Comment #: NJ4920
Rating:6.6
Comments:
Judge Mendez ruled that my mother was domociled in New Jersey and not Michigan and, thus, New Jersey was the venue for probating her estate.
Intention is the standard of both states to estabilsh domicility.
My mother signed two rental contracts with the retirement community in which she continuously resided for close to a decade. She had then signed a contract with a assisted living facility where she would shortly relocate. She left the state of MI only twice in her final years: once to a wedding of her grandson in VA with a short stop over in NJ and then a year later to a graduation in IN. These claims were supported by EZPass records.
Years earlier, she expressed her desire return back to MI after the sale of her northern NJ home in an email declaring: "Redford, Redford here I come!" (Redford, MI that is). In this email she specifically explained that she would sell her other NJ as soon as possible fearing Obama now elected would raise taxes. In another email, my brother declared that his mother's NJ house was no place she could reside. Subsequently, water damage made the house even more uninhabitable.
My mother could not have, nor did she ever reside in this house. All of her doctors, churches, friends and activities took place in Michigan.
Although Sylvia should have never operated a motor vehicle, out of kindness that she would not feel "trapped in MI" I did not insist she turn in this right she held for most of her life for a MI identification.
Judge Mendez equivocated Sylvia's long standing residence in MI with visits to her other children, neglecting that these were brief, years ago and ended with her return to Mi, not NJ as was the case with her attending the wedding.
This deliberate dismissal of the standard of intention as expressed by both my mother and my brother for the application of possession of a legacy driving priveledge to assert domicile in a house documented to be uninhabitable is a rediculous standard which if put forward reversed as a means to avoid NJ domicicity, and, thus, NJ income taxes, I expect would be soundly rejected.
Regardless, as the Will was executed on Michigan with all witnesses located there, one would think the court would favor MI probate out of a sense of feasibility and justice.
Furhtermore, Jidge Mendez accepted the blatant lie of the court Appointed executor Mr. Richard King that my mother's home was in dire condition and required immediate sale. In my opinion, due process commands that the assets of the estate be protected until the determination of ownership as a house sold cannot then be repurchased and, thus, prejudices the court against this bequest and the Will as acceptance would prove embarassing. Mr.Richard King then did not engage a lawn service and refused to repay me for his agreeded to lawn service I hired and then sold the house for easily less than $100,000 of its comps.
Such judicial conduct is the very reason many fled Castro's Cuba. Now that we find it thriving in America where should our children flee to now?