would estimate the fair rental value to be approximately $3,360 per month. Mr. Cook objected to the amount of use and occupancy being requested but did not offer any evidence of an Sony rental amount. He did not deny being in possession of the property during the period of time in question. 7 During testimony on this issue it was.disclosed that Mr. Cook did not in actuality reside on the premises dugg thie of time. He had another residence in New Britain but still kept animals, livestock and many items of person: rope oe the estate property. His actions demonstrate a deliberate attempt to delay the fiduciary’s efforts to take contro anda Ao possession of the property and begin to clean the property which is reported to be in very poor condition. ThSprope eS according to the fiduciary, was uninsurable due to the animals being present and the condition of the property ae The court finds, based upon the totality of the circumstances that a fair use and occupancy to be paid by Mrggook ates the time specified by the fiduciary is $3,500 per month. Mr. Cook is ordered to pay to the fiduciary the totalise and’ occupancy within ten days of this order. The fiduciary has further requested an order from the court finding Mr. Cook in contempt of court for his failure to file a final financial report for his activities as executor of the estate. prior to his removal by this court on May 8, 2018. Mr. Cook has not, to this date, filed the report. He has now filed an “Objection to Motion on Final Accounting”. He explained that his former attomey, Gary Attmore, who is now deceased, was working on the financial report at the time he died. Mr. Cook testified that the firm at which Attorney Attmore worked was going to prepare the report. The court has received no confirmation of this fact from the firm. No appearance in lieu of Attorney Attmore’s has been filed. The court will request that the clerk contact the firm at which Attorney Attmore worked to determine whether the firm remains. involved in this matter and if so when the court might anticipate the report to be filed. The court will inform counsel and interested parties once the court receives the firm’s response, at which time the court will enter appropriate orders or schedule a hearing, as it determines necessary. The fiduciary has requested a determination by the court whether the contempt fine ordered by the court in response to Mr. Cook’s knowing and deliberate refusal to comply with a court order, should become property of the estate or revert to the probate court administration. The court finds that the funds are due to the estate and are much needed due to the poor physical condition of the property as well as the expenses of administration and outstanding expenses for which the estate is responsible. DECREE PC-160 TIOCVIASOIZIGGS DECREE STATE OF CONNECTICUT PC-160 REV. 3/03 COURT OF PROBATE COURT OF PROBATE, Tolland - Mansfield Probate Court DISTRICT NO. PD25 ESTATE OF/IN THE MATTER OF Adelma Grenier Simmons, late of Coventry (05-031) 4. The fiduciary has requested orders from the court in order to remove debris and personal property from the property. He has outlined a detailed plan which the court adopts as reasonable with the caveat that due to the State of Connecticut’s involvement, as represented by Attorney Gano from the Attorney General’s office, the state has a continuing interest in the potential value to a charitable entity, if one is to be created, and therefore must be consulted with respect to the destruction or distribution of property belonging to the estate. To further clarify this point, the court adopts the recommendation of the Attorney General’s office that if any personal items or memorabilia is given by the fiduciary to a family member, the estate or its successor, shall retain ownership rights including publication rights or resale rights, In reference to the issue of personal property the court continues to be concemed about the rights to any intangible property which may be owned by, or should be owned by, the estate, specifically but not limited to publications, copyrighted material or other items including “Caprilands Press” or “Caprilands Institute”. Therefore the court orders that Mr. Cook turn over to the fiduciary within fifteen days of this order any material he may have in his possession or under his control, whether or not they are at the farm property or elsewhere, relating to any intangible or intellectual property relating to Caprilands or to Adelma Simmons. The COURT FURTHER ORDERS AND DECREES that: The specific proposals set forth by the fiduciary as listed in number 11, “a.” thru “g.”, of his January 15, 2019 filing entitled “Motion for Order for Rights to Personal Property”, including any amendments or modifications, if any, in his later filing with the court shall be permitted. Mr. Cook shall cooperate with the efforts of the fiduciary. All other orders of the court set forth above are confirmed and made an order of this court. ow cS Dated and signed in Windham, Connecticut, this 31st day of January, 2019. Oram ae A) Ue 55 oc i 228 Pa JohndéMcGrath, Jr., Presiding Judge ERTIFICATION in the Probate The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the above decree was mailed on 0 1/31/19 to the following as provided Court Rules of procedure, section 8.2: Name and Address —TTDCViASOI1ZI GOS DECREE PC-160 DECREE STATE OF CONNECTICUT PC-160 REV. 3/03 COURT OF PROBATE ' COURT OF PROBATE, Tolland - Mansfield Probate Court DISTRICT NO. PD25 ESTATE OF/IN THE MATTER OF Adelma Grenier Simmons, late of Coventry (05-031) Attorney George M. Purtill, Purtill & Pfeffer, P.O. Box 50, South Glastonbury, CT 06073 Eric Trott, Director of Planning and Development, Town of Coventry, 1712 Main Street, Coventry, CT 06238 Edward W. Cook, 15 Laurel Road, New Britian, CT 06052 Nelson Keith Simmons, 603 Meadowdale Road, , Altamont, NY 12009 Karen Gano, AAG, Office of the Attorney General, 55 Elm Street, PO Box 120, Hartford, CT 06141-0120 dk SZZS do F. Riv era, CI Terk J eQuw mS co QM ovary 20 ¢_29 cme 4 os ee = Pa DECREE TIDCVIASOIZICES PC-160 Other Documents All self-represented parties. must have an account with E-Services and submit an appellate access form (JD-AC-015), unless exempt from electronic filing pursuant to P.B. § 60-8. In addition, the following appellate documents must be e-filed unless an exemption has been granted. Within 10 days of filing the appeal, you must file the following papers pursuant to P.B. § 63-4 (a): 4 A preliminary statement of the issues intended for presentation on appeal 2 A transcript order form (JD-ES-038) properly completed by the court reporter with an estimated delivery date or a certificate stating that no transcript is necessary or a list of the specific date(s) of transcripts delivered prior to the filing of the appeal You also must order an electronic version of the portions of the transcript deemed necessary for presentation of the appeal. See P.B. § 63-8 (a) A docketing statement in accordance with P.B. § 63-4 (a) (3) A preargument conference statement in most noncriminal cases. See P.B. § 63- 4 A constitutionality notice. This document is required only in any noncri "Bre ay cases in which you are challenging the constitutionality of a state statute document should state (a) the statute being challenged, (b) the name and ad of the party bringing the challenge, and (c) whether the trial court uphel constitutionality of the statute. a SS hessber Ee 482 he 2 so A sealing order notice identifying the date, time, scope, and duration of the Bin 5 Se order and including a copy of the order. This notice is required in matters in which Se there is protected information, documents are under seal, or disclosure hasebeen BS limited. The appellee has 20 days to respond to these papers pursuant to P.B. § 63-4 Amendments to any of these documents, except the certificate regarding transcript, may be made without the court's permission until that party's brief is filed See P.B. § 63-4 (b). Case Manager After you have filed the appeal, you will receive a letter from the Office of the Appellate Clerk with additional information, including the name of the case manager for the appeal. Case managers, as officers of the court, must remain neutral and therefore cannot provide legal advice for any case on appeal. 10 TTDCEVIASO)\ 2161