Sunday, June 11, 2006

Hell, USA


Ritt Goldstein fled to seek political asylum in Sweden, so terrorized by police after making the above video. The video is from Dec. 1996, but this sort of abuse has only gotten worse since then. A special hearing was held in from the of the Legislative Judiciary Committee at the Hartford Capitol in Connecticut. Should citizens who inform elected officials about public corruption and police misconduct fear for their lives?


.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Ritt Goldstein fled to Sweden sometime after this Connecticut Legislative hearing, seeking political asylum. [youtube video] shot before Richard "Ritt" Goldstein fled the US.
.
.
.
Ritt Goldstein Dec 1996 hearing on police brutality and law-breaking. The police union is like the mafia. (58 minute windows media player video file, approx 17.5 megabyte download, it is one of the most amazing and informative hours I have ever watched.)
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Colchester Connecticut Police Officers allegedly asked Vachon to murder Phil Inkel for $10,000 so the officers could avoid a police misconduct investigation.
.


.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Phil Inkel claims Colchester Police Officer or Officers fired their pistols near him when he was riding his bicycle with his wife and infant(s). There are too many incidents of police abuse and misconduct to list. The Ritt Goldstein link will prove to all doubters that the problem is much worse than ever reported.
.
.
Phil Inkel informs State legislators (video, 5 megabytes) Is it ok for officers to shoot at an unarmed civilian couple with their infant on bicycles, to scare them out of making a police misconduct complaint?

Update Erickson Interview June 6, 2006 audio 10 to 15 min.

Update Erickson Interview June 7, 2006 audio 10 to 15 min.


Beyond a Bad State, Connecticut USA


.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Murzin TV Interview Beaten by Police, false arrest

Steve Murzin's lawyer, F. Mac Buckley, speaks, Channel 8 newsclip, 1994 Attorney F. Mac Buckley nearly bursts into tears describing how one Murzin Boy cried out to the other and for police to stop beating his brother.

Steve Murzin talks about being stabbed and the events at the hospital May '06
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Ian allegedly had strangulation marks on his neck, there is speculation that Ian may have been snuffed out temporarily and then revived as Ian has never been the same since that fateful night in police custody.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

The former Mayor of Norwalk Connecticut claim police would go out on the rapage wearing ski masks, not identifying themselves, bringing citizens to be beaten and questioned in warehouses.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/europarl/Story/0,2763,510051,00.html (about Ritt)

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0309-21.htm (by Ritt)

http://www.antiwar.com/ips/goldstein.php?articleid=3409 (by Ritt)







Kristine Blake “Drop the (law) suit or you’re dead!” Fox 61 TV (stay tuned, it is in two parts)

Erickson Interview Kristine Blake Audio June 6, 2006 (you'll be just amazed at what this daring woman has to say.)

Erickson Video Kristine Blake Interview June 6, 2006



Steve Murzin's_"Homeland Security" murder attempt, stabbed 13 times (audio file)

Murzin TV Interview Beaten by Police, false arrest

Colchester Police request Phil Inkel to be murdered TV Interview

Attorney Barbara Johnson (MA) speaks about abuse by DCF and Judicial Abuse Audio Interview, 50 minutes, 3 megabyte download
.
.
http://starkravingviking.blogspot.com/

www.freespeech.com
.
If you'd like the story and videos to go with the above, please email me at stevengerickson@yahoo.com

* * * *
added June 14, 2006, at 3:42 PM EST:




This baby is alive and well. Incident occurred when the baby was 6 months old.


Jason Gebhardt- Falsely Accused of Shaken Baby Syndrome; not allowed a defense http://www.lifeundertheseas.com/jason/


Audiofile with Parents, June 13, 2006 (listen to these parents talk about events, police, prosecutorial, and judicial misconduct, and ask yourself why you would even want to drive through Connecticut)

Use Windows Media Player to play this telephone interview Prosecutor Dave Shannon, Judge Gary White



Imagine being in your early 20’s, your girlfriend’s baby has difficulties, you dial 911, and then find yourself under arrest, as calling the authorities for help or assistance means if there is a possibility to arrest and process as many people, they will. And, it seems the common criminal parasites fall through the cracks, but the productive, average, taxpaying citizens can find themselves in the crosshairs of a State Government that has to make up for growth in a stagnant population and business pool, to defraud Federal Taxpayers to cover Connecticut Officials Cronies’ Padded Projects and the Bribes that are funneled back to the Officials.

It is the police, DCF, DMR, and other state agency unions that allows these officials to get more money to hire more officials to abuse more citizens.

Jason Gebhardt is sitting in a Connecticut prison to make up for a deficit. Jason did not rape anyone, didn’t rob anyone, didn’t try to kill anyone, did not murder anyone, Jason is accused of putting a child to roughly into a car seat. Like too many citizens police played their little tricks to make a crime out of a situation, lying, and trying to pressure impressionable, trusting citizens into making false statements that could lead to a maximum prosecution where none should have been taken up.

Listening to the Gebhardt parents describe the course of events that caused their son, Jason to be serving 12 years for doing nothing. Knowing what prison is like and what this young man is going through, in prison, innocent, with violent, mentally ill, disease riddled alcoholics and drug addicts is just plain wrong.

The Gebhardts put everything in prospective, especially towards the end.

This blogger's email: stevengerickson@yahoo.com

The SRV

Page 9 Crimes, a list of past interviews

* * * *

added June 25, 2006, 12:39 PM EST:

Crapulent Courts

Connecticut Supreme Court Chief Justice William Sullivan should face arrest for crimes against humanity. Treason is what the Connecticut Judiciary is up to and all of them should be punished accordingly. There is supposed to be separation of power between the 3 branches of government. Connecticut legislators, elected officials, are merely a puppet consortium and the people have a pretend ability to have access to their representatives. Connecticut is looking to abuse the average citizens, rip them off, process them, arrest them, incarcerate them, put them in a mental hospital all to defraud ALL Federal Taxpayers. Legislators and more of the people should try and grow a pair and not take this abuse anymore.


The Connecticut Commercial Elite feel they can rule the world from their Connecticut Castles. Many can trace their family trees to the Mayflower. Skull and Bones at Yale, other secret societies, and openly arrogant committees of jackasses abound. You are not safe anywhere in the US with this consortium of assholes running everything and ripping off everything and everyone they can.

DCF is the Secret Police, out doing anything they want, with an agenda of steal you blind, wreck your life, and punish those most severely that dare speak out and expose the abusers.

Connecticut is levying undeclared taxes. If the people have no say they are being taxed without representation. “Don’t Tread on Me”

Enough is enough, Sheeple, they have come for you, the train is at the station. Stand up, fight back.

If we were truly a Nation of Laws, the National Guard should be sent in and protect the people of Connecticut from the Abusive, Unconstitutional Crime Syndicate that has a hold on everybody’s everything. Stand up, Speak up, FIGHT BACK.

A DEMONSTRATION FOR JUSTICE is going to be held in front of the Connecticut Supreme Court in Hartford Connecticut, June 27, 2006.


Is a lame attorney angry with me for what I posted about him?

Open Letter to Chief Justice William J. Sullivan of Connecticut

Connecticut's Steal Your Property, Wreck Your Life, Mafia

Barbara Johnson, Massachusetts Lawyer tells how Connecticut Judge, Jonathan Kaplan doesn't like her website, so he allegedly calls Massachusetts Judges to lodge complaints to get Barbara Johnson disbarred. What!!!??? The link to the 50 minute audio will more than educate you, you may laugh out loud, and be afraid, very afraid to end up in Connecticut Kangaroo Court.

* * * *
* * * *

EDITORIALS (Hartford Courant)

Testify, Justice Sullivan
June 25, 2006

Judges are fond of saying that the only power they possess is the power of respect. One justice is undermining respect for the entire judiciary in Connecticut.

All three branches of state government have committees looking into court secrecy thanks to the reprehensible behavior of former Chief Justice William J. Sullivan. He furtively withheld publication of a controversial court ruling in April in hopes of getting a colleague promoted to the post he was vacating. He almost succeeded.

Now he's causing a constitutional collision between the judiciary and the only branch of government trying - in public, anyway - to hold him accountable for his misconduct.

Justice Sullivan is refusing to appear Tuesday at a hearing of the legislature's Judiciary Committee, whose members want to know more about the April incident.

Other justices have agreed to testify. But Justice Sullivan alone could explain such curious coincidences as how he knew who Gov. M. Jodi Rell would name to succeed him before the governor even knew, she says, that he was stepping down from the chief's job to senior justice status.

He is trying to evade the legislative hearing by asking a court to quash the subpoena requiring him to testify. In fact, on Friday, he even went so far as to ask a Superior Court judge in Waterbury to set the subpoena aside without a hearing. That's outrageous. The judge said no, as he should have.

Justice Sullivan should stop the evasive maneuvers and honor the subpoena. Two years ago, the state Supreme Court ruled that a legislative panel had the authority to subpoena a chief executive, Gov. John G. Rowland. Surely the rule is no different for a former chief justice.

But the judiciary would defend even an unworthy member to protect its independence. Acting Chief Justice David M. Borden has filed a motion to intervene in the battle on Justice Sullivan's behalf - even though Justice Borden is voluntarily testifying before the same committee and is championing court openness.

If Justice Sullivan refuses to obey the subpoena, the legislature has solid grounds to begin an impeachment inquiry. An inquiry could give Connecticut's halls of justice a good airing.

In 2002, two years after Justice Sullivan became chief justice, reporters found that the courts had sealed thousands of cases involving prominent and powerful people, including University of Connecticut President Philip Austin and Gov. John G. Rowland. Some cases were "super-sealed": Court workers weren't allowed to say the cases existed. Even the reasons for the sealings were sealed.

Then came Chief Justice Sullivan's secret hold this spring on a decision bound to alarm advocates of open government and hurt his protege, Justice Peter T. Zarella: the 4-3 ruling that computerized criminal and motor vehicle dockets were not subject to freedom of information laws.

These sub-rosa events have many people wondering, Who is policing judges? The answer should be the judges' own Judicial Review Council. But the council is itself shrouded in secrecy. By statute, it doesn't have to say whether it's investigating Justice Sullivan's obvious violation of judicial ethics.

What an irony if this jurist never comes to justice for concealing critical information, disregarding the Code of Judicial Conduct and eroding the public's trust in the courts.

* * * *
* * * *

The SRV

* * * *
* * * *

SOS From A Hell Cast By Probate



Rick Green

May 23 2006

A few weeks ago Daniel Gross passed a hastily scrawled note to a visitor.

"I am being incarcerated against my will and I need a good lawyer to represent me," Gross wrote in the uneasy script of an 86-year-old man slowly slipping away.

In another illustration of our renegade probate court system, Gross - a New York state resident - has been locked in a dismal Waterbury nursing home since last September.

Dan Gross' money and freedom have been snatched from him. Outside visitors and calls, even from family, are blocked. At times he is heavily medicated, according to his daughter and his own court affidavit.

Is it too much to ask of our probate courts that Gross be allowed to live his last days with a shred of self-respect?

Probate court Judge Thomas P. Brunnock - whose jurisdiction consists of Waterbury, Middlebury and Wolcott - has ordered this retired oil burner repairman from Long Island held against his will since September.

Gross didn't even know about the hearing at which a couple of local lawyers were handed control of his life.

While visiting his daughter Dee King last summer, Gross became ill and ended up in Waterbury Hospital. As his health deteriorated and Dee and her sister bickered, the hospital and family turned to the probate court. Big mistake.

The man appointed by the court to represent Gross, Jonathan Newman, argued against Gross' wishes in urging that a conservator be named to take control of his finances.

"Daniel Gross could benefit from a conservator of his estate and person due to his physical and mental deficiencies," Newman told the court.

It's hard to see how Gross has collected any benefit, drugged and locked in the Grove Manor nursing home. Perhaps Newman overlooked the court system's own standards.

"The attorney is to represent the client zealously," the rules state, "vigorously supporting the course of action chosen by the client."

Dan Gross' wish is to live in New York.

"It's a horrendous situation. It's taking away his rights and everything else," said Norman Grossman, a Levittown, N.Y., neighbor who has gone to state court in New York to try to force the tiny Waterbury probate court to release his friend.

In order to pay the $165 per hour lawyer bills that have piled up, Gross' savings of nearly $20,000 have been emptied.

His Levittown, Long Island, home recently was ordered sold to pay more of Newman's bills and those of Kathleen Donovan, the Naugatuck lawyer appointed as conservator for Gross.

Daniel Gross went to Levittown in 1946 and the young vet built a life. With his wife, he raised three kids and paid off a home on Sparrow Lane where Gross thought he'd live out his days.

His wife died a decade ago. The Sparrow Lane house fell into disrepair. The kids drifted apart, with his daughter Dee picking up most of the burden.

"I've been the person his entire life who has helped him. I've always made sure he is safe and secure," King told me.

"He wants to stay in New York. My father had a life. He walked. He talked. Then they take him and lock him up like an animal."

Daniel Gross sure does need a good lawyer, one willing to take on a shameful probate court where paying the bills of lawyers looms more significant than the dignity of a man at the end of his life.

Rick Green's column appears on Tuesdays and Fridays. He can be reached at rgreen@courant.com
Copyright 2006, Hartford Courant

* * * *
* * * *

From: "Paul Trambarulo" Add to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 04:37:24 GMT
To: stevengerickson@yahoo.com
CC: syringa12@aol.com, brianwpincin@juno.com, pegtracy123@aol.com
Subject: Re: Connecticut Probate Court is robbing my family!

Hi Steve,

No I haven't contacted you before but my sister Anne Haines may have. Our 75 year old mother is trapped in CT under the CORRUPT CT Probate Court system. I have attached a document that my sister wrote which explains the whole situation. We have tried the traditional legal channels but they have been hardly effective and have simply resulted in draining my parents funds (something the probate system is supposed to PRESERVE. what a joke). Please feel free to send this information to anyone and everyone. I can be reached at [phone number snipped] until noon Eastern time or you can leave me a message on my cell @ [phone number snipped]. You can also reach Anne @ [phone number snipped].

Thanks in advance for ANY help you can offer us.

Sincerely,

Paul T. Trambarulo and family

-- Steven Erickson wrote:


For some reason, I'm getting a lot of responses lately.

Have we talked before, and please tell me more,
-Steve

Paul Trambarulo wrote:
Hi Steve,
Any thoughts on how to get my mother (NOT a CT resident) out of the jaws of the greedy, probate court system? I will send you more info if you think you can help me broadcast this corruption.
Thanks,
Paul Trambarulo

[below attached to email]




“Don’t Die in Connecticut, and Don’t be Judged Incompetent There Either!”

A great travesty of justice is occurring in Connecticut, fostered by a corrupt probate court system which feeds on the estates of those unfortunate enough to fall into its clutches. Although most cases which come before the probate court are concerned with wills and the wishes of the deceased, probate courts are also given jurisdiction over the lives of those who are judged no longer competent to make important decisions for themselves.

This jurisdiction is being used to make judgments which are clearly NOT in the best interests of Maydelle Trambarulo, ward of the court, and her family. We, her family, wish to protest the decision made by Judge Clifford Hoyle, acting Judge for Woodbridge Probate Court, as neither impartial nor fair. We plan to appeal his verdict to a higher Court, but we also feel that Judge Hoyle’s conduct of this case should be investigated on both legal and moral grounds. He brings great discredit to the Probate Court system of CT in both his handling of this case and the decision he rendered. His conduct, as well as the conduct of Mark DellaValle, “independent” conservator of Mrs. Trambarulo, Paul Whittaker, court appointed attorney for Mrs. Trambarulo, and Robyn Berke, court appointed guardian ad litem, has been a disgrace to the legal profession.

Why is this happening? Professor John Langbein, Sterling Professor of Law at Yale Law School, recently testified before the Connecticut legislature during their review and investigation of Connecticut’s probate court system. According to Professor Langbein, people should “try not to die in Connecticut”, as Connecticut has long been considered a “poster child for how not to organize probate courts.” To further quote Professor Langbein,

“The perverse financial incentives that pervade our probate system are a disgrace. Goal Number One of probate reform in Connecticut should be to sever the link between court proceedings and profit. Any system of judicial procedure that compensates judges or court officers for stirring up more work is wrong. … Our corrupt system of franchise-style probate courts has given the judges a powerful vested interest in preventing reforms that would lower costs and speed probate procedure.”

(“The Scandal of Connecticut’s Probate Courts”, Testimony to CT Legislature Committee on Program Review and Investigation, Hartford, CT, Oct. 7, 2005)

Our family has experienced this self-serving system first hand, containing an insidious corruption of cronyism and greed, in this case being used to the utmost by someone who knows how to manipulate the system for her own perfidious ends.

Background

The case was brought before the Probate Court of Woodbridge CT by Ms Teresa Sirico of New Haven on behalf of our wife and mother, Maydelle Trambarulo, without our knowledge or consent. Ms. Sirico brought Mrs. Trambarulo to CT for rehabilitative therapy for a broken hip. Ms Sirico, who is the niece of Maydelle’s husband Ralph Trambarulo, told us that she wished to bring Maydelle to a “top-notch facility affiliated with Yale University, for a period of 30-60 days”, and then would return her to her home in Delaware. Why did we agree? We trusted Ms Sirico as a family member, believing her to be acting in Maydelle’s best interests, never dreaming of the nightmare which would follow. Maydelle was essentially kidnapped, as she NEVER intended to make Connecticut her permanent residence. We testified in probate court hearings that Ms Sirico lied to us about this and other matters, but our testimony was ignored. We also contested the court’s jurisdiction in this case, based on the grounds that Mrs. Trambarulo does not have domicile in the state of CT, but Judge Hoyle based his decision on her residency in CT, a residency that was obtained through the deceitful words and actions of Ms. Sirico.

Ms Sirico, a real estate broker in the New Haven area, targets the elderly in marketing her business, and also touts herself as a champion of the elderly, as she has endowed a foundation at SCSU for issues affecting the elderly. She knows the laws and procedures regarding conservatorship quite well, since she was involved in a similar prior case (DeVita vs. Sirico, 29 CLR 449 (2001, 2002, 2003)). The facts in this case are eerily familiar. We brought this case to the attention of the court, but again, our testimony was totally ignored. We believe Ms. Sirico is a ruthless SERIAL family destroyer, aided and abetted by a court system she knows very well and manipulates for her own twisted purposes. Her outrageous behavior and blatant disregard for the truth has been demonstrated in prior cases.(DeVita vs Sirico, 29 CLR 449 (2001)) She will continue to victimize others unless she is stopped.

We received paperwork from the Woodbridge court in October 2004 advising us of Ms Sirico’s ex parte application for temporary conservatorship of Maydelle’s person and estate after Ms Sirico first had Maydelle declared incompetent using her Power of Attorney. Ms Sirico claimed that Maydelle’s financial affairs were “in disarray”, which WAS NOT TRUE. We disputed her application, and attended a hearing in Woodbridge CT in November 2004, before Judge Robert Horowitz. Peter Barrett, our attorney at the time, advised us that the appointment of an independent conservator was probably the wisest course, as none of us lives in CT. We agreed, envisioning a neutral party whom we could work with. Attorney Mark DellaValle was appointed by the court as conservator of both Maydelle’s person and estate. The court also appointed Paul Whittaker as Maydelle’s attorney and Robyn Berke as guardian ad litem.(GAL). Judge Clifford Hoyle replaced Judge Horowitz as acting Judge of Woodbridge Probate Court in January 2005.

Our goal then and now was to reunite Maydelle with her husband and family while ensuring high quality medical care for her. Ralph had moved from Delaware back to New Jersey (where he and Maydelle lived for 48 years prior to their move to Delaware in 2003) to live near Anne, their eldest daughter. Daughter Margaret also lives in New Jersey. We asked Mr. DellaValle to consider moving Maydelle back to New Jersey, which he refused to do. In February, 2005, Maydelle nearly died of an infection she contracted while a resident at The Willows-Harborside facility in Woodbridge, CT (the facility she was taken to by Ms Sirico), and was later moved to Birmingham Health Care Center in Derby, CT, where she presently resides. We presented a motion to reunite Maydelle with her family to the court in May 2005. Hearings were held in June 2005 in which members of Maydelle’s family were subjected to interrogation more appropriate to a criminal trial. It should be noted that attorneys Della Valle, Whittaker and Berke have always been adversarial to us and sympathetic to Ms Sirico. We hoped that Judge Hoyle would consider the testimony we presented to the court concerning Ms Sirico’s activities and her manipulative and deceitful behavior. Once again, our testimony was totally ignored by the court.

In November, our attorney, John Berman presented a motion disputing the Court’s jurisdiction over the case, based on the fact that Maydelle is not presently (and never has been) domiciled in CT. Ms Sirico presented motions applying for co-conservatorship and an “emergency” motion to move Mrs Trambarulo to an assisted living facility closer to her. These motions were denied by the court. We then waited 3 months for Judge Hoyle’s decision. We had previously waited 4 months for a decision on the earlier motion, and when no decision was forthcoming, asked that the decision be delayed until the jurisdictional motion was ruled upon. (Ironically, the following quote is from a recent article on probate court reform, “Woodbridge acting Probate Judge, Clifford Hoyle, advocated the present system, saying, "In a contested case, it doesn't take years." The Orange Bulletin, 02/02/2006

We will address the following charges:

1.Outrageous statements without proof:
In his judgment (dated January 12, 2006, but not received by the court until February 21), Judge Hoyle made many statements which we strongly dispute. He stated that we “seem to be indifferent to her care”. This is absolutely outrageous!!! First and most importantly, we love Maydelle, our wife and mother, and care very deeply and sincerely about her welfare. We are not “indifferent to her care”, but have been shut out of the day-to-day decision-making and information by both the conservator and our physical separation from CT. We are being penalized by the court for having spouses, families and jobs.

2. Discrimination based on age and medical infirmities:
Judge Hoyle dismissed Mrs. Trambarulo’s husband Ralph as “elderly, infirm and … has been unable to care for himself for some time.” Judge Hoyle never acknowledges that her husband’s circumstances and residence have also changed, and that he now has a live-in aide in his own home. Again, Judge Hoyle ignored testimony we presented regarding Ralph’s medical conditions. Judge Hoyle’s statement also displays callous disregard for the rights of this couple to pass their remaining years together. Ralph is being discriminated against on the basis of his age, as he is not able to speak for himself as vigorously as he would if he was younger. Ralph is no longer able to travel to CT to see his wife. Although he realizes they can no longer reside together due to her health issues, he very much wishes to be able to see his WIFE OF 50 YEARS on a daily basis.

The court in its decision is taking advantage of his age and infirmities to deprive him of his constitutional right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, namely the companionship of his wife of 50 years. Maydelle is also certainly being deprived of the same rights, as she has stated to us many times that “I just don’t care whether I live or die anymore.” This is certainly not the happy picture painted by Ms Sirico and Judge Hoyle! Again, it is an OUTRAGE that ANY court should keep a husband and wife apart for the reasons given by Judge Hoyle! Their 50th Wedding Anniversary, December 26, 2005, should have been a joyous occasion for family and friends to celebrate, but instead brought us sadness at their separation.

3. Conflicts of interest with the court and officers
This case displays a very obvious conflict of interest with the court and its officers. They are the ones who get to decide whether the source of their financial “gravy train” stays in CT or is allowed to leave the state! Clearly it is in THEIR best interests financially that Maydelle Trambarulo stay in Connecticut.

4. Denial of access to funds and information
Ralph has been denied access to his own money by Judge Hoyle. In order to purchase a residence he had to obtain a mortgage at age 80 because he could not access his own money in a joint Merrill Lynch account. We have made numerous requests to the court for information on how Maydelle’s money is being spent. We have NEVER received any answers.

5. Judge Hoyle’s decision based upon biased testimony and
inaccurate facts

Attorneys DellaValle, Whittaker and Berke have all voiced their opinions that Maydelle should stay in CT. Their opinions, with life-altering consequences, are based on their knowledge of Maydelle’s family as told to them by Ms Sirico, certainly NOT on any factual basis. These court officers are all on friendly terms with Ms Sirico and adversarial to Maydelle’s family, as evidenced by their questioning of us in the hearings. They do not know us, and most certainly have not tried to know us. Instead they have accepted the lies told them by Ms Sirico.

Judge Hoyle could not even get the FACTS of this case straight! As we have stated in numerous documents submitted to the court, Maydelle was a resident of Delaware at the time she was brought to CT, NOT New Jersey as stated by Judge Hoyle in his decision. This is a very significant error, as he then states throughout his decision that a “return” to New Jersey would return her to her prior circumstances. Maydelle would NOT be returning to her prior circumstances, but instead would reside in a health care facility with equivalent or better care than she is receiving at present. We presented information and testimony about a rehab facility in NJ which is directly across the street from where Ralph lives. We might add that the facility in NJ is also less expensive than the one in CT, by $18,000 per year! (Apparently, consideration of “what is best for Maydelle” depends upon keeping her a prisoner of the court in CT!) Instead of considering the information we presented, Judge Hoyle stated in his decision that

“The Court is not convinced that the respondent’s family is willing to make the time commitments necessary to care for her if she returned to NJ. When asked about the nursing home which was planned to become the respondent’s residence in New Jersey, her daughter who had selected the nursing home testified that she had never been inside the building.”

Once again, we are penalized by the court for having families and jobs. At the time of the hearing, the daughter (Anne) was extremely busy at work, and her husband John, Maydelle’s son-in-law, was going right by the facility. He offered to tour the facility and obtain information for his wife. Isn’t a loving and trusted SON-in-law of 20 years able to vouch for the facility as well as a blood relative? Ms. Sirico is not a blood relative, yet her word is accepted as gospel!
Why also does the Court overlook what seems so perfectly obvious to anyone else, that Ms Sirico may indeed have an ulterior motive (possibly financial, despite her protestations to the contrary) in keeping her aunt and uncle separated from each other?? Why does Ms Sirico display absolutely NO interest in her blood relative, her Uncle Ralph? Because she has no possibility of controlling either him or his finances!

When it suits the purposes of the court, Maydelle is considered competent in her opinions on where she would like to reside, but incompetent in other matters. The supposed goal of the court, “What is best for Maydelle”, (her future), is decided by the court’s officers on the basis of the few minutes they have spent with her and the answers she has provided to their questions. Those answers are a product of months of brainwashing and coaching by Ms Sirico and others, PROVEN by a paper we presented to the court which was written by a friend of Ms Sirico. AGAIN, OUR EVIDENCE WAS IGNORED by the court. We, her family know her better than anyone else in the world, and have been totally disregarded by the court when we say that Maydelle is being brainwashed and unduly influenced by Ms Sirico’s abusive and domineering manner, as she continues to feed Maydelle lies about us, her family, on a daily basis. Ms Sirico succeeded in convincing Maydelle’s siblings (who have not seen her in 10 or more years, (only two of whom who have ever met Ms Sirico briefly)), that we are unfit to care for our wife and mother.

The Probate Court’s primary function in this case should be the reuniting of Maydelle with her FAMILY, and the true conservation of her person and financial estate, NOT the reallocation of her hard-earned assets to court officers’ own bank accounts! Judge Hoyle’s decision appears to be motivated not by an interest in what is truly best for our wife and mother, but self-serving GREED of the most reproachable kind. Naively, we once believed that justice was blind; sadly, we have found the justice rendered in the Probate Court of Judge Clifford Hoyle to be both deaf and dumb to our pleas and the evidence we presented.



Connecticut's Steal Your Property, Wreck Your Life, Mafia

* * * *

added July 6, 2006, 12:35 PM EST:



Date:

Wed, 5 Jul 2006 18:19:19 -0700 (PDT)

From:

Send an Instant Message "Anne Trambarulo-Haines"
Yahoo! DomainKeys has confirmed that this message was sent by yahoo.com.

Subject:

CT court system

To:

stevengerickson@yahoo.com

Hello,

I read with interest the messages you received from Paul Trambarulo about ohis mother. He is desperately trying to have her returned to NJ in order to regain control of the family money. None of the family has gainful employment enough to support any type of lifestyle and they have been using the parents' money to live on for many years.

In this case, there is good reason why she is in CT in the first place--he moved his parents from their long-time home in NJ (48 yrs) to Delaware, then basically abandoned them. His mother broke her hip and was totally bedridden and his father is senile. Nobody was caring for them. Ms. Sirico rescued Mrs. Trambarulo from sitting in her own waste starving to death. There is documentation of these conditions by social services. Paul and his siblings are not facing charges of elder abuse, abandonment, and exploitation because they live in Delaware (or wherever they are now) and can't be tried in another state.

You will have to trust that I am in a position to know these facts and much more. This will have to be kept anonymous since Paul and his lover Brian have made threats of bodily harm and even death to anyone they think is not on their side. They are psychologically unstable.

I just wanted to let you know so you would not spend any time and energy on a case which has no merit. The story he told you is full of lies, errors, and omissions.

You've heard the saying, "you've made your bed, now you have to sleep in it". That's where Paul and co. are now.

Have a nice day,





Added July 13, 2006, The Response:



From: "brianwpincin@juno.com" Add to Address BookAdd to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 03:58:49 GMT
To: stevengerickson@yahoo.com
CC: lighthouseaw@aol.com, PEGTRACY123@aol.com, syringa12@aol.com, paultram@juno.com, brianwpincin@juno.com, princessmelany@hotmail.com
Subject: Blog written regarding the CT Probate Court- Tramabrulo / Sirico

Please if you would post my reply to the outrageous post wrtitten on your site. Please see post, then my reply. Much Thanks. Brian W. Pincin.

Original Post:

Date:


Wed, 5 Jul 2006 18:19:19 -0700 (PDT)

From:


Send an Instant Message "Anne Trambarulo-Haines"
Yahoo! DomainKeys has confirmed that this message was sent by yahoo.com.

Subject:


CT court system

To:


stevengerickson@yahoo.com



Hello,

I read with interest the messages you received from Paul Trambarulo about ohis mother. He is desperately trying to have her returned to NJ in order to regain control of the family money. None of the family has gainful employment enough to support any type of lifestyle and they have been using the parents' money to live on for many years.

In this case, there is good reason why she is in CT in the first place--he moved his parents from their long-time home in NJ (48 yrs) to Delaware, then basically abandoned them. His mother broke her hip and was totally bedridden and his father is senile. Nobody was caring for them. Ms. Sirico rescued Mrs. Trambarulo from sitting in her own waste starving to death. There is documentation of these conditions by social services. Paul and his siblings are not facing charges of elder abuse, abandonment, and exploitation because they live in Delaware (or wherever they are now) and can't be tried in another state.

You will have to trust that I am in a position to know these facts and much more. This will have to be kept anonymous since Paul and his lover Brian have made threats of bodily harm and even death to anyone they think is not on their side. They are psychologically unstable.

I just wanted to let you know so you would not spend any time and energy on a case which has no merit. The story he told you is full of lies, errors, and omissions.

You've heard the saying, "you've made your bed, now you have to sleep in it". That's where Paul and co. are now.
Have a nice day,

My reply to be posted please:


Trambarulo Family, Teresa Sirico, and the CT Probate Courts-



I read a response left "unbodly" and anonymously by someone regarding the Trambarulo Family, Teresa Sirico, and the CT Probate Courts. First the person who wrote this is an extreme coward for not verifying who they are. The entire post is full of malicious statements and lies. If this statement was not written by Ms. Sirico herself, I'm confident that it is someone who she has put up to writing it. The complete post is full of lies and accusations. First, no one is trying to gain control of anyone's money. The CT state probate court has left he husband of Maydelle Trambarulo with no money, frozen accounts, and separated from his wife of 50 years. No regard by the courts or parties to be ever support the spouse in this case, rather keep the war Maydelle Trambarulo in a nursing home away from her children and spouse of 50 years. As far as the statement made that none of the family has gainful employment is an outrageous lie. All of the family including myself is gainfully employed. The source that wrote this is very misguided. None of the children have ever stolen anything from their parents, but have received gifts over the years. Fortunately at the time in the parents lives (Ralph and Maydelle Trambarulo) - they were secure enough to be able to provide gifts at times to their children. Luckily they did, as the CT courts are eating away all of the Tramabrulo's hard earned funds at present. Paul Trambarulo did not move his parent's to DE to take their money. It was a family decision to move the parent's to Delaware, as their home in Red Bank New Jersey was much too much for them to handle. The move was also agreed upon by both Ralph and Maydelle Trambarulo. The parent's were cared for in their home in DE, and the son had provided proper medical care to both parent's when needed. There are NO reports as previously stated in the written blog "anonymously" of any elder abuse as accused. The person who wrote this is simply out to keep the fight to keep the ward "Maydelle Tramabrulo" in CT for their own financial purposes. The most outrageous statement made that Paul and Brian have threatened death to people not on their side is absolutely incredible and most untrue. I almost laughed reading that statement myself. If Paul Trambarulo or Brian Pincin did such an outrageous act, then why didn't the supposed "threatened" person press charges of threat for such a devious act? The blog I copied in my response below is nothing more than a devious act to keep the CT court ball rolling, and to attempt to discredit the family of Maydelle Trambarulo. The person who wrote the below blog is a coward, liar, and is more to be pitied than laughed at or given anger.



Most Sincerely,

Brian W. Pincin

Brian W. Pincin
brianwpincin@juno.com



This post accepts anonymous comments. Click on white envelope to share this post.

68 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

If CT. had adopted the UNIFORM PRBATE CODE, or better yet, had made PROBATE COURT a division of CT. SUPRERIOR COURTS, that situation probably would not have occured. In order to preserve the system as is, CT. probate courts have been OFFERING TOKEN REFORMS. Band-Aids will not do when even a tourneqette can't stem the bleeding. CT. probate should be a seperate division of Superior Court with REAL judges.
HAVE A NICE DAY!

Friday, July 07, 2006 12:38:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If CT. had adopted the UNIFORM PRBATE CODE, or better yet, had made Probate a division of CT. Superior Courts, this probably would not have occured.
HAVE A NICE DAY!

Friday, July 07, 2006 12:41:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If CT. had adopted the UNIFORM PRBATE CODE, or better yet, had made PROBATE COURT a division of CT. SUPRERIOR COURTS, that situation probably would not have occured. In order to preserve the system as is, CT. probate courts have been OFFERING TOKEN REFORMS. Band-Aids will not do when even a tourneqette can't stem the bleeding. CT. probate should be a seperate division of Superior Court with REAL judges.
HAVE A NICE DAY!

Friday, July 07, 2006 1:04:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not enough taxpayers know HOW probate courts in CT. work. If they did, they'd be screaming, as they should, to have CT. probate courts dismantled/abolished/destructured and made a division of Superior court. Since CT. PROBATE courts operate as a business, it has conflict of interest built into it.
Can you imsgine, that since the courts receive more money depending on how many estates they process (and even with a legal/valid will you must go through probate) that there are judges (and they are not REAL judges as they are elected and can be attorneys, waitresses, garbage haulers) have actually gone to Senior Citizen Centers, Hospice, Aarp and have discussed end of life issues. Since there is a profit motif to get estates into probate, are these vulnerable senior citizens given complete and accurate information. Is their field of expertise in TRUSTS, REVOCABLE TRUSTS, IRREVOCABLE TRUSTS, DOMICILE IN ANOTHER STATE WITH OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY IN THIS STATE. Through some trusts probate here can be avoided. I don't think so, but IF they did have this expertise, what would be their incentive to pass on this information to these vulnerable senior citizens when they themselves can fatten on the estates that come the CT. PROBATE door. I wouldn't want my parents or grandparents listening to a PSEUDO judge who stands to benefit from their hard work, fattening his/her kids while depriving me or my children

Saturday, July 08, 2006 7:37:00 PM  
Anonymous Brian Pincin said...

Trambarulo Family, Teresa Sirico, and the CT Probate Courts-

I read a response left "unbodly" and anonymously by someone regarding the Trambarulo Family, Teresa Sirico, and the CT Probate Courts. First the person who wrote this is an extreme coward for not verifying who they are. The entire post is full of malicious statements and lies. If this statement was not written by Ms. Sirico herself, I'm confident that it is someone who she has put up to writing it. The complete post is full of lies and accusations. First, no one is trying to gain control of anyone's money. The CT state probate court has left he husband of Maydelle Trambarulo with no money, frozen accounts, and separated from his wife of 50 years. No regard by the courts or parties to be ever support the spouse in this case, rather keep the war Maydelle Trambarulo in a nursing home away from her children and spouse of 50 years. As far as the statement made that none of the family has gainful employment is an outrageous lie. All of the family including myself is gainfully employed. The source that wrote this is very misguided. None of the children have ever stolen anything from their parents, but have received gifts over the years. Fortunately at the time in the parents lives (Ralph and Maydelle Trambarulo) - they were secure enough to be able to provide gifts at times to their children. Luckily they did, as the CT courts are eating away all of the Tramabrulo's hard earned funds at present. Paul Trambarulo did not move his parent's to DE to take their money. It was a family decision to move the parent's to Delaware, as their home in Red Bank New Jersey was much too much for them to handle. The move was also agreed upon by both Ralph and Maydelle Trambarulo. The parent's were cared for in their home in DE, and the son had provided proper medical care to both parent's when needed. There are NO reports as previously stated in the written blog "anonymously" of any elder abuse as accused. The person who wrote this is simply out to keep the fight to keep the ward "Maydelle Tramabrulo" in CT for their own financial purposes. The most outrageous statement made that Paul and Brian have threatened death to people not on their side is absolutely incredible and most untrue. I almost laughed reading that statement myself. If Paul Trambarulo or Brian Pincin did such an outrageous act, then why didn't the supposed "threatened" person press charges of threat for such a devious act? The blog I copied in my response below is nothing more than a devious act to keep the CT court ball rolling, and to attempt to discredit the family of Maydelle Trambarulo. The person who wrote the below blog is a coward, liar, and is more to be pitied than laughed at or given anger.

Most Sincerely,

Brian W. Pincin

Tuesday, July 11, 2006 11:55:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Date:
Wed, 5 Jul 2006 18:19:19 -0700 (PDT)

From:
"Anne Trambarulo-Haines"
Yahoo! DomainKeys has confirmed that this message was sent by yahoo.com.

Subject:
CT court system

TO FURTHER DISCREDIT THIS POST, THE PERSON WHO WROTE THIS POST CREATED A FAKE, ILLEGAL, AND FRAUDULENT EMAIL ADDRESS. THIS POST WAS NOT SUBMITTED BY ANNE TRAMBARULO HAINES.

Wednesday, July 12, 2006 12:41:00 AM  
Anonymous Paul Trambarulo said...

Steve, I see that "someone" has malisciously and FRAUDENTLY posted a response to mine, FALSELY and ILLEGALLY using my sisters identity. First off this person has committed FRAUD and furthermore has been 100% DISHONEST in her response. WE (my family) are the ones that have facts to bear out what we are saying. The "anonymous" post is full of hate (all the gay comments) and the statements about my mother being abandoned are 100% lies! If there was truth to this, then why weren't charges pressed in Delaware? As to the financial aspect, it appears that the Probate Courts are the ones robbing my parents. My father of 81 years has been forced to take out a mortgage because he hasn't been able to access his own money. My parents were generous with us when we needed help, however we are all gainfully employed (another cheap, innacurate shot)and have been. Teresa Sirico as temporary conservator was the one who started moving money around and controlling my parents finances. She even went so far as to tell Brian, my father and me that she planned to have Mom divorce Dad (both devout Catholics married for over 49 years)and that she would have Mom sue Dad for more money!


It appears to me that if ANY of these LIES posted by this PERPETRATOR were true, then they would be honest enough to also use their name and not USE SOMEONE ELSE'S IDENTITY. My family has NOTHING to hide or LIE ABOUT. Obviously the same cannot be said for this perpetrator!

God knows the truth and my family and I can sleep at night knowing we have done nothing but tell the truth. Cowardly Perpetrator, too bad you can't say the same!

Sincerely,

Paul T. Trambarulo

Wednesday, July 12, 2006 2:37:00 AM  
Blogger Peg said...

As an independent, unbiased party, who is aware of this entire Connecticut Probate Court mess involving Maydelle Tramburalo (and her prisoner status in CT), these are the facts as I have understood and witnessed (in most instances)them over the past two years:

1. The Tramburalo family is a NORMAL, upper middle-class family, who were intact as a family until Teresa Sirico arrived on the scene;

2. Teresa Sirico visited Maydelle and Ralph Tramburalo while they were living in Delaware (I personally helped with their move from NJ to DE -- wherein Paul and family implemented this move to HELP THEIR PARENTS and take care of them on a DAILY BASIS) while still holding down full-time jobs;

3. There is NO QUESTION in my mind that Paul and Anne love their parents intensely -- REGARDLESS OF ANY MONEY their parents may have. To Paul and Anne, this is NOT about money. It's about reuniting their family, and in particular their mother and father with each other;

4. Teresa Sirico offered to take Paul's mother to some medical facility near Yale (not sure of the place) and promised to return Paul's mother to Delaware within 30-60 days;

5. That promise was never kept. Instead Teresa Sirico filed for conservatorship over Paul's mother -- WHY? I am still asking this question today! I personally witnessed Paul's parents' living conditions, and they were exceptionally good. Whoever is writing these untruths about Paul abandoning his parents when he moved them less than a mile away from his home -- is guilty of defamation. Paul, I think you should consider a lawsuit against this person for the heinous and untrue remarks made about you;

6. While I don't know the legal definition of "kidnapping," I would be interested to know if taking a person over state lines, along with promising to return them within a specified time period -- and then not returning them -- is kidnapping? Paul's mother was not and is not mentally lucid enough to handle her own affairs -- so she had no control ovre what happened to her. She is a slight, soft-spoken, southern LADY who has been swept away from her family of 50 years!

7. Let me say for the record that I simply cannot believe something like this could happen in the United States of America. This means that a distant cousin of mine can stop in for a visit, take my mother over states lines, file for conservatorship in CT, and it's all over for my family! Peg

Wednesday, July 12, 2006 10:13:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am a disinterested party and know none of the Trambarulo family nor Ms. Sirico. The poster

who asks herself why,..."conservatorship over Paul's mother -- WHY? I am still asking this

question today!" The answer is Whenever someone files for conservatorship it is for CONTROL

and ALL THAT THAT IMPLIES! It brings the matter into the CT. probate system. If you do some

INTENSIVE research on CT. probate courts and how they work, you'll never have to ask

yourself "why" again.
I never paid attention to the probate system until fairly recently. (so you'll have to

read between the lines here). It is unfortunate that the matter was brought into the CT.

probate system. Please research, research, RESEARCH. You may notice that even the Governor

has been fairly NON COMMITTAL about the problems in the probate system. Rather telling.

THINK about it.
I'm a bit surprised that you, the Tramarulos, and Peg have not mentioned the post above

yours which has some "eerie" similarities.
Again, research, delve, find out what others say about the system in CT., find out what

reforms the Probate assembly has proposed, and see if you think they're adequate, or

"tokens" in order to continue their business as usual.
Again, I'm surprised that no mention was made of the post above your posts which seem

similar to your situation.
Peg"s post: as to your #7--It would seem so. BUT from what I was taught in school: a

constitutional right, one cannot be deprived of their liberty or possessions without due

process. BUT they even thought of that. Double court case. I believe a judge could order

counsel for the conservator and the estate would have to pay for that, thereby depriving the

beneficiaries. Why, then, would the beneficiaries pay for their attorney to protect their

interests AND pay for an attorney to fight AGAINST them.
All I can say is that it is heartbreaking to know that people in their twilight years
end up, it seems, to be fodder for a political machine. You know what is said about a

society which doesn't care about it's elderly...It's doomed.
P.S. I believe that last year Gov. signed into law a redefinition of the estate taxes and

raised probate court fees. Hmmm... to add insult to injury, it now COSTS MORE to die in CT!

uNLESS you learn how to protect yourself.

Wednesday, July 12, 2006 7:27:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

For those who have been watching the Daniel Gross case and the Trambarulo Case.... Read today's ( July 14th) column by Rick Green. Justice was finally served for Daniel Gross who had been held hostage by a probate court for about 10 months. 10 months out of an 86 year old man's life!!! His house in Long Island was going to be sold to pay lawyers appointed by the probate judge. I read it with tears in by eyes, and I thank Rick Green for enlightening us, and thank Judge Gormley for freeing Mr. Gross. Just think, If Mr. Gross had died from stress or, heart attack shortly after being incarcerated in a convalescent home, no one would have known about these injustices occuring in the Waterbury probate court.
I, also, as Rick Green, "wonder how many other Daniel Grosses there are, ones whose lives are buried in the backslapping underworld of probate court."
We all have to thank the two volunteer lawyers John Peters of West Hartford, and Veronica Halpine of Gr. Hartford Legal Aid too. They volunteered for justice sake and also enlightened us.
By the way, I just found out that the same probate judge who is also "judge" in Wolcott and Middlebury is running for office again and I believe, unopposed.

Friday, July 14, 2006 9:13:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank God!! Thank God for those that helped him!!!! Reading on, I wonder if someone can help the Trambarulo family? I see that the mother / wife in this case (who is actually from NJ) is being held hostage in the same type of situation. Apparently, from what I have been able to research and read, Maydelle Trambarulo (77 years old) is being held in CT by the probate courts and apparently with the ongoing coercion and persuasion of a Teresa Sirico. You can read the Trambarulo post in the June 2006 archives here under "Don't die in CT". My heart bleeds for the Trambarulo family also. Good God, this poor woman has been separated from her entire family and husband of 50 years!! I also read another post regarding this case, from someone who had a different version of this case- and a few follow ups to that response. You can easily tell from the negative response on the Trambarulo case, that the person who wrote it is obviously connected to it in some way. In my opinion, I would have to say that person may be the one who brought Mrs. Trambarulo to CT- and is fighting to keep her there. Please all, anyone, lets try to help the Trambarulo family.

Friday, July 14, 2006 10:54:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Forgot to mention that Rick Green's article was in the Hartford Courant yesterday (July 14th) and recommend you get a copy. What is amazing to me is that THE WATERBURY REPUBLICAN AMERICAN newspaper didn't cover the story, nor anything about the disposition of the case (from what I can see so far). There was no mention as to when that hearing was to have been held so that the citizens could attend either. The Waterbury, Wolcott and Middlebury people will be voting in the fall. That judge is running. How are the citizens to make an informed decision as to who to vote for without KNOWING about Mr. Gross' case. Wouldn't you think that newspaper is complicit, (has a stake in keeping the status quo). Who contributed to that "judges" campaign fund (which attorneys). What does the Waterbury Mayor think of this? You'll notice that Rick Green hit the nail on the head. He said, "Gross's shameful ordeal is a powerful lesson for our state legislators and Governor, who are unwilling to demand reform of Connecticut's shoddy probate Court system." Well, "shoddy" is an understatement. Remember that a judge ordered our Congressman Chris Shays (when he was a Representative) "to jail when he ctiticized corruption in that (probate) court system."
Gov. Rell is running on a platform which promises to clean up corruption, have transparency. Write to her and Representatives and Congressmen. As to reform, the probate assembly has made some reforms, but they seem to have bloated the system even more. Some of the reforms seem to be "token" reforms so that the system can operate... "business as usual."
The administator of the probate courts (Lawlor, also from Waterbury) in the Connecticut section of New York Times article, Judges and Lawyers Debate Probate System by Jane Gordon, said, " I have to take the position that these people are elected, and we have to be careful not to interfere with the charge of the electorate..." Well, how can they vote intelligently when their local paper is not forthcoming with information, in effect quashing information.
Write to the Governor, and Legislators and tell them that you want probate to be a special division of Superior Court.
If you are not a CT. taxpayer, speak to those who are. Educate them and have them write to Gov. and Legislators. Tell them that you object to the concept of PATRONAGE in the courts.

Saturday, July 15, 2006 9:00:00 AM  
Anonymous Anne Trambarulo Haines said...

This comment is from the REAL Anne Trambarulo Haines, not the cowardly liar who created a yahoo email account in my name and used it to submit a prevous posting.
We, the Trambarulo family, have been following the Daniel Gross case with great interest, as there are definite similarities. We are very happy that the Daniel Gross case has been resolved with justice, and hope that we too are able to find an honest judge in the state of Corrupticut!

In our case the corrupt CT probate court system is being used to full advantage by someone who knows exactly what to do, because she's done it before to ANOTHER family, the DeVitas. Ms Sirico has based her entire case on LIES, which are pretty much outlined in her post. (And by the way, Ms Sirico specifically targets her real estate marketing towards seniors, and promotes herself as an "elder advocate". Just visit her website!)
Ralph Trambarulo, Maydelle's husband of 50 years, is NOT senile, and wishes very much to be reunited with his wife, whom he misses greatly. Maydelle is in CT because Ms Sirico LIED to her family and told us she was "only taking her for 30-60 days, and don't you want the best care for your wife/mother?" Strange how Ms Sirico is pitting herself against her blood-related uncle and his entire family in order to maintain her control over his wife. Yes, this story is very much about control!
The Trambarulo FAMILY, NOT JUST PAUL, wants to regain control of our parent's money from a court which sanctions spending their hard-earned savings on lawyers, who bill for every minute at a rate of $200.00 per hour!!! The conservator ALONE has been paid over $48,000! At the last hearing on Wed, July 12, Judge Clifford Hoyle said he was being "generous" in granting Ralph 50% of the estate, when Ralph was the main contributor to that estate. Ralph had to get a mortgage at the age of 80 in order to buy a place to live, because Judge Hoyle will not allow him access to his own money! Maydelle put most of her money into separate accounts which are in her name. Maybe that's the REAL reason Ms Sirico is more interested in her "Aunt May"!
Ms Sirico has based her case on outrageous lies and accusations which a corrupt probate court is willing to believe, in order to line their pockets with my parents money! Specifically, the decision to move to Delaware was a FAMILY decision, and Paul absolutely did NOT "abandon" them there. My mother was NOT "starving in her own waste"! This is an outrageous LIE fabricated by Ms Sirico in order to help justify her actions.
Yes, the voters of Corrupticut need to be informed of their "elected" officials activities. (Judge Hoyle was "elected" with virtually no opposition!) We have tried on numerous occasions to interest the local New Haven and Orange media in our story, but have not suceeded. Politicians likewise have not responded.
Yes, our story is a damming indictment of an entire system, and how that system can be manipulated by someone who knows how.
Rick Green, where are you???

Saturday, July 15, 2006 10:20:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Have you thought of contacting the Attorney General in the State where Marydell had her last legal address? Just a thought here. As to Ms. Sirico(sp?)If she is a blood relative and IF she knew the matter would come before probate, she would not have been the first family member who used the probate system. IF she lied, she would not have been the first to lie. (I know). Of course she wouldn't have done it, if she didn't think she could count on "co-conspirators." Namely, the probate court and well connected attorneys. Appointed, independent conservators should be licensed and monitored. That system has failed in a few states, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't work in CT. Then again, what "judge" who had appointed a particular consevator, vigorously monitor their own appointee?? If malfeasance were to be uncovered, what would that say about his or her judgement anyway? He could be held responsible for what happened "under his watch"!! I think it usually doesn't come to light. (More Transparency??) Even though he/she is immune to civil suit, could be held responsible by the Council on Judicial Conduct which investigates complaints. ( You might like to look into how that council is structured. How many attorneys, how many lay people, and the new screening of complaints which disqualifies complaints before some even reaches the council etc.). I believe, ( but don't quote me as I'm not positive) that 86 complaints were filed between 2000 and 2004, but no probate judges were reprimanded. Remember, that any society that doesn't care for it's elderly or it's children is doomed. (that goes for the probate system also)
In Mr. Gross's case Judge Gormley freed him. From the article, "Gormley had harsh words for Gross's court-appointed lawyer, Jonathan Newman. Last September Newman urged ("judge") Brunnock to name a Conservator..." "It is obvious to me he grossly underrepresented and misrepresented Mr. Gross..." YET it only took Brunnock a few days to do so. Apparently, he didn't need TOO much URGING. (You'll have to read between the lines here). Diffussion of Responsibility?? That's how the system is set up. They should remove the profit motive from Probate courts and make it a division of Superior Courts and I think there wouldn't be "...terrible miscarriage (s) of justice as happened here ((Mr. Gross). That case was brought to light especially because Mr. Gross was a New York citizen/taxpayer.
If such "travesties" occur ( and we know that they do), how many CT citizen,Taxpaying constituents, who did/do not want to be "conserved" have been victimized. Who knows, but there may be a case to be made that anyone of them or their family members suffered from Legal Abuse Syndrome which is becoming more recognized as a basis for claims. Read Karin Huffer's book of same name or at least read a synopsis of it. Any litigation that succeeds would then cost the perpetrators of victimization I would THINK.

Saturday, July 15, 2006 2:16:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Web Posted:12/05/2005 John MacCormack Express-News Staff Writer wrote:
"'The Ward,' as she is identified in some court pleadings is a wealthy, 85-year old New
Jersey widow who spends her days cloistered with health care workers in an alamo Heights
apartment. She is never alone or free to leave. Her phone calls are monitored and visits must be approved by a lawyer...For nine months, Lillian Glasser has been an unwilling captive and the Central figure in a contentious family legal fight over her independence_and and her $25 million fortune. The ongoing battle has coct Glasser her freedom and left her desperate to go home. 'I want to be in New Jersey...I feel happy there.
The Glasser case has drawn the ire of New Jersey officials who say Texas courts are overreaching their juristiction...a judicial watchdog group says the case smacks of forum shopping and has become a cash cow for lawyers. She's being held hostageThey are not allowing her to come to New Jersey because they fear they will lose juristiction...She is being psychologically being tortured...While Glasser was on her annual vacation in Florida, her daughter fired long time caretaker and brought her to Texas." In any case, John MacCormack posted on 1/17/2006
'After spending 11 months against her will in San Antonio ...widow appears set to leave Texas and return to her traditional winter home. ..I'm free. I'm so excited i can hardly talk'( WHY SHOULD A LAW ABIDING SENIOR CITIZEN FEEL LIKE A WRONGLY CONVICTED PRISONER JUST SET FREE!!!) ...Though leaving Texas, Glasser will remain under the juristiction of Bexar CountyProbate Court." So, they relinquished conservatorship over her 'person," but apparently not her finances. "Once estimated at $25 million, Gasser's wealth has been reduced over one year by legal costs estimated at $3 million. What a disgrace!!!
Now the circumstances are similar, but the estates of Mr. Gross and Marydell probably do not approach Mrs. Glasser's. So... I liken their captors to nothing more than cfafty, machinating two-bit thugs carrying the mantle of "judge."
In Mr. MacCormacks article he mentions " a judicial watch dog group." I can't name it. Look into it. They are powerful.
Also, he mentions that New Jersey officials were upset ( transgression of juristiction). That's why I mentioned contacting Attorney General in Marydell's home state. Even Legislators and Gongressmen.
By now you must be wondering what I have to gain by putting so much into this... NOTHING! My father died 7 days after being incarcerated, because of the crafty machinations, of a corrupt system (the good ole backslapping boys), to provoke a confrontation between family members. In other words, they set my father up for the purpose of milking. But, more important than that, he died in a convalescent home ( not needed as he had round the clock care at home by the only child who cared for him), NOT non compus mentus, crying for the only family member who had cared for him. I remain anonmymous because I still have more work to do. It is my DUTY as I empathize with anyone in that situation. What a disgrace to exploit the elderly in the "name" of good. Criminals in this country don't experience that type of death. Not a shred of dignity, to call every night for the child who loves you, who is restricted from seeing you by another greedy family member, feeling betrayed and abandoned, all with the blessing of a well connected "judge." Probate should be a seperate division of Superior Court. These things would rarely happen.
By the way, I went into a Probate Court a few weeks ago and asked for a particular file and was told, "Oh,we don't keep files." Of Course they do! They must. Haven't they heard of Freedom of Information Act and the Sunshine Laws.

Saturday, July 15, 2006 8:52:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

TRAMBARULO CASE. In a reply to a previous post. The "victim" here, is the ward- Maydelle Trambarulo and her entire family. The person responsible for holding her from her family, bringing it into court, and keeping it in the courts- is Teresa Sirico. Ms. Sirico knows the CT probate courts quite well, as she has done this before. Ms. Sirico "looks" to be a care taker of the elder, conservatorships, generous donations to elder care centers, and a very well established realtor in the New Haven area. After viewing some credentials and information on Ms. Sirico- who would believe that this "upstanding" citizen on the community would be involved in something like this case? We do, have witnessed it, lived it, and our still fighting the wrongs of the acts of Ms. Sirico and the probate courts. Ms. Sirico has done this before, if you are able to legally research a case brought into the CT courts by the Devita family- you will find enough ERIE information to relate to the present case. This woman obviously has MANY political connections in the area of New Haven. Her family is well known from a background of doctor's, lawyers, and judges. Ms. Sirico has used all of this to her advantage, and will continue the fight to keep the ward Maydelle Trambarulo in CT away from her husband of 50 years, 4 children, and many grandchildren. What's the goal of Ms. Sirico you ask? The goals of this woman are to always win (no matter what or who it costs), and a large payout in the end I would think. Ms. Sirico is not even the wards own family member, she is actually the niece of the wards husband (Ralph Trambarulo). Ms. Sirico has also dropped her own Uncle, stated that she doesn't care about him, and continues her outrageous and vicious fight to keep this poor woman away from her family. Ms. Sirico presently I believe has the actual conservator (Mark DellaValle), GAL Robin Berke, and the wards court appointed attorney (Paul Whitaker) snowed- and in her pocket. The legal parties that are involved in this case are from impartial, and of course are keeping their wallets lined with the Trambarulo's money. The judge in this case, again is completely bias (Judge Clifford Hoyle). The judge refuses to hear any valid testimony from the wards OWN family, dismisses them and their evidence, and has NO concern for the health of the wards husband- which is detiorating. Ms. Sirico has single handedly managed to keep close tabs on the ward, and continues to manipulate and control the ward- WITH the conservator's approval. Maydelle Trambarulo’s own family are NOT even allowed to communicate with the conservator =- but Ms. Sirico can and does. Ms. Sirico didn’t even have any contact with Maydelle Trambarulo for 10+ years- until she learned that she was ill- and immediately saw a prize in her eyes. Ms. Sirico you may as well say as much as kidnapped the ward from her home in DE. It was a calculated, manipulative, and well organized process that Ms. Sirico used to take the ward to CT. Her approach was to take the ward to CT for 30-60 days to give her the best health care that the ward could receive (supposedly by Yale Doctors which never happened). Once getting the ward into CT, Ms. Sirico immediately obtained temporary conservatorship over Maydelle Trambarulo (based on lies and manipulation in the Woodbridge Probate Court). The story has continued from there since August 2004!!! Please keep your loved elders away from this woman (Ms. Sirico) - and please help the Trambarulo family in any way that you can to help the ward and her family. The family's attorney in this case, is attorney Ed Longinotti of the firm:


Levin, Ford & Paulekas, LLP
280 Trumbull Street, suite 2200
Hartford, CT 06103
Phone: (860) 527-0400

Sunday, July 16, 2006 11:48:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

TRAMBARULO CASE. In a reply to a previous post. The "victim" here, is the ward- Maydelle Trambarulo and her entire family. The person responsible for holding her from her family, bringing it into court, and keeping it in the courts- is Teresa Sirico. Ms. Sirico knows the CT probate courts quite well, as she has done this before. Ms. Sirico "looks" to be a care taker of the elder, conservatorships, generous donations to elder care centers, and a very well established realtor in the New Haven area. After viewing some credentials and information on Ms. Sirico- who would believe that this "upstanding" citizen on the community would be involved in something like this case? We do, have witnessed it, lived it, and our still fighting the wrongs of the acts of Ms. Sirico and the probate courts. Ms. Sirico has done this before, if you are able to legally research a case brought into the CT courts by the Devita family- you will find enough ERIE information to relate to the present case. This woman obviously has MANY political connections in the area of New Haven. Her family is well known from a background of doctor's, lawyers, and judges. Ms. Sirico has used all of this to her advantage, and will continue the fight to keep the ward Maydelle Trambarulo in CT away from her husband of 50 years, 4 children, and many grandchildren. What's the goal of Ms. Sirico you ask? The goals of this woman are to always win (no matter what or who it costs), and a large payout in the end I would think. Ms. Sirico is not even the wards own family member, she is actually the niece of the wards husband (Ralph Trambarulo). Ms. Sirico has also dropped her own Uncle, stated that she doesn't care about him, and continues her outrageous and vicious fight to keep this poor woman away from her family. Ms. Sirico presently I believe has the actual conservator (Mark DellaValle), GAL Robin Berke, and the wards court appointed attorney (Paul Whitaker) snowed- and in her pocket. The legal parties that are involved in this case are from impartial, and of course are keeping their wallets lined with the Trambarulo's money. The judge in this case, again is completely bias (Judge Clifford Hoyle). The judge refuses to hear any valid testimony from the wards OWN family, dismisses them and their evidence, and has NO concern for the health of the wards husband- which is detiorating. Ms. Sirico has single handedly managed to keep close tabs on the ward, and continues to manipulate and control the ward- WITH the conservator's approval. Maydelle Trambarulo’s own family are NOT even allowed to communicate with the conservator =- but Ms. Sirico can and does. Ms. Sirico didn’t even have any contact with Maydelle Trambarulo for 10+ years- until she learned that she was ill- and immediately saw a prize in her eyes. Ms. Sirico you may as well say as much as kidnapped the ward from her home in DE. It was a calculated, manipulative, and well organized process that Ms. Sirico used to take the ward to CT. Her approach was to take the ward to CT for 30-60 days to give her the best health care that the ward could receive (supposedly by Yale Doctors which never happened). Once getting the ward into CT, Ms. Sirico immediately obtained temporary conservatorship over Maydelle Trambarulo (based on lies and manipulation in the Woodbridge Probate Court). The story has continued from there since August 2004!!! Please keep your loved elders away from this woman (Ms. Sirico) - and please help the Trambarulo family in any way that you can to help the ward and her family. The family's attorney in this case, is attorney Ed Longinotti of the firm:


Levin, Ford & Paulekas, LLP
280 Trumbull Street, suite 2200
Hartford, CT 06103
Phone: (860) 527-0400

Sunday, July 16, 2006 11:59:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The conservator, appointed feduciary, court appointed lawyer do not have to communicate with the Trambarulo family because they have an attorney, but they MUST, MUST, MUST communicate with the Trambarulo family's attorney. One of the "tricks" that have been used in some cases is to stall, stonewall so that the family's attorney has to make continued,repeated requests thereby taking up more time and more money, thereby depriving the beneficiaries, depleting their resources in the hopes that they will give up, while everyone else is lining their pockets. The profit motive needs to be removed from these little franchise operations (probate). Probate should be a special division of Superior Court.
Gov. Jodi Rell is running on a platform that promises to restore the faith of the people of CT. in the INTEGRITY of our state Government. That could never happen unless she has the intestial fortitude to refuse to accept the "token" reforms proposed by the probate system. She must see that there is more transparency. Behind closed doors is where corruption has the opportunity to fester. The Governor and Legislators need to remove the profit motive from the probate courts. Probate needs to be abolished and it's function should be a division of Superior court. How could she restore faith in the INTEGRITY of CT. Government when CT. probate courts are considered a NATIONAL disgrace, When the CT. probate courts are the laughing stock of the Country??
If this is what is happening why would anyone want to move to CT. Why would anyone want to even visit, ( they might have to worry that if they got sick, then went to a CT. hospital, and then somehow get embroiled in a probate court) Why would anyone want to give their tax dollars to the State?
Yes, it would take courage for The Governor and Legislators to remove the profit motive from probate and make it a division of Superior Court, but I see it as the only way to restore faith in ANY of three branches of Government.
To Maydell's family, it doesn't do much good to harange about the particulars about Ms. Sirico. Belive me, the probate assembly knows that there are probably many. In Jane Gordon's article (see above) One CT. Representative dismissed the problems, "There are certainly isolated and anecdotal issues... Judges in small towns who are in legal practice create some difficult situations ethically." How does he know how isolated. He may have made the understatement of the Century, since these "issues" seldom come to light. It is the PATRONAGE. IT'S THE SYSTEM.
More openness, transparency is needed. As I said, behind CLOSED doors is where corruption has the opportunity to fester. Knowing human nature as I do, it will certainly occur. There are certain areas/districts/cities which have had a milieu of corruption for years (read between the lines here).
Write to Gov.Rell, Congressmen and Representatives, to restore faith in the Government in CT.

Monday, July 17, 2006 10:19:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The reason details about Ms sirico are important is that they help to show the depths of injustice in this case. If you want to change a situation requiring voters to demand the change, specific details help to personalize the issue and get people excited enough to tell their elected represenatives to DO SOMETHING about it.

When enough cases such as Daniel Gross' and the Trambarulo case are brought to the attention of the public, it makes people AWARE that there IS a problem with the whole probate system. People just don't seem to get as interested in abstract concepts devoid of human interest!

Monday, July 17, 2006 6:12:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I understand full well what you are feeling. Believe me. It was a relative not by blood, but by marriage (WITH THE BLESSING OF HER HUSBAND, A BLOOD RELATIVE. WHAT CAN I SAY BUT THAT LOVE MAKES SOME MEN STUPID), who brought such destruction to my father before he died, me, and my child who is now seriously ill. She is a fragile person who is suffering from Legal Abuse Syndrome. They knew she was vulnerable and so violated the law, and harrased us with police visits while we were taking care of a sick man around the clock, suffering from caretaker burnout and all without warrants, and all with the blessing of a probate judge, without warrants. FOR NO REASON!! Only to harrass. My father made it clear to police, judge and others that he didn't want to see his two sons as "they took advantage of me. And they're not very nice to my daughter." They ( court appointed conservator of "the person" brought a son there with his wife who was screaming at my father behind closed doors and when I tried to go in to protect my father from this non-family interloper, I was stopped by the court appointed conservator and told, "He's O.K." They shouldn't have been there in the first place!Court appointed "conservator of the person " may have just been following orders by judge of probate. It is an INDUSTRY and they will protect their turf! I know that personal stories bring home the point, but recently someone (very knowledgeable ) told me "You have to get people together." The problem is, People are afaid to speak out. We know that people have been victimized, we know that people have had their constitutional rights violated by a corrupt system based on PROFIT, but you remember that Congressman Chris Shays was ordered to jail by a judge for speaking out about "the corruption in the (probate) Courts." It is an Industry! Shouldn't be, but that is what it is. The LIES are obvious, but they serve the purpose of a corrupt system that is out to milk. They KNOW who is perpetrating LIES, THEY DON'T CARE BECAUSE THEY HAVE IT IN THE SYSTEM AND CAN MILK. In other words, TRUTH doesn't matter as long as the judge and his buddies can line their pockets.

Monday, July 17, 2006 7:41:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Haven't heard anything, but would like to know how Maydelle is doing. I think of her and Mr. Gross every day.
I spoke to an attorney today about probate CT. in general. I was surprised when he said, "there
is something going on in probate now which I'm very, very concerned about. It's that anyone can go through probate records. They get info and sell it to marketers, a scammer could get info and scam a widow, widower etc. etc."
Excuse me!! I'd rather fend off a scammer, I think I'm astute enough to do that. BUT by pushing to close records, we would not have known about Mr. Gross or Maydell.
With the reports of some attorneys extorting money from estates(been documented) fraud, and other abuses,( been documented) there had better be more transparency, more openess. Don't let anyone push to seal any records. Before you know it, State and Federal authorities might not be able to investigate and audit. There should be financial disclosure. Corruption occurs behind closed doors. Don't give up. If the local papers won't take up Maydelle's cause contact The New York Times (large circulation.) If people won't bring their tax dollars to CT, and those who live here take their tax dollars elsewhere because of the probate system, the Gov. and Legislators are going to have to clean up probate EXTENSIVELY or abolish it.

Friday, July 21, 2006 12:22:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In response to the previous post on Trambarulo / Gross. Maydelle is in a nursing home called Birmingham in Derby. Maydelle was determined months ago to be incompetent supported by the court, but is used “selectively” by the legal parties in CT. Maydelle has been kept away from her spouse and children for two years next month. Maydelle is under the sometimes daily presence of the woman who brought her to CT in the first place, Teresa Sirico. When Maydelle is under the influence of Ms. Sirico, she gets continual brainwashing that she needs to stay in CT. Statements have been used on Maydelle that her family doesn’t care about her, they almost let her die in the state of Delaware, and other assorted mind manipulating lies to coerce the ward (Maydelle) to stay where she is. The family actually found a “coaching” sheet left in Maydelle’s night stand by Teresa Sirico and her friend and social worker Elayne Haynes. The coaching sheet was for Maydelle to practice that she wanted to stay in CT with Teresa Sirico. Maydelle’s mind is very fragile, she suffers from Parkinson’s and I believe also Dementia. Maydelle only knows what is going on in front of her, and is being rehearsed on a daily basis. Ms. Sirico would like the public to believe that she is a hero to Maydelle, saved her, and continues to work for her benefit. Ms. Sirico knows the probate court system very well, and uses her knowledge and connections to her full advantage to keep the fight going, keep the ward in CT, and keep her away from her family.

The last court hearing was held on July 13, 2006 in the court room of Judge Clifford Hoyle. In the courtroom Ed Longinotti (Trambarulo Family Attorney), Don Swift (Attorney for Ms. Sirico), Robyn Berke (Court appointed GAL), Mark DellaValle (Court appointed Conservator, and Paul Whitaker (Court Appointed attorney for the ward) were present. The court hearing was on the following:

1) Moving the ward to Mariner’s Point Assisted Living (note 2 miles from Ms. Sirico’s office). This move was already ruled against by Judge Hoyle in January 2006- but is up for ruling AGAIN next week. The family objects the move due to cost, relocation, and believes that the only move for the ward should be back to her family in NJ. The move is just another tactic being pushed by Ms. Sirico to retain the ward in CT- which we believe that the legal parties involved are supporting as they all seem to be bonded together with the Judge and Ms. Sirico.
2) Division of Assets- The wards spouse (Ralph Trambarulo) has been left since January 2005 with his assets frozen due to the ongoing court battle in CT. The judge ordered that the funds held jointly by husband and wife be frozen- with no regards for the 81 year old spouse. The spouse had to obtain a mortgage at age 81- because he couldn’t access his own money. The court has no regard for the spouse, and has made that blatantly clear. Judge Hoyle granted last week that the spouse could be granted 50 % of the asset’s- and said that he was being generous doing so. The family disagrees, as the ward herself has no knowledge of her own money, expenses, and the legal parties are benefiting from heftily lining their pockets with the Trambarulo’s money. The Trambarulo’s monies are being quickly swept away in attorney fees, conservator fees, GAL fees, etc. The Trambarulo family of course has had to pay an extraordinary large amount in their own attorney fees as well to fight the case. After all, in the probate court, why send the ward home to her family when so many are benefiting from her funds?
3) The family’s attorney provided Judge Hoyle with a doctor’s letter from the spouse’s husband, stating that the spouse (Ralph) is not in good health, depressed, and would greatly benefit the ward and spouse to be back together. Judge Hoyle told Trambarulo family attorney that he did not wish to acknowledge any presented documentation from the family attorney, and did not. Once gain the family and spouse of the ward were outcasted in the court room of Judge Hoyle- and the request of the attorney of Sirico (and her apparent clan) were acknowledged. The ward herself has made phone calls to the conservator demanding to be returned home to her family- which has been ignored by Judge Hoyle. The ward (Maydelle Trambarulo) described her situation last month as “living hell, isolated, and wanted to go home to her family”. This of course was ignored. The Gal Robyn Berke basically said after waiting three days to talk to the ward, that the complaint was unfounded. Notarized letters from witnesses to conversations with the ward stating that she wanted to return home (and that she was under the duress of Ms. Sirico) were provided to Judge Hoyle last week also. Judge Hoyle refused to hear or allow the documentation to be presented. Sounds like a conspiracy to me- what do you think? Judge Hoyle is going to “allow” a new court hearing though surprisingly, to hear the testimony of all again regarding the ward staying in CT. I wonder if this is simply because there is a Superior Court hearing pending on this case, and he may want to buckle his shoes?

The bottom line is that this case is not, was not, and will not be heard fairly in the probate court under Judge Hoyle. The family needs to file a written complaint against the Judge- based on his bias rulings and conduct. The family attorney last week in the Judge Hoyle’s courtroom was treated as if he was some kind of a third party in the hearing, was shut down, and without reservation treated hostily by Judge Hoyle. The family and family attorney had requested that the GAL Robyn Berke step down from her role, as the family and attorney do not believe she is competent and involved enough to be in the position. Judge Hoyle immediately dismissed that request, and ordered that Robyn Berke will remain. The court hearing resulted in a 5 /1 ruling against the family and their attorney. The conservator, Mark DellaValle, really also is in no place to be in a position of managing and controlling the ward and her estate. Mr. DellaValle’s legal specialty is in collections!! The never ending outrageous story continues, and so could I- but I’m almost so tired and disgusted about even talking about it. Can anyone out there please help this family?

Friday, July 21, 2006 2:52:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A quote from an above post:
"Although most cases which come before the probate court are concerned with wills and the wishes of the deceased, probate courts are also given jurisdiction over the lives of those who are judged no longer competent
to make important decisions for themselves." As you can see from Daniel Gross's case, the judge quickly took Juristiction (a few days?) of his life and property.
And from what I can see, he had not been judged incompetant. So, his constitutional rights had been violated. I don't know the procedure by which Maydell was
determined to be incompetant. Parkinson's is an altogether different thing.
The important thing is that she be safe and comfortable, as well as her husband.
From a previous post, Article by John MacCormack Express-News Staff Writer,
"They are not allowing her to come to New Jersey because they fear they will lose juristiction...
She is being psychologically tortured...
While Glasser was on her annual vacation in Florida, her daughter fired long time caretaker and brought her to Texas." In any case, John MacCormack
posted on 1/17/2006.
' "After spending 11 months against her will in San Antonio ...widow appears
set to leave Texas and return to her traditional winter home. ..I'm free. I'm so excited I can hardly talk'( WHY SHOULD A LAW ABIDING SENIOR CITIZEN
FEEL LIKE A WRONGLY CONVICTED PRISONER JUST SET FREE!!!)' ...Though leaving Texas,
Glasser will remain under the juristiction of BexarCountyProbate Court."
So, they relinquished conservatorship over her "person," but NOT her finances. "Once estimated at $25 million, Gasser's wealth has
been reduced over one year by legal costs estimated at $3 millioN."
Texas doesn't have a very good reputation in regards to probate from what I've found.
This is what I read recently, I believe, by Professor Langbein Yale Law Prof.
"...far from clear that Connecticut probate could withstand constitutional
scrutiny on this ground under the Due Process clause of the U.S. Constitution.
When Liberty and property are at stake, the state has an obligation to operateunder procedures
commensurate with the seriousness of the affected interests.
See, e.g., Mathews v.Eldridge, 424 U.S.319 (1976) What was the procedure by which Maydell was
determined to be incompetant. Three separate physicians
qualified to do so? Who paid those physicians?
You'll notice that some newspapers will not print when there will be a hearing.
This should be a lesson for everyone no matter what State they live in. A Living Will ( to avoid
( To Avoid the Teri Schiavo situation) and a LIVING TRUST is
what you want, so that you can STAY OUT of PROBATE. Still should make a REG. wILL.
Even if you're part owner of property, you can put your part in a LIVING TRUST so can save on Fed. Taxes and PROBATE COSTS. I'm not an estate Planner so look into it
I AM! As long as PROBATE operates in the way that it does in CT.,
AVOID IT AT ALL COSTS. Since Probate is a business,
if Trusts can keep everyone and everything out of that system, there will be no need for Probate. Keep posted on the hearings and when Superior court
will hear. All that time, stress and money, not to mention
how we treat the elderly. What a disgrace! When a probate judge makes a ruling you do not agree with, the only way to appeal is to go to Superior court. Double trial, more money. Why another hearing before it's heard in Superior court? More money for everyone? I'd tell them NO MORE STALLING, NO MORE HEARINGS, PROBATE HAD IT'S SHOT. HEAR THE CASE IN SUPERIOR COURT.
How short sighted... Don't they realize that those who abuse the system will bring about it's demise?? Token reforms will do nothing. The purpose is only so
as to be able to continue " business as usual."

Saturday, July 22, 2006 1:10:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't know the particulars and in no way want to make a value judgement either way. I'm commenting on the probate system itself which is set up in such a way that these things happen. As the saying goes, "Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely." So,if you're going to Superior Court you should try to have the hearing soon. And make sure that Maydelle is kept safe and healthy. Keep posted as to date of hearing in Superior Court.
I can hear your frustration, and know that you feel betrayed, victimized by what you see to be an interloper who didn't spend time with either Ralph or Maydelle, and victimized by the probate system.
Actually you've been abused by the legal system because this has been PROLONGED. At least you'll have the oportunity to go to Superior court. Strange that there's another hearing before a hearing in Superior Court.
A Request was denied, and now it's coming up again for review???
If you went to Superior Court wouldn't that be something Superior Court should rule on? Shouldn't Superior court decide on whether she can go home to her own State if that is best for her, her husband and children? They ARE her immediate family.
Time is of the essence. You have Living Probate and Death Probate. What would happen if Maydelle should pass away in CT. Wouldn't her assets be in the hands of CT. probate to be redistributed by strangers? Sounds like stall tactics, biding time. Is your attorney working zealously to get it into Superior Court?
If you want to have superior court decide, at least it's not run as a business. Conflict of interest is built into the probate system by the very nature of the way it's structured.

Saturday, July 22, 2006 2:48:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

TRAMBARULO UPDATE

Much of the same CT probate court nonsense and such. There was an evaluation given to the ward, Maydelle, to determine if she was a candidate to be moved to the Mariners Point Assisted Living Facility (exactly 2.5 miles from the office of Teresa Sirico). Recapping, Teresa Sirico is the niece of the wards husband, who brought the ward to CT and continues the fight to keep her there). The evaluation on Maydelle will be presented to the Judge at the next scheduled probate court hearing by Judge Hoyle. We are pretty much certain that Judge Hoyle will grant the move to the assisted living facility. The Judge will not grant a move to any assisted living facility or nursing home in NJ where the spouse and a few children and grand children reside.

The move to assisted living has been pushed for months by Teresa Sirico in order to keep control over the ward, and keep her in close proximity and away from her family. Details of the case in full can be read in these blog entries.

The Judge has “allowed” a new trial to be set in his probate court to rehear the case in full, as the family knows that they were not given a fair trial in his court room. The family is denying the new trial plans, as they see no need to sit through another session in the court room with the same parties in corruption. The family is waiting for a Superior Court Appeal date, which has been pending since January.

In a fight to keep the wards money and that of her spouse in CT, the conservator (Mark DellaValle) is once again pulling any and all strings to further complicate the spouse receiving ample funds from the estate. The Judge “graciously” ruled that the estate of the couple be split 50 / 50. The spouse of the ward, Ralph, lives in NJ and has had no access to his own money frozen by the probate court for over 1 year now. Of course the goal of the parties in CT is to continue to bleed the money of the elderly couple. No concern or regard has been given by the Judge to the spouse, Ralph, who is 81 years old and not in good health. The move to the assisted living facility is just another control tactic to keep the ward and her money in the hands of CT.

Robyn Berke (maybe Robyn Burke) was asked to step down as GAL of the ward by the family attorney. Of course, the incompetent GAL refused- and the Judge ruled against it also. The Judge is definitely bias toward the wards family and spouse, and supportive of Teresa Sirico and the legal parties surrounding and supporting her. A rotten connection between the Judge, Ms. Sirico, and the other parties would seem to be assumable. A FAIR court, a FAIR trial- not in this case- and I don’t believe that there will be one in the hands of the probate courts.

Please say a prayer for Maydelle, Ralph, children, and grand children in this case who have been stripped from having their wife, mother, and grandmother robbed and held hostage in CT. Maydelle Trambarulo has now been held captive by the CT court system for 2 years.

Tuesday, August 01, 2006 12:04:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't know if I can send a link, but I'll try. This may be something for you to know.
Also, If Maydelle has been held for 2 years taking her liberty and property without an evaluation, and without opportunity for due process, then you might like to contact: This is a commision, but it's time for replies will soon be over Aug. 10

http://hartford.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=hartford&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fctnewsjunkie.com%2F There is another commision:
I understand that Gov. Rell wants input from the public about lack of openness in courts.
Hope above link gets to you and also that you write to Gov. Rell. She is going to travel to some towns for input also. Try to get the Hartford Courant on line for dates of meetings.
It is behind closed doors that corruption occurs. NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW, EVEN "JUDGES."

Thursday, August 03, 2006 10:52:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't know if I can send a link, but I'll try. This may be something for you to know.
Also, If Maydelle has been held for 2 years taking her liberty and property without an evaluation, and without opportunity for due process, then you might like to contact: This is a commision, but it's time for replies will soon be over Aug. 10

http://hartford.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=hartford&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fctnewsjunkie.com%2F There is another commision:
I understand that Gov. Rell wants input from the public about lack of openness in courts.
Hope above link gets to you and also that you write to Gov. Rell. She is going to travel to some towns for input also. Try to get the Hartford Courant on line for dates of meetings.
It is behind closed doors that corruption occurs. NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW, EVEN "JUDGES."

Thursday, August 03, 2006 10:57:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Trambarulos don't really know but you may want to contact

Public Access Task Force
Second Floor, Room J-202
Supreme Court Building
231 Capitol Avenue
Hartford, CT 06106

BEFORE AUG.10th

You may remember that Mr. Gross' house had been ordered put up for sale by the probate judge to pay the court appointed lawyers. I believe that after the Superior Court Hearing his house was saved and he was "allowed" to return home.

Thursday, August 03, 2006 11:08:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't know if I can send a link, but I'll try. This may be something for you to know.
Also, If Maydelle has been held for 2 years, taking her liberty and property without an evaluation, (You said she was determined to be incompetent, but by WHOM! Were the evaluators appointed by the court?), and without opportunity for due process, then you might like to contact: This is a commision, but it's time for replies will soon be over Aug. 10

Public Access Task Force
Second Floor, Room J-202
Supreme Court Building
231 Capitol Avenue
Hartford, CT 06106

BEFORE AUG.10th

There is another commision:
I understand that Gov. Rell wants input from the public about lack of openness in courts.
Hope above link gets to you and also that you write to Gov. Rell. She is going to travel to some towns for input also. Try to get the Hartford Courant online for dates of meetings.
It is behind closed doors that corruption occurs. NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW, EVEN PROBATE "JUDGES."

Here is a link: Scroll down to PUBLIC SAYS JUDICIAL OVERSITE... tHEN CHECK THE COMMENT


http://hartford.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=hartford&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fctnewsjunkie.com%2F


You may remember that Mr. Gross' house had been ordered put up for sale by the probate judge in Waterbury, CT.to pay the court appointed lawyers. I believe that after the Superior Court Hearing his house was saved and he was "allowed" to return home.

Thursday, August 03, 2006 1:43:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

TRAMBARULO UPDATE:

Read through to the bottom of the post for the most recent information:

A great travesty of justice is occurring in Connecticut, fostered by a corrupt probate court system which feeds on the estates of those unfortunate enough to fall into its clutches. Although most cases which come before the probate court are concerned with wills and the wishes of the deceased, probate courts are also given jurisdiction over the lives of those who are judged no longer competent to make important decisions for themselves.
This jurisdiction is being used to make judgments which are clearly NOT in the best interests of Maydelle Trambarulo, ward of the court, and her family. We, her family, wish to protest the decisions made by Judge Clifford Hoyle, acting Judge for Woodbridge Probate Court, as neither impartial nor fair. We plan to appeal his verdict to a higher Court, but we also feel that Judge Hoyle’s conduct of this case should be investigated on both legal and moral grounds. He brings great discredit to the Probate Court system of CT in both his handling of this case and the decision he rendered. His conduct, as well as the conduct of Mark DellaValle, “independent” conservator of Mrs. Trambarulo, Paul Whittaker, court appointed attorney for Mrs. Trambarulo, and Robyn Berke, court appointed guardian ad litem, has been a disgrace to the legal profession.
Why is this happening? Professor John Langbein, Sterling Professor of Law at Yale Law School, recently testified before the Connecticut legislature during their review and investigation of Connecticut’s probate court system. According to Professor Langbein, people should “try not to die in Connecticut”, as Connecticut has long been considered a “poster child for how not to organize probate courts.” To further quote Professor Langbein,
“The perverse financial incentives that pervade our probate system are a disgrace. Goal Number One of probate reform in Connecticut should be to sever the link between court proceedings and profit. Any system of judicial procedure that compensates judges or court officers for stirring up more work is wrong. … Our corrupt system of franchise-style probate courts has given the judges a powerful vested interest in preventing reforms that would lower costs and speed probate procedure.” (“The Scandal of Connecticut’s Probate Courts”, Testimony to CT Legislature Committee on Program Review and Investigation, Hartford, CT, Oct. 7, 2005)
Our family has experienced this self-serving system first hand, containing an insidious corruption of cronyism and greed, in this case being used to the utmost by someone who knows how to manipulate the system for her own perfidious ends.
Background
The case was brought before the Probate Court of Woodbridge CT by Ms Teresa Sirico of New Haven on behalf of our wife and mother, Maydelle Trambarulo, without our knowledge or consent. Ms. Sirico brought Mrs. Trambarulo to CT for rehabilitative therapy for a broken hip. Ms Sirico, who is the niece of Maydelle’s husband Ralph Trambarulo, told us that she wished to bring Maydelle to a “top-notch facility affiliated with Yale University, for a period of 30-60 days”, and then would return her to her home in Delaware. Why did we agree? We trusted Ms Sirico as a family member, believing her to be acting in Maydelle’s best interests, never dreaming of the nightmare which would follow. Maydelle was essentially kidnapped, as she NEVER intended to make Connecticut her permanent residence. We testified in probate court hearings that Ms Sirico lied to us about this and other matters, but our testimony was ignored. We also contested the court’s jurisdiction in this case, based on the grounds that Mrs. Trambarulo does not have domicile in the state of CT, but Judge Hoyle based his decision on her residency in CT, a residency that was obtained through the deceitful words and actions of Ms. Sirico.
Ms Sirico, a real estate broker in the New Haven area, targets the elderly in marketing her business, and also touts herself as a champion of the elderly, as she has endowed a foundation at SCSU for issues affecting the elderly. She knows the laws and procedures regarding conservatorship quite well, since she was involved in a similar prior case (DeVita vs. Sirico, 29 CLR 449 (2001, 2002, 2003)). The facts in this case are eerily familiar. We brought this case to the attention of the court, but again, our testimony was totally ignored. We believe Ms. Sirico is a ruthless SERIAL family destroyer, aided and abetted by a court system she knows very well and manipulates for her own twisted purposes.
We received paperwork from the Woodbridge court in October 2004 advising us of Ms Sirico’s ex parte application for temporary conservatorship of Maydelle’s person and estate after Ms Sirico first had Maydelle declared incompetent using her Power of Attorney. Ms Sirico claimed that Maydelle’s financial affairs were “in disarray”, which WAS NOT TRUE. We disputed her application, and attended a hearing in Woodbridge CT in November 2004, before Judge Robert Horowitz. Peter Barrett, our attorney at the time, advised us that the appointment of an independent conservator was probably the wisest course, as none of us lives in CT. We agreed, envisioning a neutral party whom we could work with. Attorney Mark DellaValle was appointed by the court as conservator of both Maydelle’s person and estate. The court also appointed Paul Whittaker as Maydelle’s attorney and Robyn Berke as guardian ad litem.(GAL). Judge Clifford Hoyle replaced Judge Horowitz as acting Judge of Woodbridge Probate Court in January 2005.
Our goal then and now was to reunite Maydelle with her husband and family while ensuring high quality medical care for her. Ralph had moved from Delaware back to New Jersey (where he and Maydelle lived for 48 years prior to their move to Delaware in 2003) to live near Anne, their eldest daughter. Daughter Margaret also lives in New Jersey. We asked Mr. DellaValle to consider moving Maydelle back to New Jersey, which he refused to do. In February, 2005, Maydelle nearly died of an infection she contracted while a resident at The Willows-Harborside facility in Woodbridge, CT (the facility she was taken to by Ms Sirico), and was later moved to Birmingham Health Care Center in Derby, CT, where she presently resides. We presented a motion to reunite Maydelle with her family to the court in May 2005. Hearings were held in June 2005 in which members of Maydelle’s family were subjected to interrogation more appropriate to a criminal trial. It should be noted that attorneys Della Valle, Whittaker and Berke have always been adversarial to us and sympathetic to Ms Sirico. We hoped that Judge Hoyle would consider the testimony we presented to the court concerning Ms Sirico’s activities and her manipulative and deceitful behavior. Once again, our testimony was totally ignored by the court.
In November, our attorney, John Berman presented a motion disputing the Court’s jurisdiction over the case, based on the fact that Maydelle is not presently (and never has been) domiciled in CT. Ms Sirico presented motions applying for co-conservatorship and an “emergency” motion to move Mrs Trambarulo to an assisted living facility closer to her. These motions were denied by the court. We then waited 3 months for Judge Hoyle’s decision. We had previously waited 4 months for a decision on the earlier motion, and when no decision was forthcoming, asked that the decision be delayed until the jurisdictional motion was ruled upon. (Ironically, the following quote is from a recent article on probate court reform, “Woodbridge acting Probate Judge, Clifford Hoyle, advocated the present system, saying, "In a contested case, it doesn't take years." The Orange Bulletin, 02/02/2006
We will address the following charges:
1.Outrageous statements without proof:
In his judgment (dated January 12, 2006, but not received by the court until February 21), Judge Hoyle made many statements which we strongly dispute. He stated that we “seem to be indifferent to her care”. This is absolutely outrageous!!! First and most importantly, we love Maydelle, our wife and mother, and care very deeply and sincerely about her welfare. We are not “indifferent to her care”, but have been shut out of the day-to-day decision-making and information by both the conservator and our physical separation from CT. We are being penalized by the court for having spouses, families and jobs.
2. Discrimination based on age and medical infirmities:
Judge Hoyle dismissed Mrs. Trambarulo’s husband Ralph as “elderly, infirm and … has been unable to care for himself for some time.” Judge Hoyle never acknowledges that her husband’s circumstances and residence have also changed, and that he now has a live-in aide in his own home. Again, Judge Hoyle ignored testimony we presented regarding Ralph’s medical conditions, including a letter from Ralph’s doctor. Judge Hoyle’s statement also displays callous disregard for the rights of this couple to pass their remaining years together. Ralph is being discriminated against on the basis of his age, as he is not able to speak for himself as vigorously as he would if he was younger. Ralph is no longer able to travel to CT to see his wife. Although he realizes they can no longer reside together due to her health issues, he very much wishes to be able to see his WIFE OF 50 YEARS on a daily basis.
Apparently Judge Hoyle has chosen to believe Ms. Sirico’s allegations (again a baseless lie) that her uncle (by blood) is “senile”. This is from someone (Sirico) who presents herself as a champion of the elderly! Maydelle is the spouse who has been declared mentally incompetent, NOT Ralph! The court in its decision is taking advantage of Ralph’s age and infirmities to deprive him of his constitutional right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, namely the companionship of his wife of 50 years. Maydelle is also certainly being deprived of the same rights, as she has stated to us many times that “I just don’t care whether I live or die anymore.” This is certainly not the happy picture painted by Ms Sirico and Judge Hoyle! Again, it is an OUTRAGE that ANY court should keep a husband and wife apart for the reasons given by Judge Hoyle! Their 50th Wedding Anniversary, December 26, 2005, should have been a joyous occasion for family and friends to celebrate, but instead brought us sadness at their separation.
3. Conflicts of interest with the court and officers
This case displays a very obvious conflict of interest with the court and its officers. They are the ones who get to decide whether the source of their financial “gravy train” stays in CT or is allowed to leave the state! Clearly it is in THEIR best interests financially that Maydelle Trambarulo stay in Connecticut.
4. Denial of access to funds and information
Ralph has been denied access to his own money by Judge Hoyle. In order to purchase a residence he had to obtain a mortgage at age 80 because he could not access his own money in a joint Merrill Lynch account. We have made numerous requests to the court for information on how Maydelle’s money is being spent. We have NEVER received any answers.
5. Judge Hoyle’s decision based upon biased testimony and
inaccurate facts
Attorneys DellaValle, Whittaker and Berke have all voiced their opinions that Maydelle should stay in CT. Their opinions, with life-altering consequences, are based on their knowledge of Maydelle’s family as told to them by Ms Sirico, certainly NOT on any factual basis. These court officers are all on friendly terms with Ms Sirico and adversarial to Maydelle’s family, as evidenced by their questioning of us in the hearings. They do not know us, and most certainly have not tried to know us. Instead they have accepted the lies told them by Ms Sirico.
Judge Hoyle could not even get the FACTS of this case straight! As we have stated in numerous documents submitted to the court, Maydelle was a resident of Delaware at the time she was brought to CT, NOT New Jersey as stated by Judge Hoyle in his decision. This is a very significant error, as he then states throughout his decision that a “return” to New Jersey would return her to her prior circumstances. Maydelle would NOT be returning to her prior circumstances, but instead would reside in a health care facility with equivalent or better care than she is receiving at present. We presented information and testimony about a rehab facility in NJ which is directly across the street from where Ralph lives. We might add that the facility in NJ is also less expensive than the one in CT, by $18,000 per year! (Apparently, consideration of “what is best for Maydelle” depends upon keeping her a prisoner of the court in CT!) Instead of considering the information we presented, Judge Hoyle stated in his decision that
“The Court is not convinced that the respondent’s family is willing to make the time commitments necessary to care for her if she returned to NJ. When asked about the nursing home which was planned to become the respondent’s residence in New Jersey, her daughter who had selected the nursing home testified that she had never been inside the building.”
Once again, we are penalized by the court for having families and jobs. At the time of the hearing, the daughter (Anne) was extremely busy at work, and her husband John, Maydelle’s son-in-law, was going right by the facility. He offered to tour the facility and obtain information for his wife. Isn’t a loving and trusted SON-in-law of 20 years able to vouch for the facility as well as a blood relative? Ms. Sirico is not a blood relative, yet her word is accepted as gospel!
Why also does the Court overlook what seems so perfectly obvious to anyone else, that Ms Sirico may indeed have an ulterior motive (possibly financial, despite her protestations to the contrary) in keeping her aunt and uncle separated from each other?? Why does Ms Sirico display absolutely NO interest in her blood relative, her Uncle Ralph? Because she has no possibility of controlling either him or his finances!
When it suits the purposes of the court, Maydelle is considered competent in her opinions on where she would like to reside, but incompetent in other matters. The supposed goal of the court, “What is best for Maydelle”, (her future), is decided by the court’s officers on the basis of the few minutes they have spent with her and the answers she has provided to their questions. Those answers are a product of months of brainwashing and coaching by Ms Sirico and others, PROVEN by a paper we presented to the court which was written by a friend of Ms Sirico. AGAIN, OUR EVIDENCE WAS IGNORED by the court. We, her family know her better than anyone else in the world, and have been totally disregarded by the court when we say that Maydelle is being brainwashed and unduly influenced by Ms Sirico’s abusive and domineering manner, as she continues to feed Maydelle lies about us, her family, on a daily basis. Ms Sirico succeeded in convincing Maydelle’s siblings (who have not seen her in 10 or more years, (only two of whom who have ever met Ms Sirico briefly)), that we are unfit to care for our wife and mother.
Judge Hoyle’s most recent decisions further serve to display an obvious bias against the Trambarulo family . This was noted by our attorney, Edward Longinotti, who reported “snickering” during court proceedings by representatives of the court, which was permitted by Judge Hoyle. Our request to have the GAL in the case step down was denied by Judge Hoyle, who said Ms. Berke “is doing an excellent job.” We disagree, but AGAIN, our side is totally disregarded by Judge Hoyle. Judge Hoyle also said he was being “generous” in allowing Ralph to receive 50% of the joint assets, when in fact Ralph was the primary contributor of over 80% of those assets.
On August 2, 2006, a SECOND hearing was held on whether Maydelle should be moved to an assisted living facility located 2.5 mi from Ms Sirico’s residence (which Judge Hoyle denied the first time), an option which we, her family, vehemently oppose. Despite evidence presented that Maydelle is NOT a candidate for assisted living due to medical needs, including reservations expressed by Mark Dellavalle, the conservator, Judge Hoyle approved this move, which will happen within a week. Mr Longinotti also reported a distinct animosity from Judge Hoyle towards the Trambarulo family. Why?
The Probate Court’s primary function in this case should be the reuniting of Maydelle with her FAMILY, and the true conservation of her person and financial estate, NOT the reallocation of her hard-earned assets to court officers’ own bank accounts! Judge Hoyle’s decision appears to be motivated not by an interest in what is truly best for our wife and mother, but self-serving GREED of the most reproachable kind. Naively, we once believed that justice was blind; sadly, we have found the justice rendered in the Probate Court of Judge Clifford Hoyle to be both deaf and dumb to our pleas and the evidence we presented.

Thursday, August 03, 2006 2:36:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks to the person who provided the links listed above.

Thursday, August 03, 2006 10:27:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hope the links help. Use them TO YOUR FAMILY'S BEST ADVANTAGE, AND QUICKLY. When will it be heard in Superior court? Will check in for an update on Maydelle's situation later. I think of her every day even though I don't know her nor the Trambarulo family.

Friday, August 04, 2006 8:23:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you again. We have taken your advice and done so.

Maydelle is being moved to assisted living in CT next week, in the same neighborhood as the woman who has been fighting to keep her and the case in CT- Teresa Sirico. The probate court said that Ms. Sirico's contact should be more limited with the ward, and that Ms. Sirico is controlling. Oddly enough with that statement, and the fact that Maydelle is not really a candidate for assisted living- the Judge ordered her to be moved there anyway. The only move that the spouse and family wanted from Judge Clifford Hoyle was to move Maydelle back to her family in NJ. The superior court date is pending, and the family refuses to sit through any more probate court hearings. Maydelle is blindly aware of any of this, as her memory from one day to the next does not retain. Maydelle only sees what is in front of her, and is shocked and angered when she finds out what is occurring. The Judge deems Maydelle competent and incompetent as he sees fit, depending on what answer he wishes to assume. What a horrible travesty of justice is occurring!

Friday, August 04, 2006 3:38:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That was a very good recap of Maydelle and her family's situation. Have you thought of contacting some Watchdog organizations.
I've read that the probate system is in financial difficulty and that it may collapse from it's own weight. Some judges resist reform. Some reforms have added more weight and some reforms are "token" reforms. I've read, or heard through the pipeline that one "judge" wants to open two more children's probate courts in his district. Desperate people do desperate things. It will topple over as it is top heavy now. Too bad the weight isn't caused by an excess of brains, rather than overwhelming avarice (just my opinion). How can any system (political) based on profit, even pretend to be impartial.
How can anyone spout the importance of separation of powers when probate "judges" are voted into their office (political), and then claim they have judicial power. The power to decide the fate of individuals and every member of their families.
Another ploy is "we'll give 'judges' more training." Aside from the fact that training won't inculcate ethics, can they (not all, as some few are judicious, wise), be taught the psychology/dynamics of different families and know how to make wise decisions. Their judgement often is clouded, foggy, slanted ($$$). Are these "judges" who make such grave decisions about other's lives put through psychological testing themselves. These "judges" should be Constitutional Scholars, so that they don't play fast and loose with others freedom and property.
After all, these elderly are not criminals, they're ELDERLY, or sick, or vulnerable in some way. They should be respected, revered.
I guess you can tell that I'm still INCENSED by what happened to Mr. Gross, and though I don't know all of the details about Maydelle, I'm becoming VERY incensed about that situation also.

Friday, August 04, 2006 4:03:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

First, I'm not an Estate Planner nor an Attorney. I'm an advocate for the elderly, and our vulnerable children. What I'm concerned about is that, "She's not a candidate for assisted living," and is being sent there anyway??
That Ms. Sirico's visits are now limited and the "judge" conceded that "she is controlling," sounds like schmoozing to me, since she is being moved(as they requested) and the case is still in CT. Crafty.
I'm concerned that Maydelle is "shocked and gets angry," only because I am hoping she stays physically healthy. Just as Mr.Gross did. We would not have known about him if he had expired while "incarcerated." If her State claims juristiction, IF Maydelle was taken to CT. under false pretenses, then what does the Attorney General from her State say about this?
Also, what I don't understand is, if Ms. Sirico went to Maydelle's domicile and found undesirable conditions, why didn't she call Protective Services or Social Services, or a Commission for the PROTECTION of the ELDERLY in that State? Where was Ralph when she was taken? If he was there what did he say? I'm concerned about Ralph's health also, since he's not with his wife his life has been altered negatively. Living Probate is truly a hellish nightmare. Especially in this State. It's also more lucrative than Death probate. If a probate court can get to handle BOTH, I would imagine they'd feel like they hit the jackpot. If she were my mother, I'd do everything to keep her healthy, and push for Superior court. "Justice delayed is Justice denied." I'd find out who Superior court judge is going to be and I'd find out about his background, his past positions, where they were, his associations, even down to where and what he has for breakfast if i could find that out also. (just my opinion).
The issue of elderly or child abuse really irks me. I doubt highly that an entity that is run like a franchise, that is in financial distress, which has conflict of interest, should have any business in family affairs. I don't understand how the Governor expects to restore the peoples faith in Government here. There is no way that system could be considered non- biased.
Next thing you know some "judges" will join organizations and ask that the members keep him apprized of any illness or deaths in his district.
Don't laugh, it's coming.
We do have some good Superior Court judges.
As to probate "judges" some are even practicing Real Estate Attorneys. ( REALLY a disinterested party! LOL).If Probate "judges" don't keep some of their less than ethical "brothers" in check, they might as well be shooting themselves in the foot as they will be complicit in the demise of their own system. Not a bad idea.

Friday, August 04, 2006 5:59:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I read through my post again and your previous post. You said, " The probate court said that Ms. Sirico's contact should be more limited with the ward, and that Ms. Sirico is controlling." I assumed that you meant the judge said that. I may have assumed incorrectly. Of course the probate court couldn't have said it. A person had to have uttered those words. It's the difference between intensioal and extensional meanings. See what happens when you've studied linguistics and the structure of language? O.K. are you very clear about exactly who made that statement? It may be important as there may be other issues involved. I'm not sure. Were any family members present at that hearing? If not, can you find out exactly who said it?
Also, you said in one of your previous posts that a Judge Horowitz (interim judge?) appointed the conservator(?). Do you know his first name?
Was the last short post as to Maydelle's transfer to assisted living by one of the family members? Again, were any family members at the most recent hearing?

Friday, August 04, 2006 10:32:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Reply to Response Posted Friday August 4, 2006 5:59PM

The hearing of August 2, 2006 in the probate court of Judge Clifford Hoyle was heard. The results are much of the same. The Judge approved the motion and Maydelle will be moving next week most likely. The rational for the ALF is quality of life. There are no expectations that Maydelle's physical status will improve with therapy. The issue of safety was addressed and Mark Dellavalle was directed to make sure the aide is able to provide safe "transfers". The family attorney argued that Maydelle's physical and mental condition are too deteriorated for the ALF and she will end up an object of ridicule and will not be able to socialize due to her mental condition, that her dignity will suffer.
The family attorney’s arguments did not carry the day but Robyn Berke and Mark Dellavalle do now recognize that Maydelle may not fit in the ALF and this will be monitored. If the cost exceeds expectations she could be moved back to Birmingham Health Center.
There was some discussion of Teresa Sirico and there is general agreement that she is "overbearing" and needs to be restrained in her relationship with Maydelle. The family attorney noted that she seemed obsessed with Maydelle and that she was hindering Maydelle's true intentions but the Judge, while not disagreeing with the attorney’s analysis, saw that Teresa Sirico was doing no harm.
An evaluation was done of Maydelle by the facility where she currently resides, Birmingham Health Center. The evaluation stated that Maydelle requires transfers with assistance of 2 persons using the sit-stand lift device. At this time, she is able to support some weight through her lower extremities but in a flexed position. Stated also was that if pool therapy was pursued, that she would still require transfers with the assistance of 2 people with a sit-stand lift device for safety reasons. Maydelle is not receiving skilled rehabilitation services at this time due to the fact that she was previously on caseload and she reached a plateau with her overall mobility skills. Maydelle is able to sit upright in a standard wheelchair with leg rests with a specialty Roho cushion.

Doesn’t sound like a candidate for assisted living to me, does it to you?

Maydelle Trambarulo and the Trambarulo Family encountered some VERY QUESTIONABLE decisions set by Judge Clifford Hoyle. Also it is a complete conflict of interest that Judge Clifford Hoyle was / is allegedly representing someone in a legal matter vs. Birmingham Health Center (where Maydelle is and has resided for over a year!!). It is also more apparent that Judge Clifford Hoyle’s most common law specialty seems to be that of a divorce lawyer! Judge Hoyle apparently lives in a world which profits on divorce! Interesting that he doesn’t want Maydelle reunited with her husband Ralph Trambarulo of 50 years! See the link below to the case mentioned above, in the State of CT Judicial Branch site:

http://www.jud2.state.ct.us/civil_inquiry/DispDetail.asp?DocNum=AAN-CV-05-4004931-S

Also of extreme interest is that the GAL in this case, is allegedly almost always representing domestic violence abusers, banks foreclosing on people, and parents trying to avoid child support. Her expertise certainly doesn’t appear to be in elder services at all. See the link below to the case mentioned on Robyn Berke, in the State of CT Judicial Branch Site:

http://www.jud2.state.ct.us/civil_inquiry/DispDetail.asp?DocNum=FBT-FA-05-4006603-S

The attorney general avenue was not followed, as the family was advised against it by our previous attorney. However, that avenue is now being re-investigated.

Regarding Teresa Sirico. First I should tell you that Teresa Sirico was involved in another suit for a situation that is eerily similar to this one. I believe that case was either dismissed, or that Ms. Sirico won the case? The family that was in suit with her (with I believe the same type of situation) was the Devita family. See link to this found here on the State of CT Judicial site:

http://www.jud2.state.ct.us/civil_inquiry/DispDetail.asp?DocNum=NNH-CV-01-0448826-S


Teresa Sirico arrived to their home (Ralph and Maydelle Trambarulo) in DE after having no contact with the either her Aunt May, or Uncle Ralph for 10 + years (incidentally, Teresa is related to Ralph, NOT Maydelle). The situation is much more described previously in this blog. Ms. Sirico is a realtor in CT, and also seems to specialize in elder care. Ms. Sirico has made contributions to the elder care field, given seminars and teaching on conservatorships, etc. If you do a search on her name you will find this woman to appear to be a most outstanding woman in her community. Those that have had to battle against her know differently. Ms. Sirico did not file any claims with Social Services or Protective Services when she arrived in DE- as we believe that she had another agenda and her allegations are not true. The other reason she did not file is because these are FALSE allegations!

Ms. Sirico made an outstanding performance while visiting the home of Maydelle and Ralph Trambarulo in DE. Maydelle had broken her hip after a fall in church, and required surgery. Ms. Sirico had been trying to make contact with the elder Trambarulo’s after 10 + years. Did she have an agenda in that? Ms. Sirico made a theater performance that was like no other. She used her elder care expertise in showing the family what a wonderful care taker and knowledgeable woman she was in reference to elder situations. She was very controlling, domineering, and focused in on any and all problems. To the family she appeared controlling- but “appeared” to know what she was doing, and “appeared” to have Maydelle’s health as her interest.

The family at the time was at odds, and Teresa Sirico certainly focused in on that issue. The family didn’t realize what Ms. Sirico was up to, until it was much too late. Ms. Sirico further pitted the children against each other with lies and manipulation- to apparently achieve her goal. Ms. Sirico also managed to pit Maydelle’s sister, brother, and their families against Maydelle’s children. Maydelle and Ralph Trambarulo were not well at the time of Ms. Sirico’s visit to DE, but did have nursing care at their home. Their son Paul Trambarulo was trying to keep up with everything, along with the help of his sister Anne Haines Trambarulo. Maydelle and Ralph lived a few blocks away from their son Paul (they had moved to DE for a short period of time as their home in Red Bank NJ was much too large for the elderly couple to handle).

Their son Paul was trying to help both parents, keep up with medical assistance, had just started a brand new business, and his partner Brian was in the hospital suffering with a staff infection from a recent back surgery. Oh yes, and let me mention that Paul does have a life partner named Brian. Not that should have anything to do with the case, but the cowardly and suspected person who wrote a previous blog entry- seems to like to exploit that fact. Teresa made a point of telling both Paul and Brian how she was supportive of their relationship, but immediately used that issue to push away Maydelle’s siblings from the Trambarulo’s. The parent’s have accepted Paul’s life, his partner, and the parent’s have always been appreciate of Brian’s care, concern, and help. The cowardly liar who wrote the negative reply also stated that Paul and Brian have made death threats towards this “person”. The family actually had to laugh over that comment, of course knowing that wasn’t true- and in full suspicion of who wrote the blog (as I’m sure that you can read between the lines here).

Ralph Trambarulo (spouse) was not well at the time either. Ralph was suffering from an undiscovered medical condition (that was discovered soon after) called Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus. Mr. Trambarulo did not have control of his emotions at the time, bladder, etc. The outcome of that was that Mr. Trambarulo had a shunt placed to relieve the pressure on his brain that was causing all of this. Ms. Sirico focused in on this as well (Ralph being ill). Ms. Sirico seemed to have an apparent anger towards her Uncle Ralph, and definitely focused in on the negative when discussing him with Maydelle. With a triumphant performance, Teresa Sirico made the suggestion to the spouse and family that she could take Maydelle to CT for “thirty days” to a top notch facility run by Yale doctors so that Maydelle could receive the absolute best medical treatment and rehabilitation of her hip. Teresa picked the perfect time, with the kids in disagreement, Ralph ill, Paul having so much on his plate- it seemed like a perfect solution. Maydelle initially did not want to go (as she hadn’t even really been close with Teresa and hadn’t had contact with her for 10 + years). Teresa (according to a nurse aide) was badgering and being persistent that Maydelle go with her to CT. The husband Ralph, and family of course only wanted what was in the best interest of their mother / wife. Ms. Sirico’s persuasion and overwhelming concern won over, and Maydelle was to go to CT for a period of “thirty days”. The story begins with the immediate results of Teresa Sirico filing for temporary and immediate conservatorship of the ward (Maydelle) in CT. Teresa was able to do this without notification being given to the immediate family, as she told the story that Maydelle had no one caring for her and was left in detiorating health. The story has of course continued from there.

Ralph Trambarulo is now in is own home in NJ with a full time live in aide. He had resided at his home in DE for a short period, and then moved in with his son Paul. From there Ralph went to assisted living in NJ, and was determined that it would be better for the overall emotional health of Ralph to be in is own home with his pet dog Basil (who is Ralph’s therapeutic and loving companion). Ralph has been suffering from a lot of medical conditions, is not physically able to travel any more to visit his wife in CT, and is for the first time in his life on antidepressants (as is Maydelle). The couple has now been forcibly separated from each other for two years. Sadly, May & Ralph haven’t even been able to celebrate their 50th wedding anniversary together! What a shame a milestone like this was missed due to the works of Teresa Sirico, Judge Hoyle, and all the other attorneys who appear to put greed before family! The story continues to go on and on, with no resolution in sight.

Oh, also the Judge who removed Teresa Sirico as temporary conservator, and appointed attorney Mark DellaValle as permanent conservator in November 2004 was Judge Robert H. Horowitz, Woodbridge Probate Court. The family has not been present at the last two probate court hearings, as they are employed, all live hours away from CT, and refused to sit through any more hearings under Judge Clifford Hoyle. They also have been at hearings in the past, when they traveled for hours (and some arrived by air) - and were not even allowed to be in the Judge’s chambers- or allowed to even speak!

Saturday, August 05, 2006 3:06:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've just printed your last post so that I can read it more thoroughly.
I'm not an Attorney so I'm not giving legal advice nor should it be interpreted as such, in any way. I'm an ADVOCATE for the ELDERLY, CHILDREN and defenseless animals ( Ralph needs to be with his beloved dog).
Usually when a consevator, even a temporary conservator is going to be appointed, all interested parties are usually notified of the hearing ( usually hand delivered by a Sheriff) and are urged to be present at the hearing. Otherwise, they feel that they have no interest in protecting their rights, so they can do anything.
I gathered from your post that you weren't notified.
I know that often family members are kept out of "the room" when they want to carry out their agenda with no objections from family members. It's to be done quickly and easily.
The links you sent were not able to be accessed so can't see those cases. It may be a glitch, power, time of day. I will check them again later.
The Horowitz ("judge")has a different first name from the person I was thinking of who is an estate planning attorney.
I read recently about the problems they were having in N.Y. State probate courts and the article said N.Y. could learn from N.J.(I keep copies of all articles
I've read.), so it seems that N.J. is more reasonable, in the main.
Yes, when someone applies for conservatorship that's what starts it all. Yes, when there is the slightest contention or bickering between family members it is used, even exacerbated. I've seen where some of these appointed conservators actually come and drive a bigger wedge between family members. Of course, it's to their advantage. Suits their purpose. Any situation brought into court is a declaration of war, and they are looking for the spoils of war.
Paul and Brian have nothing to do with this matter at all as far as I can see, except that it may be character assassination, discrimination.
I will read more thoroughly. I hope you're keeping copies, documentation of everything.
This is a lessom for ALL of us
everywhere. NEVER willingly give up control of your person or your property to ANYONE EVER. That is the lesson of Shakespeare's King Lear. He was mentally competant at the beginning of the play. Just a foolish old man who played games with his children, gave away control of his Kingdom to the greediest two daughters of the three he had. He became mentally unbalanced AFTER having been thrown out by the two greedy daughters. The third wouldn't play his game, was banished, though she was the most loving and faithful. When the Kingdom came under siege she came back to save him and the Kingdom. Was killed on the battlefield and Lear comes in carrting her body, collapses and dies himself. TOO LATE! Sorry for the long analogy. But it's a lesson for ALL of us. The question is: Is there Justice in the world? Probably not, but I believe we must always work to that end and fight the "good fight."
I know of people who fought to keep their liberty and their possessions, were completely competant and self sufficient except that they were elderly, though slightly frail from an illness, with live in help and outside professional help and STILL they were "bagged" by probate. One method is that the probate court ("judge")in the district finds out someone is ill and at the "appropriate" time a state employee (sometimes from Social services) pays a friendly visit and offers "help," even offers the incentive of services like fuel assistance, food brought in, a free nurses aide etc.etc. hoping the elderly person will "bite." They then suggest that the elderly person name a consevator to help them with the handling of their finances ( they often just want information about their finances) even though the person may be capable of doing it themselves. It's NONE of their business! After all, the person is still alive. If the elderly names a family member, it can always be changed to a court appointed attorney later by the "judge" under some pretense, at a later hearing. His buddies who have helped him in his campaign to get elected can then start to collect money. They love it when the elderly is alone with no family member around who is astute enough to see through the ploy. That's why I said, "Next thing you know some 'judges' will join organizations and ask that the members keep him apprized of any illness or deaths in his district.
Don't laugh, it's coming."
Truth be told, it HAS been done. Some have become GREAT marketers.
I'll read your post more thoroughly. You realize that I'm not giving you any type of legal advice, I'm not an Attorney. I just feel that we should "fight the good fight." What the heck, this is not the Arctic Circle where Eskimos used to put their elderly out on an iceberg so that the polar bears could eat them, survive to be hunted and eaten by the younger generation.

Saturday, August 05, 2006 8:25:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks so much for your thoughts and information. When Ms. Sirico took Maydelle to CT, she immediately went to the probate court in Woodbridge and filed and received an action for temporary conservator of the person. Apparently, she was able to do this immediately, as she went into the probate court with a story of:

Her Aunt, Maydelle, was left in DE uncared for, ill, and claims of neglect. Ms. Sirico also stated at the time that there were no family members or anyone caring for the needs of the elder. All of this of course was an outrageous lie, was not discovered that she had said and done this until later. Teresa Sirico was somehow able at that time to be granted immediate temporary conservator of the person by the Woodbridge Probate Court. The family and spouse were notified later by regular mail. Ms. Sirico had the family where she wanted them, added to the family disagreements- and exploited them for her own benefit. I should also point out that Teresa Sirico is actually the blood niece of Ralph Trambarulo, not Maydelle. Teresa Sirico also was able to enlist Maydelle’s brother, sister’s, and some of their children in her crusade of lies and betrayal. This of course would be used by Ms. Sirico later on with letters from May’s sister and two daughters. Oddly enough, May’s sister and nieces were quick to join forces with Ms. Sirico- as they seem to like to participle in any troubled events. I should note that they were no where to be found ever, when May really needed the help (they were the critics on the outside looking in- but never lifting a hand). Teresa Sirico used all of this to her advantage of course.

In November of 2004, when the family was notified by mail of a probate court hearing at the Woodbridge Probate Court, Teresa Sirico was applying for permanent conservatorship of the person and estate. Ms. Sirico had thought she had a well mapped out game plan, as she had already further pitted family member’s against each other even more. What Ms. Sirico wasn’t planning on was that May’s children had figured out what Ms. Sirico was up to, mended their fences, and were all at the Woodbridge Probate Court hearing together in unison. Ms. Sirico lost her role as temporary conservator, and the role of conservator of the person and the estate was granted to a “supposed” independent attorney, a Mark DellaValle. No one was really aware in full at the time what the fight was really about with Teresa Sirico, until she had a tearful outburst when losing temporary conservator in the hearing. It was apparent then, as it is more apparent now- that Ms. Sirico was out to control the ward. Losing control, or losing anything at all in her game- was most apparent and upsetting to her. To date, Ms. Teresa Sirico is still fighting with her own attorney to keep the ward in CT, away from her entire family.

Saturday, August 05, 2006 1:03:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Again, I'm not an attorney so this is not legal advice. Not to be interpreted as such. If you go back and read about Mr. Gross' plight, you may find this interesting. The "judge" who orered him "confined/incarcerated against his will, and then his house in Long Island ordered to be sold ", is a Real Estate Attorney. Only in CT!
In the post before your last, the syntax is different in the beginning from the last part so I don't know if info in the beginning is from a written report from your Attorney, Physicians at Birmingham Health, or "judge."
No matter I guess. But it seems that you are getting second hand info. No, Maydelle doesn't seem to be a candidate for ALF to me.
IF notified by REGULAR mail, after the hearing, after the fact, that is suspect to me. If you have been accused of something and don't know what you've been accused of, and did not have the opportunity to face your accuser and "judge" to defend yourselves, and a decision was made based on hearsay that is suspect, and I would think Judicial Behavior could be called into question.(?)
So, IF as you said, that the "judge" was/is representing someone in a legal matter (what kind of legal matter?)vs. Birmingham Health, (and judges are to avoid even the perception of impropriety), If you can prove his involvement, why hasn't he recused himself? Why hasn't he been asked to recuse himself? I doubt highly that he would, but at least there would be a record of the request and a record of his reply.
It is good that the immediate family has come together. Often there are members of a family ( usually not the immediate family members, but some times family members) who do nothing in the way of help or support who involve themselves (at the most opportune time), based on hearsay. They become hated as they are viewed as intrusive/interlopers, don't know their places. They have "long noses" in otherwords.
IF, (because some of this is hearsay), you can prove that Ralph was spoken about negatively to his wife over time, does that sound like an attempt to alienate affection? Was it successful?
IF Maydelle was taken under false pretenses that is suspect.
IF there was a conspiracy to alienate other family members, does that sound malicious?
Your quote, "family attorney's arguments did not carry the day but Robyn Berke and Mark Dellavalle do now recognize that Maydelle may not fit the AFL and this will be monitored..." WHEN did they realize this??? Doesn't mean much.
Another of your quotes, "There was some discussion of Teresa Sirico (WHO engaged in this SOME discussion, and WHO was present during this SOME discussion?), and there is general agreement ( GENERAL agreement by whom? The world, the country, the state, all of Woodgridge, the whole court? the "judge"? the attorneys? Sounds like just legalese, jargon. The ambiguity isn't helpful to Maydelle or her family ) ...that she is 'overbearing'...but the judge, while not disagreeing with the attorney's analysis saw that Teresa Sirico was doing no harm."
IF it has been conceded that she is "overbearing, obsessed." Is there a probability that Maydelle, Ralph, family members were unduly influenced? If Ralph and Maydelle are frail were they put under duress? These are all just some of the questions I ask myself. I'm not an Attorney.
Now, I realize, that probate assets (but not NON probate assets) are inviolate when it comes to a Federal court (Supreme), but it seems to me that if some of the allegations are proven and the Trambarulos WERE harmed...who knows where THAT could go. Accountability is needed.
You may find this link VERY interesting. It should probably be read with an extremely analytical eye if for nothing more than enlightenment.
Does the person who brought Maydelle to CT. have a successful, lucrative business?

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-1544.ZO.html

Sunday, August 06, 2006 9:47:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Again, I'm not an attorney so this is not legal advice. Not to be interpreted as such. If you go back and read about Mr. Gross' plight, you may find this interesting. The "judge" who orered him "confined/incarcerated against his will, and then his house in Long Island ordered to be sold ", is a Real Estate Attorney. Only in CT!
In the post before your last, the syntax is different in the beginning from the last part so I don't know if info in the beginning is from a written report from your Attorney, Physicians at Birmingham Health, or "judge."
No matter I guess. But it seems that you are getting second hand info. No, Maydelle doesn't seem to be a candidate for ALF to me.
IF notified by REGULAR mail, after the hearing, after the fact, that is suspect to me. If you have been accused of something and don't know what you've been accused of, and did not have the opportunity to face your accuser and "judge" to defend yourselves, and a decision was made based on hearsay that is suspect, and I would think Judicial Behavior could be called into question.(?)
So, IF as you said, that the "judge" was/is representing someone in a legal matter (what kind of legal matter?)vs. Birmingham Health, (and judges are to avoid even the perception of impropriety), If you can prove his involvement, why hasn't he recused himself? Why hasn't he been asked to recuse himself? I doubt highly that he would, but at least there would be a record of the request and a record of his reply.
It is good that the immediate family has come together. Often there are members of a family ( usually not the immediate family members, but some times family members) who do nothing in the way of help or support who involve themselves (at the most opportune time), based on hearsay. They become hated as they are viewed as intrusive/interlopers, don't know their places. They have "long noses" in otherwords.
IF, (because some of this is hearsay), you can prove that Ralph was spoken about negatively to his wife over time, does that sound like an attempt to alienate affection? Was it successful?
IF Maydelle was taken under false pretenses that is suspect.
IF there was a conspiracy to alienate other family members, does that sound malicious?
Your quote, "family attorney's arguments did not carry the day but Robyn Berke and Mark Dellavalle do now recognize that Maydelle may not fit the AFL and this will be monitored..." WHEN did they realize this??? Doesn't mean much.
Another of your quotes, "There was some discussion of Teresa Sirico (WHO engaged in this SOME discussion, and WHO was present during this SOME discussion?), and there is general agreement ( GENERAL agreement by whom? The world, the country, the state, all of Woodgridge, the whole court? the "judge"? the attorneys? Sounds like just legalese, jargon. The ambiguity isn't helpful to Maydelle or her family ) ...that she is 'overbearing'...but the judge, while not disagreeing with the attorney's analysis saw that Teresa Sirico was doing no harm."
IF it has been conceded that she is "overbearing, obsessed." Is there a probability that Maydelle, Ralph, family members were unduly influenced? If Ralph and Maydelle are frail were they put under duress? These are all just some of the questions I ask myself. I'm not an Attorney.
Now, I realize, that probate assets (but not NON probate assets) are inviolate when it comes to a Federal court (Supreme), but it seems to me that if some of the allegations are proven and the Trambarulos WERE harmed...who knows where THAT could go. Accountability is needed.
You may find this link VERY interesting. It should probably be read with an extremely analytical eye if for nothing more than enlightenment.
Does the person who brought Maydelle to CT. have a successful, lucrative business?

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-1544.ZO.html

Sunday, August 06, 2006 12:35:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the Trambarulos: I realize that you probably don't get CT. newspapers.
Since there seems to be a similarity with Mr. Gross's situation, and you
don't have some of the details as to what happened when they went to
Superior court, I thought I'd give some excerpts from Rick Green's article -
Hartford Courant, July 14,2006:

" ...an 86 year old New york man with no legal connection to Connecticut_
locked in a Waterbury nursing home for 10 months, his freedom stolen in the
courtroom of Waterbury Probate judge Thomas Brunnock...
But Gross is now a free man. I prefer the words of a Superior Court judge...
'A terrible miscarriage of justice has happened here,' Judge Joseph Gormley
told the courthouse as Brunnock(Waterbury, Wolcott and Middlebury probate judge)
and the lawyers who worked on the old man's behalf hung their heads....
Gross didn't want a conservator and wasn't even at the probate court hearing
at which a conservator was named.
'This case has disturbed me from day one. I kept looking for evidence
to support what was done, but I find none,' said Gormley, who freed Gross
on a writ of habeus corpus, terminating the conservatorship...Gormley said
he was mystified how Brunnock thought his court-which covers Waterbury,
Wolcott and Middlebury_had juristiction over the estate of a New York man
visiting his daughter. (Mr. Gross became ill and went to Waterbury Hospital.
His daughters allegedly bickered over his care. Waterbury hospital asked
probate court to step in. Allegedly, his children agreed) . He (GROMLEY)
likened it to the absurd notion of forcing visitors to pay income taxes
merely because they spent a few days here.
... It is a system in which in which prospective judges with close ties
to the local legal community win office through election, their campaign coffers
stuffed with contributions from lawyers and political insiders...
I wonder how many other Daniel Grosses there are, ones whose lives are buried
in the backslapping underworld of probate court...His house, approved for sale
by Brunnock might have been sold and an old man forever lost."
Interestingly, T.Brunnock has advertised himself as a Real Estate Attorney,
and is coming up for election again this fall. The Waterbury Republican
newspaper didn't cover the story. When the public can't depend on their newspaper
to cover local newsworthy stories, they are doing their readers a disservice
and shouldn't be patronized.
My pipeline informed me that he has raised quite a bit of campaign money.
Wonder who he'll owe favors to, IF that's how it works. LOL! Connecticut probate
courts, with the help of collaborators, are now in the business of kidnapping
and hostage taking??
Here are some excerpts from Hartford Courant, NEEDLE section, a pointed view of
the news..,by Paul Stern:
"RULING THE JUDGE IS OUT OF ORDER-superior Court Judge Joseph Gormley had some
choice words recently for Thomas Brunnock the Waterburyprobate judge who ordered
a retiree from Long Island held against his will...Gormley said he could not
imagine why Brunnock thought his probate court had juristiction over the affairs
of a New York resident who was merely visiting here. (After Brunnock allowed Gross to
be locked up in the nursing home , the retiree's court-appointed lawyers got busy
having his house in Levittown N.Y. put up for sale to pay for their services
and other bills.)...
Of course Connecticut probate judges don't get a lot of training...
so how was Brunnock supposed to know he is only supposed to screw up the lives of
people from around here?"
Aw, come on...even Brunnock must know that ignorence is no excuse of the law.
Even in Connecticut you can't kidnap and take hostages.
Judge Gormley couldn't "imagine how he..." could think he had juristiction...
Could it be that Brunnock hasn't been held accountable for a long time (2002?),
done this before, and like any kid who has gotten away with breaking rules,
continuously testS his powers? Judge Gormley did the right thing with his
wayward kid. He couldn't do otherwise as I see it, even though the poor kid (Brunnock)
was trying to bring money into that bankrupt system. Actually though, his punishment
should have been greater. He should have been grounded for about six years
and had his Health Insurance and pension taken away.
One thing about Superior court_It's OUT THERE, to be seen, where it should be.
All families have their own dynamics, with squabbles, comtentions etc. SO WHAT!!
Is Maydelle's situation similar? That she is deemed to be incompetant, is that
any justification not to let her go to her home state? If she were an indigent
person would Connecticut be willing to take on the responsibility of her care
with no remuneration? NO, because it would cost the probate court money.
Indigent people in this State costs probate money!!!

Sunday, August 06, 2006 9:38:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was being facetious, the epression is, "Ignorance of the law is no excuse," but because I think that Brunnock might be mentally deficient, not to know the boundaries of his juristiction, I said, "even Brunnock must know that ignorence is no excuse of the law." It probably didn't translate well.
IF the Trambarulos are reading this, while this is not professional advice, I hope you're
looking into EVERY avenue.
I've been imagining what I would think, if I were one of the officials of a State, or if I were a TAXPAYER of a State, knowing that on the demise of one of my citizens, or even BEFORE their demise, that my state would have a portion of their assets to go into my State's coffers (budget), and another State interfered, by trickery, hostage taking or whatever, I'd be upset that that state was stealing from my other taxpayers. I'd demand that MY citizen be sent back and MY State would handle my own citizen's affairs.
Every one of the players in this tragic human drama has their own agenda. An individual will ALWAYS do what is in their own best interest. Even when it doesn't appear that way. Even self-destructive people are serving their own best interest (or think they are). That being the case, I'm a great believer in self help. This may sound off point; it's not. Hope everything turns out well.

Monday, August 07, 2006 9:01:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the Trambarulos, Hope Maydelle is well.
I'm going to give some more excerpts from another article about another person this has happened to, if only so that if anyone else is reading this it may help them.
From the Hartford Courant, by Rick Green- March 24, 2006
PROBATE CAN BE SAD END FOR ELDERLY- "If you're old and unhealthy and the kids are fighting about what to do, pray you don't end up like poor Florence Kidwell. With the stroke of Probate Judge Marianne Lassman Fisher's pen on April 7 last year, the Windsor Locks woman lost everything and descended into a hell known as probate court. 'The court finds that the respondent is incapable of managing her affairs, expressly including the exercising of all civil or personal rights' Fisher wrote in the order that turned the 79 year old Kidwell into a gulag prisoner. ( Mind uou, Fisher could be a hairdresser, waitress, or an Attorney. What level of expertise does she have to make such determinations. That's why it is most often done behind closed doors with the elderly person NOT present, and often even family members are NOT present) ...that means no voting, no checking account, no rights at all...Kidwell opposed all this. The court and the lawyers appointed to represent herignored Kidwell's wishes...This started with a fight with her children about Kidwell's well-being...It landed in probate ... It wasn't long before a "temporary conservator" was appointed was appointed...'Conservatorship' is legal language for taking away all of a person's rights. There was no proper application filed with the courts for this, according to lawyers from Greater Hartford Legal Aid who intervened on Kidwell's behalf. The affidavit presented to demonstrate Kidwell's mental incompetence was 'unreliable and incorrect' according to the Legal Aid lawyers....'there is supposed to be clear and convincing evidence before'conserving'somebody. Kidwell is just a drop in the bucket....Hard to believe? Halpine can point to a dozen other cases like Kidwell's. ...are stripped of their civil rights and moved to costly nursing homes and assisted living facilities. Kidwells family was deeply divided...The probate court which is supposed to help solve these problems, made it worse (You may remember that I said they exacerbate the problems in families because it serves their purpose. The judge and lawyers collect money. The probate judge gets a high yearly pay, health insurance, pension AND a percentage of the estate). Somebody should have been listening to Florence Kidwell. Instead she was placed in a locked unit at her nursing home. A court order to give her weekly spending money was ignored. The contents of her home were tossed without consulting her. Her daughter said 'she didn't need to be told what to do.Every one has the right to make their own decisions.' Actually you don't if a conservator gets hold of you."
Does this sound similar to what happened to Maydelle? It's what happened to my father three years ago, except that he died in 7 days. I WILL NEVER FORGET THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF HOW A COMPETANT MAN WAS "BAGGED". Probate courts in CT. HAVE DESTROYED MANY, MANY lives and that is why it needs to be abolshed and it's function taken over by a seperate division of Superior Court.
I believe that family members have to get PRO active and go to whomever they think can help them, and not depend on just one source for help. This is not legal advice just my opinion. Do you see a similarity? Does it look like it may be a proscribed script where the actors are interchangeable? Yes, it's the accepted system here, but only because not enough people know about it.

Wednesday, August 09, 2006 6:23:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
To the Trambarulos, Hope Maydelle is well.
I'm going to give some more excerpts from another article about another person this has happened to, if only so that if anyone else is reading this it may help them.
From the Hartford Courant, by Rick Green- March 24, 2006
PROBATE CAN BE SAD END FOR ELDERLY- "If you're old and unhealthy and the kids are fighting about what to do, pray you don't end up like poor Florence Kidwell. With the stroke of Probate Judge Marianne Lassman Fisher's pen on April 7 last year, the Windsor Locks woman lost everything and descended into a hell known as probate court. 'The court finds that the respondent is incapable of managing her affairs, expressly including the exercising of all civil or personal rights' Fisher wrote in the order that turned the 79 year old Kidwell into a gulag prisoner. ( Mind uou, Fisher could be a hairdresser, waitress, or an Attorney. What level of expertise does she have to make such determinations. That's why it is most often done behind closed doors with the elderly person NOT present, and often even family members are NOT present) ...that means no voting, no checking account, no rights at all...Kidwell opposed all this. The court and the lawyers appointed to represent herignored Kidwell's wishes...This started with a fight with her children about Kidwell's well-being...It landed in probate ... It wasn't long before a "temporary conservator" was appointed was appointed...'Conservatorship' is legal language for taking away all of a person's rights. There was no proper application filed with the courts for this, according to lawyers from Greater Hartford Legal Aid who intervened on Kidwell's behalf. The affidavit presented to demonstrate Kidwell's mental incompetence was 'unreliable and incorrect' according to the Legal Aid lawyers....'there is supposed to be clear and convincing evidence before'conserving'somebody. Kidwell is just a drop in the bucket....Hard to believe? Halpine can point to a dozen other cases like Kidwell's. ...are stripped of their civil rights and moved to costly nursing homes and assisted living facilities. Kidwells family was deeply divided...The probate court which is supposed to help solve these problems, made it worse (You may remember that I said they exacerbate the problems in families because it serves their purpose. The judge and lawyers collect money. The probate judge gets a high yearly pay, health insurance, pension AND a percentage of the estate). Somebody should have been listening to Florence Kidwell. Instead she was placed in a locked unit at her nursing home. A court order to give her weekly spending money was ignored. The contents of her home were tossed without consulting her. Her daughter said 'she didn't need to be told what to do.Every one has the right to make their own decisions.' Actually you don't if a conservator gets hold of you."
Does this sound similar to what happened to Maydelle? It's what happened to my father three years ago, except that he died in 7 days. I WILL NEVER FORGET THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF HOW A COMPETANT MAN WAS "BAGGED". Probate courts in CT. HAVE DESTROYED MANY, MANY lives and that is why it needs to be abolshed and it's function taken over by a seperate division of Superior Court.
I believe that family members have to get PRO active and go to whomever they think can help them, and not depend on just one source for help. This is not legal advice just my opinion. Do you see a similarity? Does it look like it may be a proscribed script where the actors are interchangeable? Yes, it's the accepted system here, but only because not enough people know about it.

Wednesday, August 09, 2006 11:44:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Trambarulo Post-

Maydelle "apparently" has been moved to the assisted living facility? I say this with a "?", as the wards conservator, Mark DellaValle (or Della Valle) did not see fit to notify the wards family or spouse. One of the children called to speak to their mother the other day, only to find that the phone number had been changed and apparently Maydelle had been moved. These actions are nothing new for the conservator, as he refuses to speak with or communicate with the wards family or spouse. As a conservator of the ward, Mark DellaValle most certainly should have been responsible for notifying the wards family of the move, phone numbers, room #, etc. This is so absolutely outrageous!! I write this with great disgust and much empathy for the family

Monday, August 14, 2006 11:21:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've been thinking of Maydelle and hope she is well. I know how her family feels. ( Believe me!). It IS outrageous. The conservator who is an Attorney MUST communicate with the family's attorney. If the conservator does not, the family's attorney DOES have recourse from what I have been led to believe.
From an article I read recently, CT. probate courts are in serious financial trouble and here is a quote "Some probate courts are so wanting for work they are open four to five hours a week,'said SEN. Andrew McDonald, a Stamford Lawyer who heads the Judiciary Committee. 'I don't think there's an appetite in the legislature to subsidize an inherently inefficient operation."
Now, here is a real kicker! Since the system is expected to go bust in 2008,... "forcing some courts to close if no one bails them out. Several Judges have suggested punting expenses to other branches of government, asking the state to pick up [their] health care and the judicial branch, [the] probate services for the poor." The tax paying citizens should foot their health care, while some judges go out and market their "services" by going out and making speeches to elderly organizations??? Some have given inaccurate and incomplete info. The audacity. CT. taxpayers won't tolerate that and politicians should know that, easpecially if they want to stay in office.
Is Maydelle's family going to Superior court? If so, will it be soon? I hope some family members will be present. I am not an attorney nor am I giving any advice, I'm an advocate. I, like many others feel that a lot of shennanigans, and maybe covert corruption is going on. Whichever it may be, It is certainly against the "spirit of the law." Openness and accountability is needed. An attorney is duty bound to represent his/her clients zealously, vigorously.
I'm happy that you've posted about Maydelle and hope that you'll keep us informed as to her well-being.
ALL THE BEST

Tuesday, August 15, 2006 7:50:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maydelle Trambarulo Update:

This probate story about Maydelle Trambarulo and family was posted in the Hartford Courant by Rick Green on January 19,2007. Excellent story, and the "niece" who is mentioned in the article is Teresa Sirico, a realtor based out of East Haven, CT. We all need to contact our CT legislators to change this and free Maydelle and other victims of the same. See story:

From courant.com
--------------------
Probate Court: Offering Unequal Protection Under The Law
--------------------

Rick Green

January 19, 2007

Welcome to the Hotel Connecticut. Come visit and you can never leave.

Because if you're elderly and frail and don't watch out, there's a probate court judge somewhere out there willing to lock you up in a nursing home. For your own good, of course, Grandma.

Unless something dramatic happens, another session of the General Assembly will slide by without probate reform. Oh, they'll hold hearings again, but don't bet on our elected leaders actually disrupting a system steeped in decades of old-boy politics and favoritism.

So this court system - where even the rules of evidence and recordkeeping are inconsistent and the legal experience of judges is uncertain - marches on, unimpeded.

The latest outrage-of-the-month comes from the Woodbridge probate district, where a judge last year denied a request by the children and husband of an elderly New Jersey woman, Maydelle Trambarulo, that she be allowed to leave a Connecticut nursing facility and return home.

Trambarulo was brought here for treatment in 2004 by a niece. Soon after, the niece went to probate court in Connecticut and had a conservator appointed to oversee her finances and health care, handing over the 76-year-old New Jersey woman's liberty - and control of her money - to probate.

"The husband is in New Jersey. The wife was brought here for rehabilitation by a relative. Then the relative had her conserved," said John Peters, a lawyer who won freedom for Daniel Gross, a Long Island man held against his will in a Waterbury nursing home.

Do I need to add that the Trambarulo estate is worth more than $1 million and that this fight, if nothing else, continues to provide thousands of dollars worth of work for lawyers?

It doesn't matter that this family could be a dysfunctional mess. It's not up to a Connecticut probate court to decide.

A former West Hartford probate judge who previously represented the Trambarulo family, John Berman, understood this when he said in court papers in December 2005 that the "court lacks jurisdiction to appoint a conservator."

Clifford D. Hoyle, the acting judge in Woodbridge, ruled, instead, that he was "not convinced that the respondent's family is willing to make the time commitments necessary to care for her."

Peters, now representing the Trambarulo family, told me that Maydelle "doesn't live here. The judge doesn't have jurisdiction. The fact that you are here doesn't mean you are a resident. She wants to go home."

Royal Stark, director of the health law clinic at the Quinnipiac University School of Law, said the legislature must limit the power that probate courts hand to conservators.

"Until I got a glimpse of it, I didn't realize what was at stake and how bad things could go," Stark said. For example, Stark said that once a person has been "conserved" by probate court, it is nearly impossible to remove the conservator.

Reform-minded lawyers want basic changes, such as mandating that courts respect previous requests made by the elderly, known as "advance directives." Courts should also follow the rules of evidence and proceedings should be conducted on the record. They also want to make it easier to appeal decisions.

"We are going to wade into it and see if there are solutions for it," promised state Sen. Andrew McDonald, the chairman of the judiciary committee. "A lot of this operates in the shadows."

There you have it - a court system that operates in the dark. Time to turn the lights on.

Rick Green's column appears on Tuesdays and Fridays. He can be reached at rgreen@courant.com.
Copyright 2007, Hartford Courant


--------------------
Visit www.courant.com for Connecticut news updates, sports stories, entertainment listings and classifieds.

Saturday, January 20, 2007 5:20:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, It was an excellent article by Rick Green of the Hartford Courant. I read it of course.
A quote from the article, submitted by the last poster, "Until I got a glimpse of it, I didn't realize what was at stake and how bad things could go," Stark said. For example, Stark said that once a person has been "conserved" by probate court, it is nearly impossible to remove the conservator." Yes, that is so. Even though the conservator is being paid, may not be doing their job, neglecting or abusing their ward. NO accountability, no controls, no monitoring, lack of records or files. Evidence is ignored, or not recorded in some cases. And they want the public, their constituents to have faith in the judicial system?
The article says," Reform-minded lawyers want basic changes, such as mandating that courts respect previous requests made by the elderly, known as 'advance directives.' Courts should also follow the rules of evidence and proceedings should be conducted on the record. They also want to make it easier to appeal decisions."

"We are going to wade into it and see if there are solutions for it," promised state Sen. Andrew McDonald, the chairman of the judiciary committee. "A lot of this operates in the shadows." Yes, much DOES go on behind cloaks of respectability. Especially when the public can't depend on their legislators to show courage, and to
do THEIR jobs, which is to serve the public and not their own self serving agendas.
Yes, that is the LEAST that should be done. It is amazing that with Jodi Rell's proposed tax increases (and I don't think anyone resents paying more taxes for eduaction purposes. I don't.), some probate judges want the taxpayers to pay for their HEALTH INSURANCE???? They also want the Judicial Branch to take over the costs for probate care of the poor.
The probate court now has created Project, after Project to "help" the public. No, it has bloated the system, more cost, created a system where we have more DIFFUSION of responsiblity, and cushy jobs for conservators (usually other attorneys), who delegate their jobs to some College student who is working toward a degree in Social Services or whatever, while they the conservators spends their time on their own private practice.
There is some consolation though. I'm hearing of more and more people who are having Living Wills, Living Trusts ( as they are learning that it is a way to AVOID PROBATE) created. Some others have told me that they are planning to move out of the State and take their tax dollars with them. Just amazing. Only in CT.!!!
Let Maydelle go home, and stop the kidnapping/hostage taking. This antiquated probate system in CT. seems more like the witch hunts of old ( Their real agenda was to wrestle property away from it's rightful owners ).
What right does a court (which isn't a REAL court) have to hold a resident from another State against their will or the wishes of their family???

Thursday, February 15, 2007 10:17:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maydelle Trambarulo, Rick Green Hartford Courant, CT Probate Courts, & Teresa Sirico (the distant relative mentioned in Rick Green's article in reference to Maydelle Trambarulo):

Reform? Not Now. Not Ever?
February 13, 2007 by Rick Green, Hartford Courant:


Just in from probate court: Don't worry about reform, we'll take care of it.

Some very capable lawyers say that I have little understanding of probate court, that in most of the thousands of cases that these small courts handle, they are doing unheralded, positive work, handling estates, adoptions and the peculiar process of taking away all the rights of an elderly person.

There's no need to require that there be an official record of court proceedings, that judges be lawyers and work full time, that rules of evidence be adhered to, that some limits be placed on conservatorships, where the courts can take away all of your liberties.

We really need 117 courts - some open just a few hours a week - because I'm told that probate is different, a link to a time when Pa drove the buggy to town hall for a friendly chat about Grandma's will.

Press them and probate leaders say all that's really needed is better training for judges. To make their case against change, one judges' association has hired a Capitol insider widely known to decision-makers in Hartford - former House Speaker Richard Balducci.

More than anything, they don't want a regional, full-time court system that will eliminate dozens of judges. They also don't want a lot of new rules imposed on them.

There is one small change that the judges do want - move them over to the public dole and pay for their health insurance.

Not that there's a problem or anything, but probate is going bankrupt.

According to the office of probate court administrator Judge James J. Lawlor, the courts will be $5 million in the hole next year. The river of red ink will reach $25 million by 2010.

"We need to be better managing the work that goes through the courts," said Lawlor, a former Waterbury judge who is pushing for limited reform in the legislature.

Of course, a number of probate judges say you can't believe Lawlor. The Connecticut Probate Judges Association for Local Courts Inc., led by Woodbridge Judge Joseph P. Secola, says that the top probate judge is both untruthful and a spendthrift - a charge that Lawlor denies.

"This guy has gone nuts with his staff," Secola told me. "He has spent over a half million dollars in the last four years on outside consultants. ... Nobody checks him."

As for the courts, Secola promised me "there just isn't any good-old-boys network." And the oversupply of courts "is a problem that is going to take care of itself."

I wondered how this might have prevented Dan Gross, a New York resident, from being committed to a nursing home by an overzealous court. Or Maydelle Trambarulo, a New Jersey woman still in a New Haven nursing home, unable to return to her husband and family because a distant relative persuaded the courts to take away all her rights. Or in Southington, where a pending complaint alleged that a local judge might have profited off a land deal that passed through his court.

Cases like these are the exception, said Danbury Probate Judge Dianne E. Yamin, leader of the probate assembly. She told me probate does countless good deeds that the media never report. Yamin, who said she works full time as a judge, told me that there's no need for the General Assembly to shake up probate.

"We need to all work together and make the improvements and reform in our system that will benefit the citizens of our state," Yamin said.

Finally, I talked to state Rep. James Spallone, whose mother was a probate judge and who now is sponsoring the bill that would pick up the health insurance tab for judges. He said that he wants to "preserve some of the best parts of the system without a complete overhaul."

So relax. There aren't any problems. Probate court is just fine.

Saturday, February 17, 2007 3:56:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How could Yamin say that, "cases like these are the exception," when there isn't a requirement that there be an official record of court proceedings? Rules of evidence not adhered to? As to the deficit in the probate system, if an entity which operates under the aegis of the CT.judicial branch isn't fiscally responsible in it's own house, how can legislators allow this? Where will the funds for this shortfall come from? And Health insurance on top of this? Adding insult to injury.
To say that, "all that's really needed is better training for [probate] judges" is ridiculous. If that's the case, then, thusfar probate courts have been rather cavallier with CT. citizen's lives and properties, if they have allowed those lacking in training to "handle" it's citizen's lives and property. And, the reward for this lack of education is to pay their Health Insurance? Pay for probate court's shortfall? At what price to our children's education? No, education is not THE answer. There have been many educated judges. CT. had a (Hartford?) probate judge in the 1980's. "Retired Early." Research it. As to the Committe on Judicial Behavior, why are there so few options for sanctions?? From last posted article in Hartford Courant, "To make their case against change, one judges' association has hired a Capitol insider widely known to decision-makers in Hartford - former House Speaker Richard Balducci." Hired? Is that lobbying? If so, is that probate association a non-profit organization? If so, what percentage of their funds were used? Is it a 501(c)(4)?, a 501(c)(3)? Many questions, very few answers.

Wednesday, February 28, 2007 9:34:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have been reading the posts on the case of Maydelle Trambarulo. I'm sure that the family's ultimate goal is to bring the mother / wife home where she belongs. I also hope that the family also plans on suing the state of CT, Teresa Sirico, and this conservator Mark Dellavalle. If the family has John Peter's on board, I will hope that all avenue's of this are being persued. This is another disgusting case of and elder being abused by the CT probate courts, guardian's, and conservator's!!!!!

Saturday, March 31, 2007 4:04:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, I hope the very same. However, we all need to be as vigilant as possible, because from what I can see, lawmakers make the laws, pass bills which protect themselves. They feel IMMUNE. Of course I'm not saying that all are self-serving, but TOO MANY of them are. I feel that the only thing that will shake them up is a severe scandal, possibly a wrongful death suit. I see that is quite likely to happen.
I spoke to someone recently who is a very nice man, but I felt that he didn't quite understand some of the psychological problems of some wards. There are some wards who have had to be conserved. For instance, if someone has a severe mental illness, and is in a situation where they have been severly victimized, robbed, raped and then hooked on drugs, and that person refuses to move from a dangerous environment, because of lack of judgement. I was told, "well, we all have free will." The truth of the matter is, that some illnesses rob it's victims of their judgement, and addiction robs people of their "free will." Now, if the "conservator of the person" has been apprised of the situation, and doesn't even go to see the ward, but once or twice in a year and allows the ward to live in a building where the landlord seems to prefer to rent to drug dealers ( and it is common knowledge, even the probate judge KNOWS the situation), what in the world does a reasonable person think the end result might be? I know of such a case.
Oh, the conservator said she can't make someone move to another environment if they don't want to. I guess that's predicated on the assumption that the ward has some judgement. What then is the purpose of a conservator? To collect a pay to watch someone die?
As this ward certainly will.
Oh yes, I certainly hope as you do, that those families (Trambarulo and D.Gross) who have been victimized SO BADLY, and for SO LONG do seek justice and that they are successful. There is no amount of money that could make up for what they've been through, but they NEED to be compensated with a
a very LARGE award.
What is the penalty for kidnapping?(DEATH)
Hostage taking? (WAR)
What is the penalty for false imprisonment? ( AN AMOUNT THAT HURTS!)
What is the penaly for treating a law abiding citizen of the U.S. like an enemy of the state of CT.?
(That citizen's ACCESS TO A FEDERAL GRAND JURY)
Yes, the only thing that these weasels understand, is a damned good bashing of their wallets and I hope that that is what happens to those law breakers who hide behind their "cloaks." Their legislation that protects themselves, their patronage. There are a few probate judges, and there are some attorneys who would like to see some serious reform, but there are not enough of them. Citizens need to be educated. ( and not by some probate judges who go out and speak to Senior Centers, Hospice, etc. Or those who go out and speak to Community groups and ask that the community group members tell him of any "new neighbors, deaths, illnesses (HIPPA?) etc." It has been done! People who have been abused by the probate system, or are enraged by what has happened to some of their fellow citizens, or who are concerned about their own children, need to get together and exchange notes on their experiences. They need to come together as a group. They need to inform their Representatives and their Congressmen. They need to contact those National Organizations for legal reform.
Again, DANIAL GROSS' family and MAYDELLE TRAMBARULO'S family should be awarded a VERY large judgement in their favor.

Friday, April 06, 2007 6:20:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

TERESA SIRICO, MAYDELLE TRAMBARULO, TRAMBARULO FAMILY, CT PROBATE COURTS, MARK DELLAVALLE.....

Seems to be much of the same BS STILL going on trying to return Maydelle Trambarulo home to NJ where she belongs with her husband and family.

Teresa Sirico is keeping the battle going in the CT probate courts, making every and all attempts to keep Mrs. Trambarulo and her financial holdings in the state of CT.

Teresa Sirico has been requested on behalf of the Trambarulo's attorney to submit to doing a deposition before the case goes into court yet again. Teresa Sirico's attorney stated that Teresa Sirico is not well enough at the moment to do that. Ms. Sirico is an expert at her game, and the CT parties have fell right into her hands over absolute corruption. One wonders if Ms. Sirico herself is also benefiting from Maydelle Trambarulo staying in CT, because everyday that Maydelle remains in CT is another pocket lined with the Trambarulo's money. Ms. Sirico has played this game before, calls herself an "advocate for elders", has given elder care career seminars, etc. Ms. Sirico has also been sued for this same corrupt game by another family who fell victim to her robbery- the case was Devita vs. Sirico. Ms. Sirico has put off the deposition in yet another attempt to avoid being directly questioned in her motives regarding Maydelle Trambarulo who is not and never was a CT resident. It's amazing that Teresa Sirico can not sit for an hour and give a deposition to the Trambarulo family lawyer, yet she continues to act as an aid daily with Maydelle Trambarulo's water therapy, is at the assisted living facility on a daily basis, and still is running a realtor business daily. As ordered by the probate court Judge Clifford Hoyle, Teresa Sirico's contact with Maydelle Trambarulo was to be "limited". I guess the conservator Mark Dellavalle considers Teresa's daily activities with Maydelle Trambarulo to be limited? What an outrage!
Ms. Sirico knows how to work the system well. Her father was a retired judge, and has brothers and sisters in both the medical and legal fields. The probate courts and conservator "appear" to work hand and hand with Teresa Sirico. One wonders what the REAL connection and doings are?
Maydelle remains to be held “HOSTAGE” by the state of CT both physically, mentally, and financially.

Wednesday, June 13, 2007 12:46:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You said that the judge ordered that contact was to be "limited." Did he qualify that term. Did he give any specifics. How many times per week, the scope, function of her visits etc. Listen, when a legal, valid Will, which was not contested, has taken as long as 3 1/2 years to get through a probate court, you KNOW what's going on. There is no monitoring of each probate court.
Some districts have many probate courts with part time "judges" who collect a lot of money for themselves, and for the State, not to mention the appointed conservators (most often, fellow attorneys). I would dare say that in my opinion, the antics of some these groupies border on the fraudulent. Has anyone determined whether Ms. Sirico(?) will want compensation for her "efforts." If she is assisting with water therapy, is she an employee of the facility? If not, and IF anything should happen to Maydelle while in water therapy, could the facility be held responsible? What would their Insurance Company think about that. A non-employee assisting in therapy?? It seems unlikely that the supervisor of any facility would put the facility in such a precarious position. IS she going to ask for FINANCIAL compensation?
I believe she could be questioned about that at a deposition. Also, remember there are other ways to be compensated (ie. gifts, business referals, larger than average bonuses, kickbacks etc., etc., etc. That, of course, is harder to prove, but we do have a very determined IRS in this Democracy. Hope all goes well with those who have chosen the "good fight", and done the "right thing."

Sunday, June 17, 2007 7:21:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It will be 3 years in August that Maydelle Trambarulo has been incarcerated in the hellhole they call "Corrupticut"- we are hoping there is an honest judge who will FREE MAYDELLE!
Watch our Youtube video-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A__2nTL58JQ

Monday, July 23, 2007 10:37:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

MAYDELLE TRAMBARULO, TERESA SIRICO, MARK DELLAVALLE, PAUL WHITAKER, ROBYN BERKE, AND THE CORRUPT CT PROBATE COURTS...........

Three years and counting since Teresa Sirico enacted her plan of taking Maydelle Trambarulo over state lines from Delaware, into CT. Once in CT, Teresa Sirico filed for conservatorship- and the story went on.

The New Haven Supreme Court heard the case (Ralph Trambarulo vs. Paul Whitaker- the "appointed" legal representative for Maydelle Trambarulo). There were 12 people present supporting the Trambarulo's, and one person present supporting the fight to keep Maydelle in CT- that being Teresa Sirico.

The case was heard based on domicile and residency, which Maydelle never had- and still doesn't! The lawyer "appointed" for Maydelle (Paul Whitaker), Robyn Berke (GAL), Mark DellaValle (conservator), and Teresa Sirico (niece of Maydelle's husband and previously sued individual for the same circumstance) were the fighters to keep Maydelle in CT away from her husband and family in NJ.

Help us stop this travesty of injustice continuing, fight with all you can to help Maydelle and the many others who have been stripped of all of their rights by the CT courts!! Please see and view this video done on the afternoon following the court hearing:



This video appears on You Tube, and was taken the day of the "latest" court
hearing in CT Friday July 20, 2007. The elder shown in the beginning is Paul's mother, and
the speaker's are mainly all of the Trambarulo Family. Please see video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A__2nTL58JQ

Thursday, July 26, 2007 1:41:00 PM  
Blogger ginny said...

What is Maydelle's health condition today

Wednesday, August 01, 2007 7:57:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maydelle is very frail and tells us that she "just doesn't want to wake up in the morning"- Please see this article in the New Haven Advocate about Maydelle, as well as two other people trapped in the nightmare of the CT probate court system. http://www.newhavenadvocate.com/article.cfm?aid=2235

Friday, August 03, 2007 12:42:00 AM  
Blogger ginny said...

Anonymous, you did not answer the question. FRAIL, does this mean she is suffering from a terminal disease, Alzheimers, a stroke patient? If Maydelle is so frail then why should she be moved anywhere? Could she survive a move in a frail condition? Also, has the family visited Maydelle regularly since she was moved to Connecticut?

Friday, August 03, 2007 6:00:00 AM  
Blogger ginny said...

Paul perhaps you can answer my question instead of anonymous. I would think if you have been so involved and caring about your mom that you would know her present medical condition. Also what is your plan when you take your mom home. Do you have Drs. in place to treat her, will someone in your family be caring for your mom, where will she be living and with which family member, who will be her primary caregiver?

Saturday, August 04, 2007 4:28:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Can someone please give an update as to whether Maydelle has been returned to her family?

Tuesday, September 18, 2007 1:59:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO MAYDELLE TRAMBARULO?

Link (half way down page once in) is:

http://www.newhavenadvocate.com/article.cfm?aid=4936

Maydelle Trambarulo and Gregory Russell
"Losing Control," Aug. 2

Judges in two different courts—New Haven Superior Court and New Haven Probate Court—have both ruled that Maydelle Trambarulo, the ailing 77-year-old New Jersey woman who's been in Greater New Haven against her children's wishes for more than three years, should return to her home and her family.

But that hasn't happened: Trambarulo is still in an East Haven assisted living facility. Trambarulo was brought to Connecticut in 2004 when her niece, an East Haven realtor, told Trambarulo's children their mother could get better care for her broken hip from Yale doctors. Trambarulo's four adult children thought it was a good idea, and say they thought their mother would be home in about three months.

It's now been more than three years and the family is engaged in a lengthy and costly legal battle over custody of their mother. Trambarulo's niece applied for conservatorship over Trambarulo shortly after bringing her to Connecticut and the probate court granted conservatorship—or, guardianship—to an attorney. Trambarulo has three attorneys who make decisions for her and are paid by her estate. Trambarulo's lawyers are fighting her family to keep her in Connecticut.

Two judges sided with the family, saying Trambarulo should be retuned to her family and be allowed to die with them—she has end-stage Parkinson's and dementia. "We thought my mother was going to leave," says Trambarulo's eldest daughter, Anne Haines. Instead, their mother's lawyers have asked Superior Court Judge Angela Robinson to reconsider her ruling, a legal move that will extend Trambarulo's stay in Connecticut indefinitely.

—Betsy Yagla

From Gloria R. :

MAYDELLE TRAMBARULO-

Let's not beat around the bush here, the niece is TERESA SIRICO, a local East Haven / New Haven realtor, and has been the one fighting the family to have her non blood related Aunt stay in CT.

Maydelle has been ordered by two courts to go home, but that was stopped when the conservator MARK DELLAVALLE refused to cooperate, and retained his own TWO lawyers(even though he is a lawyer, and paid for by Maydelle’s estate)- for fear of being sued by the Trambarulo family (which I hope that he will be).

The additional noose that was added to Maydelle coming home to NJ is that whenever she is able to return home, "suddenly" she is unable to travel, semi comatose, and is reported as having only a week to live. This has turned out to be complete HOGWASH, and many of us believe that she may even have been drugged to appear in a semi comatose state, incoherent, and non responsive. I certainly wouldn't put it past certain people, and it HAS happened to other elder prisoners held in captivity by their captors of hired hands!! Someone has got to push hard at the CT parties, and make them hold to their orders.

Tuesday, January 01, 2008 7:45:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Please read "corrupt probate attorney" under the Norwalk Topix blog. This prestigious attorney engaged in so much criminal activity- including collusion in attempted murder of the family he was supposed to be concerned with.
Very sick situation. Luckily the Attorney General took the case. No one else would help.

Thursday, January 10, 2008 2:18:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

MORE OF THE SAME!!!! Teresa Sirico is still filing appeals, bringing up old testified information, is still on her scam to keep this poor woman and her money in CT. "TERESA SIRICO" is bringing up old emails that she had the family write to her, when she began her mission to set the family in feud against each other. TERESA SIRICO, in my opinion, is a lying, malignant, destructive, evil, manipulative, and mental monster!! On top of that, the so called conservator (for the so called benefit of Maydelle Trambarulo) is a joke. The conservator "MARK DELLAVALLE" was paid $48,000 in 2006 from the monies of Maydelle and Ralph Trambarulo, and requested another $37,000 up to September 2007. Can you smell that this is all about money? MARK DELLAVALLE had to retain TWO lawyers for himself because he is not competent enough of an attorney to deal with matters on his own, and fears being sued himself. If I were the Trambarulo family I would sue both MARK DELLAVALLE AND TERESA SIRICO for anything and everything I could. From what I have heard, the family has full intent of doing so. Maydelle still sits isolated in CT in assisted living, with the monster of a kidnapper TERESA SIRICO. "Supposedly" she was given only two weeks to live in November, and after it "appeared" that Maydelle could not travel due to failing medical conditions- both SIRICO and DELLAVALLE obtained a note from the doctor stating that she could not medically travel. Oddly enough, since then- Maydelle appears to be of a condition that does NOT represent a dying woman. I have to wonder if someone self servingly drug induced Maydelle to make her appear in a comatose state!! Don't be surprised, this has been done before to elder people!! What in the hell is it going to take to send Maydelle Trambarulo home, especially since two courts and two judges have already ruled that she be sent home!!!

Tuesday, January 15, 2008 10:04:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

EXPOSED……Guardian Abuse!

Mark Dellavalle, Teresa Sirico

Victim: Maydelle Trambarulo and Family

Fox 5 News New York aired 2/19/08, and nationally

Please watch this story from Fox 5 News! Maydelle Trambarulo’s story begins about half way through the segment. Learn how these poor victims are being abused, cheated, stolen from, held in “prison”, and “possibly” even drugged! It’s no wonder Mark Dellavalle had no comment for the reporter. Oh, and let us all not forget the cousin who started all of this (her picture with her cat are shown in the segment, of Teresa Sirico). Please beware of conservator’s, court appointed guardians, Mark Dellavalle, and Teresa Sirico. See link below to watch:

http://www.myfoxny.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail?contentId=5821397&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=1.1.1

Wednesday, February 20, 2008 9:08:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maydelle is fairly well and living at home with her husband Ralph, where she should have been. Teresa has been banned all contact of any nature, and lost her battle to rob, steal, and continue her mental rage against the family.

Wednesday, September 10, 2008 10:24:00 PM  
Anonymous Stamford CT Real Estate said...

All the thanks goes to British Government who initiated and supported the rescue at the time of ultimate difficulty

Wednesday, March 17, 2010 10:02:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


View My Stats