Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibitsAugust 28,2002 TO: RICHARD RUPP ~ FROM: MARILYN JO GERBER RE: VISITS WITH MILDRED JANE GERBER mother, Mildred Jane Uemer wno is ~n LomuU,el,,,,' ~' - ] have confimed reservations for the ONLY DATES which I can arrange pm* the Court orclerd entered by the Honorable Judge Bayley in March 2002. They are as follow~: ~y, ,~mber 3,2002 1-SPM Crdcago Time Monday, Septem~r 9,2002 1-SPM Chicago Time Monday, SePtemt)er 16,2002 1-SPM Chicago Time Tuesday, ~r 1,2002 1-5PM Chicago Time Since my mother's condition I~as deteriorated to the point that she is not able to ambulate without major assistance and has presented herself to me in Chicago the last two visits, in a wheelchair, I have to assume that my mother iS not attending the On good author~, I Senior Services Day Care Centers on T __t~. _~y~'__~ar?~ ~Thu~,r~sd~aySnn~rs if at all for averv ~,,,, ,ve been informed that my mother has not a~unu~= u'<"-'~ "~' "" .......;"to long time and that these centers operate from Monday through Friday, from U~UU/~M 4:30 PM. I just received my nursing schedule and I cannot visit my mother on any other days other than is noted above. Therefore, I shall expect arrangements to be made for my vis. as Ba ey has so emp. ha?ca W not allow my brother to continue to harass ano aouse me oy making me wm[ urm~ me very last minute prior to my departure for Cl~icago and wait for weeks to find out if I am going to visit my mother. I require sleep, rest and relaxation just as my brother and sister and cannot drive,travel and visit my mother under extreme sleep deprivation. I muSt be rested and capable of worl<ing as a nurse especially since I am charge of critical patients. My mother's schedule is much more flexible than mine for ve~ obvious reasons as well as my sister's who doesn~ seem to work full-time. Please correct me if I am wrong. I also would like to point out to my bro~, that I have failed to receive any compensation that was offered to me tot my visit to Chicago on February 9,2002. When does my brother plan on reimbursing me and under what trust and under what account and under what condition? My brother terminated my visit with my mother after just 15 minutes and I had to cancel a wi'tole weekend of work, in addition to travel, hotel, food,expenses. Does this not fall under the category of emotional,physical and financial abuse? Does he and has he treated my sister, Jane Heflin this way or any other member of the Gerber family? As you may or may not know, one of my visits with my mother occured in my mother's former car for 4 hours in a parking lot, as she refused to exit the car. Another visit occured outside for a change of venue for 4 hours so that my mother would not be subjected to a dark enclosed and COLD hotel room. This last visit outside in the parking lot where my mother could observe and be entertained by the ducks and geese was the most successf~ visit tllat I have had since February, 2002. This proves our constant request to take my mother to the park in Lombard, another restaurant, sl3opping as anything other than the constant and persistant imprisionment of my mother and myself in a sterile and confusing hotel room at the Embassy Suites which also costs my mother's estate eacl~ week. I also think It can be safely and firmly estasblished that I am not a threat to my mother especially in lieu of my extensive geriatric and critical care skills and t~at we are no longer in need of an independent iai worker, Joan Jackson or anyone else from her agency as they have no medical ss~ills that superscede mine and they are costing my mother's estate $85.00 per hour. ..... ~ ;,. ~"thLc~flnne tt3 ~oerlano ~.,uu,,,y wu,, .,. ....... , .. e- -: .. _ [llUI. ~/.U,~V.W %r'~,~q,,',,'"! '" - . ......... ~,. .... "~ ~at Jane and the (3emer each month at Jane's house In aoomon family bills my mother's estate is above and beyond what a prudent and economical guardian and bank would approve in customary circummnces. I am also concerned as to the left blackened necrotic toe of my mother, ~ TMJ('l'emporal Mandibular Joint) which is constantly contracting and firing off, her rapid decline In amubulation in the month of August, her continued loss of weight, her coarse breathe sounds which I ascultated several weeks ago, her frequent and copious oral secretions which ! noted last week,and most importantly a future care plan for my mother when my sister will be absent in the upcoming future from ChiCago and where I will be visitin9 my mother when is not willing to leave my sister's house or Incapable of leaving my sister's houSe. Will my brother ~ guardian, force my mother on a stretcher, into an ambulance over to the Embassy Suites or worse institutionalize her(because my sister refuses me to see our mother in her home) as ~ ultimate punist~ment of her and myself? I am alsO concerned as to Pauline Welner's reference tn one of her letters that was bought as an attempt to terminate my visits with my mother, where she references that my moUqer is bein9 tranquilized more frequently. This practice is barbaric and abusive and I caution the guardian to consider ten-fold his Intentions and practices. I would also like to know how many visits my brother, Fred E Gerber, il .~__$ made to IllinOis to see his mother. How long have his visits been and for how many days? We have asked for tills several times and as my mother's guardian, he has many responsibilities and duties to fullfill. My sister Jane Heflin and Joan Jackson believe or fantasize that t13ey are empowered by ttle guardian to terminate visits, make decisions,etc. Please amplify the State law as to how my brother is capable of transfering gurardianshlp duties and powers to anybody else without a Court approval and sanction. Since the guardian, Fred E Gerber, II refuses to speak to me, take messages or acknowledge my messages or questions as well as my sister, Jane Hefiin, I canot take my sister's word for it when She stetes. 'the guardian has told me a very Io_r~ ti.m .or ~ .._..._.: ,__,_... ~ u,,norable j,~.toe Baytey by affirming h~s oath Court in ~umuerlan(I umy . j Elay~y s oec~s~n, my ' of 33 rs. 361moursatte~ uoge · ' r community yea __ . and essentially made my aste. ic, a o as was e-meditated by Jane and Fred . to Ch g pr id never uardtamhlP · · red knew that Jane wou get g. . guardian and then dls~.pp~, red..F. ...... ,,,... k.., in mm, v,Jwania which IS wt~t he of my mother in Ilinois but ne cou~o uy ~u t~ ,,,'~''"~" ....... · .... did. the elderly? aDout my mother's health as ~lemonsu'ateo in your last leu~,. , ,m.,, x~,,, ~ .......... very fine complement of -super-guardian", what a nice thing to sa~. September 15,2002 TO: Fred E Gerber Richard Rupp FROM: Marilyn Gerber On Saturday, September 14,2002, I received a telephone call from Start Laskowski stating that he had received a letter from Richard Rupp in his handwriting stating that the visit with my mother on September 16,2002 would be changed to the Embassy Suites in Lombard Illinois from 1-5 PM (CDT). I am responding to such telephone call. On September 7,2002, it was confirmed that my visits for September would be at the Sunrise Assisted Living Center in Glen Ellyn. I therefore visited my mother last week at her new home and location where my brother the guardian admitted her on or about September 1,2002. As I have reminded the guardian many times, Judge Baytey ruled that I was to visit my mother when I can arrange each weekly visit and where my mother is located. Therefore, I WiLL be visiting my mother at Sunrise Assited Living Center on September 16,2002 from 1-5PM (CDT). My mother does not and is not located at the Embassy Suites Hotel in Lombard nor does she reside at 270 N Garfield, Lombard, Illinois. I am particularly concerned that my mother has shown significant medical changes since early August. AS you Know, my mother refused to exit her car or should I say the car which was sold out from under her to my sister with funds more than likely from the Trust. Even my sister could not make her exit her car nor Joan Jackson. I had my second only four continous hour visit with my mother in the front seat of her car. My mother and I were left alone with no one staring at us and she talked to me, ate and drank fulids, she stroked me lovingly and spontaneously embraced me and kissed me. On August 21,2002, I had another visit with my mother which the majority of the visit occuring in the parking lot where my mother was entertained my ducks and geese and the particularly lovely day. Again my mother was happy with me, talked to me and stroked my head, embraced me spontaneously. She allowed me to hold her hand, comb her hair, offer her fuilds as She did on the previous visit. The visit allowed my mother to change settings. However despite that after five months, I only had three visits which lasted for the tour continous court ordered visits, I have become concerned with the condition of my mother. On my second visit on August 14, I noticed that my mother had a necrotic left toe, she jaw or TMJ was constantly contracting, her lungs sounded coarse and her lower legs,ankles and especially feet were cold with dependent edema all suggesting some serious vascular disease. On August 21,2002, my mother showed up for the very first time in sliipers with open toes and cut-away ted stockings. It was obvious that her necrotic toe was a concern as well as her edema. My mother also had significant difficulties in ambulating and transfereing in and out of a wheelchair. This brings up another issue that my mother In August presented herself in a wheelchair for the first time. This alone suggests that my mo~er Is havtng problems. Her personal hygiene of her toes was unclean with filth between her legs which ! showed to Joan Jackson. My mother has been removecl from my sister's home where she only had homemakers provide care for her along with my sister. TO the best of my knowledge, my sister had 24 hour caregivers as well as her presence. My mother is obviously declining under her care and where is the GUARDIAN? My mother has now been removed from my sister's home after 8 months to a strange location where she has a small room or should I say an alcove with no windows, in a single bed shoved up against a wall and she must share this area with another woman who has twO windows around the corner_ She knows no one, is confused and is subjected to men and women whO are more cognitively challenged than her. There are no certified nurses aides or nurses present at this facility. There are no LPN's after 8PM and none on the weekend. There are only homemakers who do not sleep in her room at night whereas she did have a caregiver sleep alledgedly at my sister's home. She is forced to eat and sleep when it is convient for the facility. She is bathed at night not when she wants. My mother is also put in a wheechair for long periods of time which cause early stages ot decubiti- I am also told by Michelle that finally physical therapy has been orderd for my mother. Why wasn't this done months ago? On September 7, I noticed that my mother's right heel was in a large gauze dressing which indicates a heel wound or ulcer. It is obvious that my mother iS not receiving excellent care and as a geriatric nurse with over 17 years experience and over L::>0 years experience going back to when I was a certified nurses aide at Kimbrough Army Hospital, I am making the following decision. I will not approve my mother being transported to a small,cold and clark hotel room at the Embassy Suites hotel where you have subjected her to essentially imprisonement for 4 hours. As a licensed nurse, I will not violate my Nurse Practice Act, Title 6 under Pennslyvania Law and the juHstiction of the Court of Cumberland County under the Honorable Judge Bayley- I will only visit my mother where she is living and located. I will notassist in the barbaric and punitive treatment of my mother as I have witnessed in the last five months, i will not agree as a nurse to my mother being traumatized by making get into a car, drive to a strange hotel room. transfer out of a car and into a wheelchair and then reverse the process. This is completely abusive and I will not agree to this on the basis of my licensed clinical skills_ This violates all the care plans for a demetia patient. I shall also remind you that Judge Bayley did not order supervised visits as he stated in his footnotes that he was content that my mother would not be adversly affected by my visits. Therefore since it has been apparent that many of my visits have been conditional on the availability of Joan Jackson or anyone from her firm, I shall not agree to supervision or being followed around as has occured for five months. Joan Jackson has stated to me herself that she has no concerne of any harm that would become of my mother due to my presence. Joan Jackson has confirmed that she is paid $~5.00 per hour to essentially sit and talk to my sister while I visit with my mother. This is an outrageous abuse of my mother's monies and I shall take this up with the Court and the $1200 montly expenses or should I say the enrichment of the firm of Warren and Sanders. Judge Bayley also was specific that the visit would be for four continous hours when I could arrange it and therefore I shall not wait until the very last minute prior to my departure and at times on the same day of my flight to hear from the guardian as the his approval of my visits which I provided to him on the averagte of three weeks prior to my visits_ I cannot imagine that Fred manages his Army career at the last minute nor is he allowed to treat his fellow officers in this manner. I shall from here on It enforce my four continous hours which will be from the moment I make personal contact with my mother and not because Jane or Fred say it is from 1-5PM. Often my plane is late In arriving In Chicago or it takes longer than anticipated to procure my ren( a car. I Shall not be penalized nor abused or harassed by my sister, Jane Heflin who essentially believes that she is the guardian. It is quite clear that my brother,Fred Gerber Is often on assignment all over the country, o/ten in San Antonio, Germany and any other secret high security assignment_ My brother testified tl3at he would i<eep my mother in her home at 623 Hilltop Drive in New Cumberland, PA_ My mother has all the assests to allow her to stay at her home. You tOOk her away from everything she knew and loved from her personal possessions, to her friends ,her priest and beloved Church and her community who loved her and enjoyed seeing her. She is now in Chicago I believe only to spite me and where my sister's job is in New York and the guardian rarely visits her. How cruel,how completely abusive and insensitive to my mother's wishes and my father's legacy. My mother should be returned to her home where she can enjoy her $ bedroom home and where she can have all the luxuries that she so richly deserves. There are so many people that can and want to visit her In New Cumberland. My brother would be only 2 hours away, my sister only 3 hours away from her job in New York and I live only 5 doors down the street. The logistics of my brother traveling and my sister traveling, not to mention the expense that ! incur each week goes beyond anything my father ever envisioned and It represents a HUGE depletion of my mother's TRUST funds which the guardian, Fred E Gerber, II has already depleted and which PNC Bank has filed serious objections as well as my self on August 27,2002. Therefore, i shall be at the SUNRISE ASSISTED LIVING CENTER on September 16,2002 from when I arrive which due to my flight's arrival shall be approximately 1:30m to I :45 due to traffic and that Glen Ellyn is slightly further away from Lombard. I shall wait until my mother is present at her facility. I shall make sure that my visit is enforced and the authorities in Illinois are prepared to enforce Judge E~ayley's court order of March 2002. I also strongly object to your discourteous treatment of my attorney, Stan Laskowski when you send him responses at 4:30PM prior to my visits tO see my mother and especially In this case when he has to deal with your Saturday faxes. This is not the firs! time that you have employed these tactics. We never have treated you or your attorney this way. You have delibertly burclened me with excessive letters just to arrange visits with my mother. Since my visits started in April, you have been responsible for 62 LL=-I-I'FRS concerning my court ordered visits. ThiS means that in the 5 months that I have visited my mother In Chicago, I saw her only 13 times for the 28 times that I requested visits with my mother. This means that for the 13 visits there were 5 letters for eaCh requested visit. One does not have to be a rocket scientist to know that this tactic is clearly one of intimidation in the hope tha~ I will give up my desire to see my mother. I have to wonder if this is the manner of managment that the guardian manages his responsibilities for the US Medical Corps? September 15,2002 TO: Fred E Gerber Richard Rupp FROM: Marilyn Gerber On Saturday, September 14,2002, I received a telephorte call from Stan LaskOwski stating tlqat he had received a letl:er from Richard Rupp in his handwriting stating that the visit with my mother on September 16,2002 would be changed to the Embassy Suites in Lombard Illinois from 1-5 PM (CDT). I am responding to such telephone call. On September 7,2002, it was confirmed that my visits for September would be at the Sunrise Assisted Living Center in Glen Ellyn. I therei'ore visited my mother last week at her new home and location where my brother the guardian admitted her on or about September 1,2002. As I have reminded the guardian many times, Judge Bayley ruled that I was to visit my mother when I can arrange each weekly visit and where my mother is located. Therefore, I WILL be visiting my mother at Sunrise Assited Living Center on September 16,2002 from 1-5PM (CDT). My mother does not and is not located at the Embassy Suites Hotel in Lombard nor does she reside at 270 N Garfield, Lombard, Illinois. I am particularly concerned that my mother has shown significant medical changes since early August. As you I(now, my mother refused to exit her car or should I say the car which was sold out from under her to my sister with funds more than likely from the Trust. Even my Sister could not make her exit her car nor Joan Jackson. I had my second only four continous hour visit with my mother in the front seat of her car. My mother and I were left alone with no one staring at us and she talked to me, ate and drank fulids, she stroked me lovingly and spontaneously embraced me and kissed me. On August 21,2002, I had another visit with my mother which the majodty of the visit occuring in the parking lot where my mother was entertained my ducks and geese and the particularly lovely day. Again my mother was happy with me, talked to me and stroked my head, embraced me spontaneously. She allowed me to hold her hand, comb her hair, offer her fuilds as she did on the prevmus visit. The visit allowed my mother to change settings. However despite that after five months, I only had three visits which lasted for the four continous court ordered visits, I I~ave become concerned with the condition of my mother. On my second visit on August 14, I noticed that my mother had a necrotic left toe, She jaw or TMJ was constantly contracting, her lungs sounded coarse and her lower legs,ankles and especially feet were cold with dependent edema all suggesting some serious vascular disease. On August 21,2002, my mother showed up for the very first time in sliipers with open toes and cut-away ted stockings. It was obvious that her necrotic toe was a concern as well as her edema. My mother also had significant difficulties in ambulating and transfereing in and out of a wheelchair. This brings up another issue that my mother In August presented herself in a wheelchair for the first time. This alone suggests that my mother is having problems. Her personal hygiene of her toes was unclean with filth between her legs which I showed to Joan JacKson. My mother has been removed from my sister's home where she only had homemakers provide care for her along with my sister. TO the best of my knowledge, my sister had 24 hour caregivers as well as her presence. My mother is obviously declining under her care and where is the GUARDIAN? My mother has now been removed from my sister's home after 8 months to a strange location where she has a small room or should I say an alcove with no windows, in a single bed shoved up against a wall and she must share this area with another woman who has twO windows around the corner. She knOWS no one, is confused and is subjected to men and women who are more cognitively challenged than her. There are no certified nurses aides or nurses present at this facility. There are no LPN's after 8PM and none on the weekend. There are only homemakers who do not sleep in her room at night whereas she did have a caregiver sleep alledgedly at my sister's home. She is forced to eat and sleep when it is convient for the facility. She is bathed at night not when She wants. My mother is also put in a wheechair for long periods of ~me which cause early stages of decubiti. I am also tol(~ by Micllelle that finally physical therapy has been orderd for my mother. Why wasn't this done months ago? On September 7, I noticed that my mother's right heel was in a large gauze dressing which indicates a heel wound or ulcer. It is obvious that my mother is not receiving excellent care and as a geriatric nurse with over 17 years experience and over 20 years experience going back to when I was a certified nurses aide at Kimbroucjh Army Hospital, I am making the following decision. I Will not approve my mother being transported to a small,cold and dark hotel room at the Embassy Suites hotel where you have subjected her to essentially imprisonement for 4 hours. As a licensed nurse, I will not violate my Nurse Practice Act, Title 6 under Pennslyvania Law and the juristiction of the Court of Cumberland County under the Honorable Judge Bayley. I will only visit my mother where she is living and located. I will notassist in the barbaric and punitive treatment of my mother as I have witnessed in the last five months. I will not agree as a nurse to my mother being traumatized by making get into a car, drive to a strange hotel room, transfer out of a car and into a wheelchair and then reverse the process. This is completely abusive and I will not agree to this on the basis of my licensed clinical SkillS_ This violates all the care plans for a demetia patient. I shall also remind you that Judge Bayley dtcl not order supervised visits as he statecl in his footnotes that he was content that my mother would not be adversly affected by my visits. Therefore since it has been apparent that many of my visits have been conditional on the availability of Joan Jackson or anyone from her firm, I shall not agree to supervision or being fOllowed around as has occured for five months. Joan Jackson has stated to me herself that she has no concerns of any harm that would become of my mother due to my presence. Joan Jackson has confirmed that she is paid $EI5.00 per hour to essentially sit and talk to my sister wl3ile I visit with my mother. This is an outrageous abuse of my mother's monies and I shall take this up with the Court and the $1200 montly expenses or should I say the ennchment of the firm of Warren and Sanders. Judge Bayley also was specific that the visit would be for four continous hours when I could arrange it and therefore I shall not wait until the very last minute prior to my departure and at times on the same day of my flight to hear from the guardian as the his approval of my visits which I provided to him on the averagte of three weeks prior to my visits. I cannot imagine that Fred manages his Army career at the last minute nor is he allowed to treat his fellow officers in this manner_ I shall from here on it enforce my four continous hours which will be from the moment I make personal contact with my mother and not because Jane or Fred say it is from 1-SPM. Often my plane is late In arrtvlng in Chicago or it takes longer than anticipated to procure my rent a car_ I shall not be penalized nor abused or harassed by my sister, Jane Heflin who essentially believes that she is the guardian. It is quite clear tl~t my brother, Fred Gerber Is often on assignment all over the country, often in San Antonio, Germany and any other secret high security assignment. My brother testified tl3a~ he woulcl Keep my mother in her home at 623 Hilltop Drive in New Cumberland, PA. My motl3er has all the assests to allow her to stay at her home. You tOOk her away from everything she Knew and loved from her personal possessions, to her friends ,her priest and beloved Church and her community who loved her and enjoyed seeing her. She is now in Chicago I believe only to spite me and where my sister's job is in New York and the guardian rarely visits her. How cruel,how completely abusive and Insensitive to my mother's wishes and my father's legacy. My mother should be returned to her home where she can enjoy her {5 bedroom home and where she can have all the luxuries that she so richly deserves. There are so many people that can and want to visit her In New Cumberland. My brother would be only 2 hours away, my sister only 3 hours away from her job in New York and I live only 5 doors clown the street. The logistics of my brother traveling and my sister traveling, not to mention the expense that ! incur each week goes beyond anything my father ever envisioned and it represents a HUGE depletion of my mother's TRUST funds which the guardian, Fred E Gerber, Il has already depleted and which PNC Bank has filed serious objections as well as my serf on August 27,2002. Therefore, i shall be at the SUNRISE ASSISTED LIVING CENTER on September 16,2002 from when I arrive which due to my flight's arrival shall be approximately 1:30m to 1:45 due to traffic and that Glen Eltyn is slightly further away from Lombard. I shall wait until my mother is present at her facility. I shall make sure that my visit is enforced and the authorities in Illinois are prepared to enforce Judge Bayley's court order of aarcl3 2002. I also strongly object to your discourteous treatment of my attorney, Stan Laskowski when you send him responses at 4:30PM prior to my visits tO see my mother and especially In this case when he has to deal with your Saturday faxes. This is not the ?lrst time that you have employed these tactics. We never have treated you or your attorney this way. You have delibertly burdened me wlth excessive letters just to arrange visits with my mother, Since my visits started In April, you have been responsible for 62 LETTERS concerning my court ordered visits. ThiS means that in the 5 months that I have visited my mother in Chicago, I saw her only 13 times for tl~e 28 times that I requested visits with my mother. This means that for the 13 visits there were 5 letters for each requested visit. One does not have to be a rocket scientist to know that this tactic is clearly one of intimidation in the hope that I will give up my desire to see my mother. t have to wonder it this is the manner of managment that the guardian manages his responsibilities for the US Medical Corps? September 19,2002 TO: Fred E Ge~oer, It ,~ Richard Rupp FROM: Marilyn Gerber RE: upcoming visit with Mildred Jane Gerber Dear Richard: Per the court order by Judge Bayley, i am coming to visit my mother on Monday, September 23,2002 from approximately 1-5PM (Chicago time). Since I was not able to visit my mother last week where she resides and lives, I will visit her this coming week at Sunrise Assisted Living in Glen Ellyn. If you can show me a state or federal statute that says that i have to have an attorney contact you to arrange my visits and you think that a guardian can stipulate and authorize this, I am always willing to look at this. However you and I both know my brother's 'briilant" method of abuse and manipulation in essentially costing me a small fortune the last six months in arranging court ordered visits with my mother. This method has been arduous and unproductive. It is more than clear that the majority of tl~e time, you have no idea or cannot access the guardian and essentially you have been working with my sister Jane who thinks she is the guardian. You and ! and all of the authorities in PA and ILLINOIS know that guardianship is not tranferable unless the court orders this or appoints her the a co-guardian. The police in Glen Eilyn have had numerous conversations with ali of the parties, my sister, me and my attorneys. The court order is quite clear and it stands. I will and have arranged a visit and will visit my mother. Your last letter to Stan on September 16,2002 is inaccurate and essentially a pack of lies. I am not an attorney and Stan still is my attorney and shall act as my attorney when it is necessary, I shall when I able inform you and the guardian of my visits. I do not have to ask permission to visit my mother. I have tolerated your intimidation too long and from here on in, I shall out of due process inform you of my visits. My mother has Alzheimer's. She is essentially available to me almost 24 hours a day minus scheduled doctor's visits, and any or all acitivites I can be a part of of especially since I am a trained geriatric nurse. Let me remind you, there is no head nurse at Sunrise Assited Living and I shall and have conducted myself as a professional and expert in the care and treatment of the elderly. I will not dignify by responding to your letter of September 16,2002 an~l I doubt if Stan shall waste his time and resources either. It is time for the guardian to get real and face the facts of this court order. My mother iS not a pawn. Fred is anywhere but present as a guardian and Jane has too many job responsibilities in New Yorkl. My team of experts in Illinois have made it perfectly clear that I have the right at any time to visit my mother. The State's Attorney is also clear on this and the court in EO:d :931 ~~ 20-$~-±~0 DuPage County is also clear on this. Therefore as of today, I shall proceed and visit my mother per the court order. I also have a bank of hours and days where I was not allowed and Fred you were incontempt of the court order. My attorney, John O'Halloran shall address this in Illinois and the court. Therefore, 1 shall at times return on a consecutive day to tal(e advantage of the days over the last six months were you were in contempt of this order and I showed up or you cancelled me as I was on my way to the airport. Reread Judge Bayley's order, it is BRILLANT. This Judge knew what he was doing. I shall decide my visitation days and bool( my flights and get my discounts and arrange for cars and at times lodging and out of courtesy, ! shall inform the guardian and his attorney. I am extremely concerned as to the medical and physical condition of my mother.l am requesting and essentially demanding to Know who her primary care physician is. I have been told by Joan Jackson that she has no power, she is just an observer. Well we all know about inspectors, don't we Fred as in Iraq. Joan has also informed me that her notes were altered, underlined and tampered with in your last motion in July before Judge Bayley. I also do not need Joan Jackson present and since Judge Bayley did not orde observed visits or monitored visits,I am objecting and shall take legal action to have her visits stop. This is a waste of money and of my mother's assets. You are already up to your ankles in problems with PNC Bank and the court for a seriOus amount of money in Pennslyvania- This also brings up my next request or issue, I am requestiong a status conference on the Exceptions before the court. The 45 days is almost up and since I am on record as PRO-SE, I await your response to my inquiry. We are beyond working things out amicably. Fred is in contempt for accounting that was court ordered on July 8,2002 by Judge Hoffer. I shall move ahead for a full AUDIT and I know that PNC concurs. Start is still my attorney- I ask that you send your responses tohim by FAX during usual and customary business hours, Monday through Friday from 9-5PM Eastern Time. Stan will no longer come in on Saturdays or Sundays. I have left messages with my brother and my sister and they hang-up on me and never get back to me. The guardian is mandated by state law to be available for my mother and to respond to Bayley's court order. My brother is in Germany, on alert, in San Antonio, anywhere else but in Illinois. I am sure that his country needs him and he is doing an excellent job. My sister is working in NewYork and since the Motion of Exceptions she cannot be draining the Trusts dry for herself or her children as was evidenced by Fred's accounting or shall I say partial and contemptous accounting_ I also have never seen, my request for the $200.00. I shall also be submitting a full accounting of my costs to Chicago and I am sure that Fred as Trustee shall deal with these in a professional and timely manner especcially in the height of the "Enron Era". This leads me to my last request, IF I should make a request of the Trust, who will be the attorney. Undsay Baird or yourself? I am warning you straight out that t shall not be chased and abused into producing an accounting need or balance sheet as have never seen my sister or any of the grandchildren fill out one needs request questionaire and I have already filled out four. FRED still owes me $2,500.00 from his offer through Linclasy Baird from the fall of last year. He is in breech of his word and his agreement_ Therefore since Undasy Baird recently wrote to me that she is currently not representing my brother, please have Fred send me the $2,500.00 to my address in New Cumberland. Since Fred stalks me, tracks me and essentially knows my business, he should have not trouble knowing where or when to find me. Fred has also destroyed and removed my personal possessions from my mother's residence at 623 Hilltop Drive, New Cumberland. There are now sevearl witnesses who have come forward and I recently had the opportunity to view the house and take note of the absence of my possessions. How would you like to deal with this. Amicably or through the courts or better yet in pub#c? We can spend the next few months before Judge Bayley, Judge Oler etc and I think that by now you know that I have unlimited energies and resources to accomplish my legal rights. Please return your letters to Stan in acknowledging my visits. All other matters concerning my PRO-SE status concerning the accounting, trust or my property, please write or call me. I know that you know that I do not have an office, a staff etc. Therefore, Judge Bayley shall more that likely not condone your attempts of not informing me in a timely manner of your intent of actions. I have a voice mail on my cell phone: (717)503-5280. Please leave a message and then follow up with a letter. I am not always home and will not be clnasing letters or lack of letters. You can always send a copy or FAX Stan. He is responsible and can always find me. FRED PLEASE DO THE RIGHT THING. DO NOT HURT MOM. BRING MY MOTHER,OUR MOTHER BACK HOME. LET HER END HER LIFE WHERE SHE WANTED. All the resources are present to bring her back to New Cumberland. I am certified to transport and fly Mom home. I have all the resources ready to take care of her 24/7. it would be cheaper for her Trust and the long care r,;,---Js of MOM. Please forget about me and your hatred of me. Alter Mom is gene and in Ileaven you can destroy me. Take the righter, right. Remember Dad's legacy. Stand tall to the institutional values of the US Army and the position wt~lch you currently hold. You have only a few months left in the Army. Fred you worked so hard to get where you are and you have done such an excellent Jobin the ARMY as you and your commanders see it. Don't blow it now, Fred. Be the example of son and brother that we all wished for you. I Will always be your sister and don*t ask me to have to battle you for sensless reasons. But make no mistake, I shall until last breath and dime protect our Mother. CALDWELL ~, KEARNS A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CARL g. WASS ATTORNEYS AT LAW. of COUNSEL JAMES R. CLIPPINGER THOMAS D. CALDWELL. CHARLES J. D£HART, III RICHARD L. KEARNS JAMES O. CAMPBELL. JR. 3631 NORTH FRONT STREET JAMES L. GOLDSMITH HARRISBURG. PENNSYLVANIA 17ii0-1533 STANLEY J. A. LASKOWSKI JEFFREY T. HcGUIREe DOUGLAS K. mARSICO BRETT M. WOODBURN 717-232-7661 DOUGLAS E. HERMAN PAX: RAY J. MICHALOWSKI theflrmOcaldwellkearns.com -^~o ^ .~.~R o~ .~ ,,,,R April 16, 2002 Richard C. Rupp, Esquire RUPP AND MEIKLE P.O. Box 395 Camp Hill, PA 17001-0395 Re: Access visits - Mildred Gerber Dear Richard: Your letter dated April 2, 2002 confirmed the acceptability and availability of Mildred on April ! 7. No mention or notice was provided of any scheduling commitments or conflicts for her in that letter or other communications since then. Further, no information has been provided regarding the purpose and nature of the post 3 p.m. commitment for her which you reference. My client's travel arrangements are single day, committed and non-refundable. Due to Marilyn's flight arrangements she physically can not arrive and be available before I p.m. tomorrow. The location for the visit is also questioned as it requires further travel by Mildred to another unfamiliar location. Ifa full visit at an appropriate location will not be provided as ordered by the conrt, we will have no choice but to seek further enforcement of the Order for all future visits. I have attempted to reach you by phone upon receipt of your letter today but I was advised that you were not available. Mr. Gerber thus should contact Marilyn this evening (she can be reached on her cell phone 717-503-5280) so as to confirm whether the visit will proceed between I p.m and 5 p.m., if not, Marilyn will not attend tomorrow's visit as the location, accommodations and shortness of the visit will not be conducive to Mildred's bests interests. ~ty yours~ S a~ley J.¥ E/iskowski CALDWELL & KEARNS SJAL:sl Via Facsimile and U.S. Ill[ail 01-607 CALDWELL ~ KEARNS A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CARL G. WASS ATTORNEYS AT LAW. OF COUNSEL JAMES R. CLIPPINGER THOMAS D. CALDWELL. JR. CHARLES J. DEHART. Ill RICHARD L. KEARNS JAMES O. CAMPBELL. JR. 3631 NORTH FRONT STREET JAMES L. GOLDSMITH HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17110-1533 STANLEY J. A. LASKOWSKI JEFFREY T. McGUIRE- DOUGLAS K. MARSICO DOUGLAS E. HERMAN April 19, 2002 PAX: 7,,-232-2766 RAv J. NICHALOWSKI thefirmOcaldwellkeams.com Richard C. Rupp, Esquire Rupp and Meikle P. O. Box 395 Camp Hill, PA 17011-0395 RE: Mildred J. Gerber, Dear Richard: Marilyn's availability to visit with her mother is dictated by her work schedule and present flight schedules. A long-term work schedule for Marilyn is not always attainable. We have and will continue to provide dates for visits as well in advance as we are able to. Thus the proposal for the same day each week for visit may not be viable in any event as this is outside of Marilyn's control. Marilyn is not able to make travel arrangements in any event to allow visits between 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. or 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Central Daylight Time. As to Tuesdays and Thursday, please advise why such dates pose conflict for Mildred. For April 24 and May 1, Marilyn can only be available and arrive in Lombard, Illinois, if not at Ms. Heflin's home, for a visit between I:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. (CDT). The Hilton Hotel as previously suggested is unacceptable as my client would not be able to arrive timely by 1:00 p.m. The visit should occur and is again requested to occur at Ms. Heflin's home, or in Lombard, Illinois, where Marilyn will still attend but under protest. Please advise whether these visits will be allowed or not on these dates and times so that we may act accordingly. Mildred's schedule should be rather flexible due generally to her reduced or limited physical ability as well as the fact that she is no longer having access to her friends, home and community in New Cumberland. Marilyn is willing to'go wherever Mildred is located and even accompany her on any errands or appointments which may be part of her regular routine. For these and other reasons which have previously been expressed to you, the best alternative is for Marilyn to see her mother where she is staying, to avoid the unfamiliar environments chosen to date such as hotels and hotel rooms, being a quiet and private setting to avoid tiring distractions and confi~sion for Mildred. For the guardian to travel with Mildred such as to O'Hare InternationalAirport and Hilton Hotel, I surmise is too taxing on all concerned, Richard C. Rupp, Esquire April 19, 2002 Page 2 particularly Mildred. I question the reasonableness of the guardian's decisions and actions in this regard. Regrettably, Mr. Gerber did not return Marilyn's phone call of April 16, if only to leave a confirmatory message. Use of respective counsel should not always be necessary in communicating confirmation of such arrangements. The Court provided visitation to my client when she can make herself available. This is' understandable and reasonable as Mildred was removed from Pennsylvania by decision of the guardian and Marilyn has the burden physically and financially of traveling out of state to spend any time personally with her mother. No credible basis has been given as to why Mildred cannot be available. This matter is unnecessarily complicated and strained by the guardian insisting that all visits occur outside of Ms. Heflin's home. Ostensibly, Ms. Heflin's employment would cause her as I understand it not to be home during the visitation times, yet caregivers, social workers and Mr. Gerber himself would otherwise be available. If Mildred's best interests are being considered, then Ms. Herin and Mr. Gerber must reconsider these visitation arrangements for Mildred's comfort and health and provide for them at home. If you have any questions, please contact me. Otherwise I shall look forward to your reply with respect to the April 24 and May I visits. Very tru!.y yours, Stanley J. A./Laskowski CALDWELL & KEARNS SJAL:Ib FACSIMILE/U.S. MAIL cc: Marilyn Jo Gerber 33397/00-556 CALDWELL & KEARNS A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CARL G. WASS ATTORNEYS AT LAW oF COUNSEL JAMES R, CLIPPINGER THOMAS D. CALDWELL. JR. CHARLES J. D£HART. III RICHARD L. KEARNS 3631 NORTH FRONT STREET JAMES O. CAMPBELL, JR. JAMES L. GOLDSMITH HARRISBURG. PENNSYLVANIA 17110-1533 STANLEY J. A. LASKOWSKI JEFFREY T. McGUIRE' DOUGLAS K. MARSICO BRETT M. WOODBURN 717- 232- 7661 DOUGLAS E. HERMAN FAX: 717-~.32-2766 RAY J. MICHALOWSKI theflrm~caldvvellkeams.com · ^Lso A .,'.,,E. o..., .,,. April 30, 2002 Richard C. Rupp, Esquire Rupp and Meikle P.O. Box 395 Camp Hill, PA 17001-0395 Re: Mildred Gerber Dear Richard: I have received your letter of earlier this afternoon. I have attempted to reach you by phone to discuss the various points you have noted but I was informed that you were out of the office and unavailable. Due to the shortness of time, this letter is to address the arrangements for tomorrow's visit. Marilyn is unable to change her work and flight schedule for tomorrow on such short notice. She can only arrange to arrive and will be at the Embassy Suites Hotel, Lombard, IL at 1 p.m. (CDT) tomorrow for her scheduled visit as per the court order. Marilyn is willing to accompany, transport and assist her mother in getting to her afternoon appointment. Unfortunately, no details were provided until this afternoon regarding Mildred's commitments and appointments, even though we advised you of the visitation dates several weeks ago. I will address separately the May 7 visit and the remaining points you have stated. Please call me upon your return to the office so that we may discuss these matters further. Very truly yours, CALDWELL & KEARNS SJAL:Ib cc: Marilyn Gerber CALDWELL ~ KEARNS A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CAmE G. WASS ATTORNEYS AT LAW OF COUNSEL JANES R. CLIPPINGER THONAS O. CALDWELL, JR. RICHARD L. KEARNS CHARLES J. DEHART, III 3631 NORTH FRONT STREET JANES D. CAMPBELL, JR. JANES L. GOLDSNITH HARRISBURG. PENNSYLVANIA 17110-1533 STANLEY J. A. LASKOWSKI JEFFREY T. NcGUIRE" DOUGLAS K. NARSICO 717- 232- 7661 BRETT M. WOODBURN DOUGLAS E. HERHAN FAX: 717-23;~-2766 RAY J. NICHALOWSKI tfleflrm~aldwellkeams.com 'ALSO A MEMBER Or NJ BAR April 30, :200:2 Richard C. Rupp, Esquire Rupp and Meikle P.O. Box 395 Camp Hill, PA 17001-0395 Re: Mildred Gerber Dear Richard: I have received your letter of earlier this afternoon. I have attempted to reach you by phone to discuss the various points you have noted but I was informed that you were out of the office and unavailable. Due to the shortness of time, this letter is to address the arrangements for tomorrow's visit. Marilyn is unable to change her work and flight schedule for tomorrow on such short notice. She can only arrange to arrive and will be at the Embassy Suites Hotel, Lombard, IL at 1 p.m. (CDT) tomorrow for her scheduled visit as per the court order. Marilyn is willing to accompany, transport and assist her mother in getting to her afternoon appointment. Unfortunately, no details were provided until this afternoon regarding Mildred's commitments and appointments, even though we advised you of the visitation dates several weeks ago. I will address separately the May 7 visit and the remaining points you have stated. Please call me upon your return to the office so that we may discuss these matters further. Very truly yours, CALDWELL & KEARNS SJAL:lb cc: Marilyn Gerber CALDWELL ~ KEARNS a PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CARL G. WASS ATTORNEYS AT LAW OF COUNSEL RICHARD L. KEARNS JAMES R. CLIPPINGER CHARLES J. D£HART, III JAMES D. CAHPBEL/, JR. 3631 NORTH FRONT STREET THOMAS D. CALDWELL, JR. JAMES L. GOLDSMITH HARRISBURG. PENNSYLVANIA 17110-1533 .ga8-aoo. STANLEY J- A. LASKOWSKI JEFFREY T. McGUIREe oouo-^s K..ARS,CO .RETT M. WOODSUR. DOUGLAS E..ER,A, May 3, 2002 7,7-,3z-7,~e, RAY J. MICHALOWSKI thefirm~caldwellkeams.com Richard C. Rupp, Esquire Rupp and Meikle P. O. Box 395 Camp Hill, PA 17011-0395 RE: Mildred J. Gerber Dear Richard: I have endeavored on prior occasions to relate to you my client's abilities and limitations to be available for visits and traveling to the Chicago area, but sadly to no avail. My client and I are attempting to apprise you of available dates for visits as soon as they become known to Marilyn, and we shall continue to do so. Marilyn testified at the hearings as you recall, at least in part, concerning the nature of her employment. Shifts are assigned to her at times normally 10 to 14 days, for example, in advance. Marilyn surely would like to obtain a more firm work schedule for a month or greater period of time in advance; however, she has no control over doing so. When longer term arrangements are able to made by her employer with hospitals and care providers, perhaps longer term scheduling from Marilyn's shifts will be available. For example, Marilyn received only this morning her proposed work schedule for the remainder of May. Based on that schedule, I am reporting to you that she can be available and commit to visits with her mother on May 15, 21 and 26, 2002. Please confirm these dates with the guardian. As Marilyn's shifts vary, it is difficult for purposes of timing, to arrange a period with appropriate travel to and from Chicago, particularly for single day travel. Multiple day travel is not feasible as it would conflict with such schedule. By the time Marilyn travels to the airport, completes her flight, passes through security at both ends, obtains transportation or rental of a car, and travel to the location for the visit, it is not reasonable or possible for her to arrive at the guardian's designated site before 1:00 p.m. Marilyn's visitation days with her mother, for example, are preceded and followed by an evening and/or night shift, which makes arranging travel difficult. Generally, therefore, visitation between 1:00 and 5.'00 p.m. best accommodates the time when Marilyn can make herself available and travel to and from Chicago. As I explained to you previously, Mildred's schedule is more flexible under the circumstances due to her limited i to -7 ?z5 Richard C. Rupp, Esquire May 3, 2002 Page 2 abilities and activities. Therefore, we have offered and requested before that reconsideration be given by the guardian as to the physical arrangements made for the visit. Marilyn remains willing to go where her mother is located to provide minimal discomfort and disruption to her. Marilyn's attendance or even participation with her mother in her normal Alzheimer acitivities, for example, should pose no problem and lead to a more productive visit. My client as you should know is specifically trained and experienced in this type of care. I understand the Social Worker, Joan Jackson, which has been engaged by the guardian, would agree that the current isolated hotel arrangements are not optimal for Mildred's condition or conducting a reasonable visit as ordered by the Court. I understand that Mildred is saddened by the continued hostility and interference during visitations which is interjected against Marilyn and frustration is exhibited at the location chosen for those visits. More detail on Mildred's Alzheimer's activities is requested and would be greatly appreciated. We understand that a senior citizen center and her Alzheimer's activities may be available on any day. Allowing Marilyn to participate or at least attend such activities would provide a variety of contact, stimulation and social interaction for Mildred and foster overall a less stressful environment than currently exists than a highly structured and supervised visitation in an isolated hotel room. We understand that Ms. Jackson would concur that interaction at the center would be beneficial to Mildred. Please confirm the arrangements and location for Marilyn's visit on May 7. Again this is needed to occur between 1:00 and 5:00 p.m. on this day. Also please confirm visitation for May 15, 21 and 26 from 1:00 to 5:00 p.m. All times noted herein are CDT. I shall look forward to your response. If you have any questions or would like to discuss these matters in more detail, please call me. Very truly yours, CALDWELL & KEARNS SJAL:Ib FACSIMILE/U.S. MAIL cc: Marilyn Jo Gerber 33397/00-556 CALDWELL & KEARNS A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CARL a. WASS ATTORNEYS AT LAW oF COUNSEL JAMES R. CLIPPINGER RICHARD L. KEARNS CHARLES J. DEHART. Ill 3631 NORTH FRONT STREET JAMES D. CAMPBELL. JR. THOHAS D. CALDWELL. JR. JAMES L. GOLDSMITH HARRISBURG. PENNSYLVANIA 17110-1533 ~1928-ZOOll STANLEY J. A. LASKOWSKI JEFFREY T. I~IcGUIRE* OOUGLAS K. MARSICO BRETT M. WOODBURN DOUGLAS E. HERMAN R^Y ~. M,CHALOWS~' May 6 2002 thefirm@¢aldweltkeams Richard C. Rupp, Esquire FACSIMILE - U.S. MAlL Rupp and Meikle P. O. Box 395 Camp Hill, PA 17011-0395 RE: Mildred J. Gerber Dear Richard: I am in receipt this afternoon by fax of your letter dated May 3, 2002. Your accusations and suppositions concerning Marilyn as stated therein are without merit and factual basis. For instance, Marilyn in fact was not in Chicago on Tuesday, April 30, but in Harrisburg. Your information is wholly unfounded and so is the alleged skepticism for unreasonably insisting on a visit to occur between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m. (CDT) in Chicago. You have not provided any information regarding Mildred's alleged Alzheimer's activities, their location, nature and extent, type, time or the identity of the facility. There are a variety of adult centers and facilities in the area where Mildred is staying that offer alzheimer's activities, mondays through fridays, generally 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., which offer flexible scheduling. Similarly, you have not provided any basis as to why Marilyn could not attend, assist or even just observe her mother's activities. Families of alzheimer's patients are encouraged to participate and share in such activities. I again note that Marilyn will support her mother's activities and will go tomorrow wherever they are to be held so that any cancellation by the guardian of either the visit or Mildred's activities is entirely unnecessary. Please confirm upon receipt of this letter whether a time conflict still exists for tomorrow's visit or if the guardian will not permit the visit to occur. As you have chosen apparently not to discuss these issues or provide basic information, we find your client's efforts disingenuous and obstructive to complying with the court order. I asked that you call me to discuss these matters in detail but to no avail. Unfortunately, it appears we will need to bring the timing and location issues in general to the court for a resolution unless you advise me promptly that your client is willing to reconsider his decision. Stanley J. AtYLaskowski CALDWEL'L & KEARNS SJAL:lb cc: Marilyn Jo Gerber CALDWELL & KEARNS ' A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CARL G. WASS ATTORNEYS AT LAW OF COUNSEL JAMES R. CLIPPINGER RICHARD L. KEARNS CHARLES J. D~:HART, III JAMES D. CAMPBELL, JR. 3631 NORTH FRONT STREET THOMAS D. CALDWELL, JR. JAMES L. GOLDSMITH HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17110-1533 STANLEY J. A. LASKOWSKI JEFFREY T. McGUIRE· DOUGLAS K, MARSICO BRETT M. WOODBURN DOUGLAS E. HERMAN · A-,o ^ -E-,ER OF .J ,A, May 13. 2002 tax: thefirmOcaldwellkearns.com Richard C. Rupp, Esquire RUPP AND MEIKLE P.O. Box 395 Camp Hill, PA 17001-0395 Re: Access visits - Mildred Gerber - May 21 Dear Richard: I am in receipt of your fax this afiemoon regarding tomorrow's access visit. I have again attempted to reach you by phone to discuss these matters without success. Marilyn can only be available 1:00 - 5:00 p.m.(CDT) tomorrow due to her confirmed travel arrangements. As of this date I have not received from you any substantive response to my letters of May 3 and May 6, 2002. The activities in which Mildred participates tomorrow can be attended and supported by Marilyn, wherever they may be located. You have provided no basis to support otherwise and thus Mr. Gerber is in contempt of the court's order. In accordance with that order, Marilyn will be arriving at the Embassy Suites by 1:00 p.m. tomorrow. Please advise your client accordingly and if you have any questions, please contact me. Vep.~-~yours, F / , Stanley J.A.fl_~asko'wski CALDWELL & KEARNS SJAL:sl cc: Marilyn J. Gerber Via Facsimile and U.S. Mail O1-607 FROM : Rupp & Pleikle FAX NO. : ?30 B214 Maw. 21 2002 09:31AM PI LAW OFFICES RUPP AND MEIKLE A PROF~SIONAL CORPORATION ~55 NOI~TH 21~T ~ET, SU1TE 205 neRBE~ a R~P~, Jrt, C~P HILL, PA 17011 ~ MEIK~ Z~IK~ON (19~4-82) E-~IL: R~PLAWI~AOL.~M CAMP ~, PA 1~1-0~5 May 21,2002 VIA FAX - 232-2766 Stanley J. Laskowski, Esquire Caldwell & Kearns 3631 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Re: Marilyn Gerber - Mildred Gerber access visits Dear Stan: i wrote you yesterday by fax in error. I misunderstood the Guardian's message to me. The Guardian did not set up for any access visit today, May 21, based on our previous communications to you that mom would be unavailable for access visits on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Further, all other access visits would occur from 10:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. CDT, unless otherwise mutually agreed by both parties. I attempted to call you upon learning of my error before 6:00 p.m. yesterday, May 20, with the correct message, but I could only leave a message on your voice mail system. I very much regret this error in communication ize for it. C. Ru RCR/lin cc: Col. Frederick E. Gerber, !1, Guardian to_ I 0 CALDWELL ~: KEARNS A PROFESSIONAL CORPOI~ATION CARL G. WASS ATTORNEYS AT LAW. or COUNSEL JAIRES R. CLIPPINGER RICHARD L. KEARNS CHARLES J. D£HART. III JAMES D. CAMPBELL. JR. 3631 NORTH FRONT STREET THOMAS D. CALDWELL. JR JAMES L. GOLDSMITH HARRISBURG. PENNSYLVANIA 17110-1533 uges-aooi) STANLEY J. A. LASKOWSKI JEFFREY T. MCGUIRE* DOUGLAS K. MARSICO 8RETT N. WOODBURN DOUGLAS E. HERMAN RAY J. MICHALOWSKI · ALSO A .E..ER O~ .J 8AR May 23, 2002 FAX: 7,,-e3~-~,66 thefirmiJcaldwellkeams.corn Richard C. Rupp, Esquire RUPP AND MEIKLE P.O. Box 395 Camp Hill, PA 17001-0395 Re: Access visit - Mildred Gerber - May 31 Dear Richard: Regrettably, your client has canceled Marilyn's visits for both May 21 and 26, without justification. My client bears the burden of traveling a great distance and at substantial expense to be able to have a short visit with her mother. As the last two visits have been canceled, Marilyn is next available on May 31, 2002 from I p.m. to 5 p.m. (CDT) for a visit with Mildred. I have explained previously that conducting these visits between I0 a.m. and 2 p.m. are not acceptable or feasible for Marilyn due to her work schedule and travel needs. On the other hand, you have yet to offer any explanation as to why the visits must occur only during this time period (or for that matter must exclude Tuesdays and Thursdays). Please confirm that your client will comply with the next requested visit of May 31, 2002 ( i p.m. - 5 p.m. CDT) and do so sooner than the eve of the visit as has been done for prior requests. V?_~ tr~y yours. ' ~ Stanley J.A'~. Laskowski CALDWELL & KEARNS SJAL:sl cc: Marilyn J. Gerber Via Facsimile and U.S. Mail 01-607 FROM : Pupp & Meikl~ FAX NO. : 730 0214 May. 30 2802 12:05PM PI LAW OFFICES RUPP AND MEIKI, E A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIO~f 355 NOI~'TII 21ST STREET, SUITE ~ Rg~ ~, ~e~, ~a. CAMP H~L, PA 17011 MAIL~G ADDR~ nlCl~ C. RUPP (717) 761-~5a P,O, ~X 895 -- CAMP N~,~.~ PA 17~t~395 May 30, 2002 VIA FAX - 232-2766 Stanley J. Laskowski, Esquire Caldwell& Kearns 3631N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 1 7110 Re: Marilyn Gerber - Mildred Gerber access visits Deor Sfon: This letter both responds to your request for an access visit for Marilyn on 31 May 2002 as well as future access visits. 1. As i previously informed you, the Guardian has respectfully requested and advised that access visits not occur on Tuesdays nor Thursdays of a week by reason of Mom's enrollment in pre-scheduled Alzheimer's activities at an adult care facility in order to provide a weekly routine in mom's best interests which provides needed and appropriate stimulation for Mom. By reason of these prescheduled Alzheimer's activities on Tuesdays and Thursdays, mom is unavailable for access visits. 2. Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays are perfectly fine for Marilyn's access visits. However, the times of the visits should be from 10:00 a.m. - 2..00 p.m. local time (CDT). The visits will occur at Embassy Suites Hotel in Lombard, IL, unless otherwise specified by the Guardian. FROM : Rupp & M~ikl~ FAX NO. : 738 8214 May. 38 2802 12:05PM P2 3. The Guardian respectfully requests and advises that there can be no access visits on Sundays as Mom is unavailable as Mom routinely goes to Church and brunch with family and is unavailable for Sunday access visits. 4. The Guardian respectfully requests and advises that there be no visits on holidays as Mom is often away with family and, therefore, unavailable for access visits on holidays. 5. With respect to Saturdays, the Guardian respectfully requests that Saturday visits be avoided as Mom is also away with family and, therefore unavailable. 6. The Guardian further requests 30-days advance request for Marilyn's access visits. This time frame is requested Jn order to assist the Guardian fo avoid scheduling activities, coordination of persons needed to allow the access visit, to insure the obtaining of a location, and thereby barfer allow Marilyn's access visits so that mom is available for said access visits. Presumably, this time frame would also better assist Marilyn in planning her access visits to Chicago. 7. With respect to the visit requested for 31 May 2002, please be advised that Mom has a previously scheduled dental appointment from 10:00 a.m. - 12;00 p.m. CDT. The Guardian cannot obviously guarantee what condition Mom will be in after sitting in the dental chair immediately prior to another required visit from Marilyn. The Guardian personally asked Mom if Mom thought she would feel up to v~siting with Marilyn this Friday after her dental appointment. Mom replied 'No! I don't want to see her this Friday or any other day. I certainly don't want to see her after someone has been poking around in my mouth." However, if Marilyn wishes to continue her request for this Friday, 31 May 2002, the Guardian will produce mom for an access visit from 1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. CDT at Embassy Suites in Lombard, IL. In summary, per the Guardian's request, there should be no access visits requested for Tuesdays and Thursdays by reason of Mom's prescheduled A~zheimer's activities which are for mom's benefit and best interests whereby Mom is unavailable for access visits. Monday, Wednesday and Friday access visits are fine, occurring between 10:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. CDT. FROM : Rupp & Mcikl~ FAX NO. : ?30 0214 May. 30 2002 12:06PM P3 There should be no access visits on holidays or Sundays as mom is unavailable and Saturdays are requested to not occur to ensure availability of Mom. The Guardian requests 30 days advance notice in order to effectively plan, coordinate and schedule the access visits into mom's schedule. Marilyn's access visits will occur at the Embassy Suites Hotel, Lombard, IL, unless otherwise specified by the Guardian. Please advise whether Marilyn still wishes to continue the 31 May 2002 access visit which will occur immediately after Mom's dental appointment. I look forward to hearing from you with respect to the 31 May 2002 access visit request. Best regards. ~//.~ ictard C. Rupp RCR/lin CALDWELL ~. KEARNS A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CARL G. WASS ATTORNEYS AT LAW OF COUNSEL RICHARD L. KEARNS JAMES R. CLIPPINGER CHARLES J. DEHART, Iii 3631 NORTH FRONT STREET JAMES D. CAMPBELL, Jr. THOMAS D. CALDWELL, JR. JAMES 1. GOLDS~41TH HARRISBURg, PENNSYLVANIA 17110-1533 (I92:8-200I) STANLEY J. A. LASKOWSK1 JEFFREY T, MCGUIREe DOUGLAS K, MARSICO BRETT M, WOODBURN DOUGLAS E. HERMAN 717-232-7661 RAY J. MICHALOWSKI FAX: 717-232-2766 "ALSO A MEMBER OF NJ BAR June 19, 2002 thefirm~caldwellkeams.com Via Facsimile: 730-0214 Richard C. Rupp, Esquire Law Offices of Rupp and Meikle P. O. Box 395 355 North 21st Street, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-0395 RE' Mildred Gerber Access Visits Dear Richard: Unfortunately, our office did not receive your confirmation facsimile for today's visit until later this morning and not in time for Marilyn to make her flight. These scheduling matters would be more expeditiously resolved at less cost to all concerned if the Guardian or even Ms. Heflin would be willing to communicate directly with Marilyn. In any event, our position remains that 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. (CDT) is when my client can arrange to be available. A 12:00 noon to 4:00 p.m. (CDT) visit is unacceptable. I have been authorized and directed by Marilyn to bring these matters to the Court for a resolution. In the interim, Marilyn can arrange to be in Chicago for a visit with her mother from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. (CDT) either on Monday, June 24, 2002 or Friday, June 28, 2002. Please advise which date is acceptable. If you have any questions, please contact me ~ · Stanley J. ~. Laskowski CALDWELL & KEARNS SJAL:sme 41475 cc: Marilyn Jo Gerber CALDWELL & KEARNS A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CARL G. WASS ATTORNEYS AT LAW OF COUNSEL JAMES R. CLIPPINGER RICHARD L. KEARNS CHARLES U. DEHART. III JANES D. CANPBELL, JR, 3631 NORTH FRONT STREET THONAS D. CALDW£LL. JR. JANES L. GOLDSMITH HARRISBURG. PENNSYLVANIA 17110-I 5 3 3 u9~8- ~oou STANLEY J. A. LASKOWSKt JEFFREY T. MCGUIRE' DOUGLAS K. NARSICO BR£TT M. WOODBURN DOUGLAS E, HERMAN RAY J, MICHALOWSKI 717- E3~- 7661 FAX: 717- :='3:~- :~ 766 · ^,.so ,, HE""ER O; ",' """ June 27, 2002 Richard C. Rupp, Esquire Law Offices of Rupp and Meikle P. O. Box 395 355 North 21st Street, Suite 205 Camp Hill, PA 17011-0395 RE: Mildred Gerber Access Visits Dear Richard: This letter is in response to several of your comments by letter of June 12, 2002. When I had spoken to you that Wednesday, it was the second of my calls as the first call in the early morning was not returned by you. As I explained, I was leaving for an appointment and would be out of the office in the afternoon and was endeavoring to leave a message with you for purposes of confirming the time of the visit for June 14. As I further explained, it was our understanding, based upon your prior communications, that either the visit would occur between 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. as noted in your correspondence, or otherwise it would not take place. I noted in our discussion that I found your position in this matter to be unreasonable on the scheduling of visits and that I have attempted on many prior occasions to work this matter out with you. As the guardian intended, as we understand it, to remain firm on how the visits are being conducted and the time during which they are only to be conducted, I expressed my client's frustration to you that it appears we have no alternative but to return to the Court with these issues. The Court Order clearly directs that my client is entitled to "visit with her mother for 4 continuous hours each week when Marilyn Gerber can arrange to be where her mother is located." My client can arrange and has arranged to be in Chicago June 19 for a Richard C. Rupp, Esquire June 27, 2002 Page 2 visit between 1:00 and 5:00 p.m. with Mildred. Marilyn's flight had been pre-booked and paid with notice to you of this date on June 4, 2002. As I have noted on prior occasions to you, Marilyn is a per diem nurse, whose schedule and job locations are subject to change and do change at times with short notice. Advance scheduling is difficult for Marilyn; however, we will continue to give advance notice to you of visitation dates as much as is possible. The guardian I believe should give consideration to my client's ability to arrange to travel to Chicago. The majority of this burden and expense is for Marilyn to coordinate this with her work schedule as best can be done under the circumstances. Marilyn has attempted to make the most feasible and reasonable single-day travel arrangements which would fit within her schedule without altering the course of Mildred's routine day. To this end, we have requested the ability to visit with Mildred at her home, Alzheimer activities or other functions to which she must attend without disruption to her. However, consistently, we have been met only with the guardian's demand for the structured and supervised environment at the hotel, which we continue to object to and find as unreasonable and unnecessary. I believe that a request for written verifications of Marilynn's work schedule from her employer in any event is onerous and unreasonable. "Proof positive" of my client's whereabouts and work schedule at all times to the guardian for his benefit is not required or reasonable. In a similar note, again you raise the issue of my client's whereabouts on April 30. Marilyn has satisfactorily explained to me her presence in Harrisburg on April 30. You have neither shared with me any of the "information" or the source of this information to the guardian as of this date to warrant any further response by my client. On the other hand, your client's staunch insistence on evidentiary verification of my client's whereabouts on April 30 are irrelevant and not conducive to amicably resolving these matters. The visits by Marilynn are scheduled in advance as much as possible, as well as at hours which are reasonable, being mid-day times, for example, during which Mrs. Gerber is otherwise active, such as with her own Alzheimer functions on Tuesdays and Thursdays, or other appointments which you have noted in prior correspondence. Afternoon visits allow my client to reasonably travel to and from Chicago within the same day. In order to arrive at a visit to be scheduled for 10:00 a.m. (CDT) is unduly burdensome, and would require my client to unreasonably arise between 3:00 and 4:00 a.m., typically after working a shift on the prior day or evening, to board a flight between 7:00 and 8:00 a.m. Richard C. Rupp, Esquire June 27, 2002 Page 3 Further, the visits which have been occurring have typically in any event been cut short after 2 1/2 to 3 hours. The environment and location of these visits we believe is a substantial contributing factor to this. The visits have been occurring in any event substantially between 1:00 and 5:00 p.m. to date. It is our view that if you claim to be experiencing an aggravation of Mildred's mental condition or anxiety to her as a result of the visits, you should take a closer examination of the circumstances and conditions under which these visits have been conducted. We do not believe that they are conducive to a personal and meaningful exchange between Marilyn and her mother. Many times, I have explained to you that Marilyn will go to, attend or support her mother's activities wherever they may be held. The guardian yet refuses to consider allowing Marilyn to do so. Very scant, if any, information about Mrs. Gerber's daily schedule or activities is provided to Marilyn, although we have requested it. I have shared my client's concerns with you regarding the conditions under which these visits have been conducted. The visits are typically confined to a hotel room. There is no ability for Mildred and Marilyn to even go for a walk about or outside the facility. On two occasions, Marilyn has asked to take Mildred shopping, such as at T.J. Max's, which is only a few miles away from the hotel in Lombard. These requests have been refused. My client's requests to attend Mildred's Alzheimer's or senior care center facilities are refused, even were it only for Marilyn to be able to observe her mother so that she could gain a further understanding of her mother's condition and abilities and determine how to better interact with her during visits. The visits being conducted are observed and thus supervised purportedly by Joan Jackson, which detracts from any informality and personal nature of the visit. On recent occasions, where visits are attended by Miss Heflin, she has exhibited hostility and rude behavior toward my client. She obstructs interaction by Madlyn with her mother, sits regularly by Mildred's side, makes negative comments about Marilyn and the situation . in Mildred's presence. She conducts personal business in the midst of Marilyn's discussions with her mother to the distraction of the visit. Marilyn has further concerns regarding the soundness of the guardian's decisions generally in these matters, including, for example: Mildred remaining in Chicago at a place which is not a family home and where space is limited; no information is shared about Mildred's current medical condition, current or prospective treatment respectively she is receiving or will receive, if any; no information is shared about Mildred's current daily activities, caregivers and current primary care physicians; no information is shared about what efforts have been taken to maintain Mildred's nutrition and improve her general physical condition; no information is shared about her Alzheimer's activities; Richard C. Rupp, Esquire June 27, 2002 Page 4 and no information is shared regarding Mildred's personal accommodations, living arrangements and/or daily schedule while staying at Jane's home, for example, is there adequate space and access in and about the home for Mildred even to go for a walk or freely move about? On the other hand, I believe it is the guardian Who is not helping matters by taking such an obstructionist view on even a simple visit for a few hours. You have requested suggestions as to alternative visit locations. I again have explained to you that neither Marilyn nor I are familiar enough with the locality where Mildred is residing to suggest specific locations. On consideration of the matter, please let us know what Mr. Gerber and Miss Heflin do with Mildred when they are together and where they may go with her when they do take her out. Perhaps this will advance our discussion of the matter. Absent any suggestions from the guardian, we offer the following: Marilyn reiterates her request to visit her mother at Jane's home and at her mother's daycare center Alzheimer activities, as we believe this is the most natural and familiar environment to Mildred; Marilyn would like to have lunch alone with her mother, such that either Fred, Jane or other caretaker who bdngs her to the visit can sit elsewhere in the restaurant when this occurs; take her mother shopping; go for a walk, in a park or elsewhere, (weather permitting) other than the hotel or hotel room; go to church; dine at a restaurant other than at the hotel; and/or visit her senior daycare center or other facilities where Mildred enjoys going. My client's suggestions have been made during prior visits and rejected. I do not find this conducive to Mildred's best interests and being flexible to other activities which Mildred may enjoy and share with Marilyn. If the guardian has suggestions of other locations or activities in which the visit can be conducted, please advise. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this matter further, please call me. Ve~_ry_~ruly yours, Stanley J. A. Laskowski CALDWELL & KEARNS SJAL:sme cc: Marilyn Jo Gerber 01-607/41175-1 July 6,2002 TO: Fred Gerber via Richard Rupp FROM: Marilyn Gerber RE: Upcoming v isIts Since my attorney Stun Laskowski has been absent for the last week, I called your office on Wednesday, July 3,2002 to inform you of a schedule change for my visits with my mother in July. My nursing schedule is subject to change at sho~t notice without my control. Therefore, I am requesting the following dates. July 10,2002, July 17,2002 and July 26,2002. 113ave booked and paid for these reservations. The times are from 13:00 tO 17:00 {CDT). I am not able to arrive at any other time. I am requesting that I receive confirmation for the July 10 visit on Tuesday,July 9 by late morning_ I would also like a confirmation as to the other dates by the end of this week. For the past three months, you have confirmed my reservations only on the day before my departure for Chicago in the very late afternoon. Often these confirmations have been faxed after 5PM and once my attorney had to come in on a Saturday. This is unacceptable and clearly is inten~led to harass me. In order to reserve discounted fares, I need to purchase tickets two weeks in advance and these fares are not refundable. Your continued pattern of only letting me know less than 16 hours prior to my departure to see mother is financially abusive. '1 have had to pay finance fees on unreturned fares for several weeks. An example of your increased abuse is that for my requested visit with Mother on June 19,2002, was only answered on June 19, at 10:30 AM. What flight did you expect me to take on the same day? I then requested June 24 and June 28,2002. This time you never even responded to my requests. It is clear to me that you could not conduct military affairs t~is way nor would you subject my sister to this method of travel planning, I would also like to bring to your attention my sister Jane's behavior at the visits with my mother. Jane has been openly hostile with me since her presence With mother in April. Her visible hatred and hostile communication in front of mother is unacceptable and is clearly disturbing to mother. This has been witnessed by Joan Jackson and Louise Warren. Jane does everything she can to create an unwelcomed atmosphere and it is clear that her actions are intentional. Jane assaulted me on my February 9 visit in front of witnesses and mother. Jane on the subsequent visits has been nasty and threatening to me in front of our mother. As a nurse I can tell you that this is destructive for mother's well being. Her behavior is also disburbing to me and is abusive. As mother's guardian, it is your responsibility to make sure that mother is in a healthy enviornment. Since you are not frequently present in Chicago, it concerns me if you actually really know what is happening. Mother 13as verbally told me that she knows that Jane and you do not like me. This is not acceptable behavior to tell mother as It causes her concern and sadness and confusion. This Is cruel to cio this to a patient who suffers from dementia. I never prevented either you or Jane from visiting mother. ! always supported your visits would be private without my presence. I have not taken anything from either of you. It is confusing to me that neither of you can conduct yourselves as adults and put mother first. You both discredit our father and what our parents raised us to be. Have you forgotten Dad's last words to all of us? If Jane's behavior does not change, I will asl( the Judge to restrain her from abusing me and mother. You will be held responsible for not fullfiling your guardian responsibilities. I am sure that I do not need to remind you that Judge Bayly ordered that I am to visit Mother on a weekly basis when I can arrange it for four continous hours. Since April,in the 14 weeks available for me to visit mother, you have allowed me only six visits. Two weeks ! was not able to visit mother. That leaves six weeks that you have refused me a visit with mother. In May and June, you only allowed me to visit mother once. It is clear tl3at you have no intention of letting me see mother. This is your continued pattern of abusing me. I continue to protest and object to your forcing mother to be Imprlsonned in a hotel room for four hours. Mother is taken to an unfamiliar setting where she is confused and unhappy in addition to having a hostile daughter, Jane and an unfamiliar social worker sitting in the same room. Mother has rights wherever she lives and she is not a guest in Jane's house as long as she is kept there. Mother has the right to receive her family and daughter in her "home" where she is confortable, familiar and happy. It is cruel to subject mother to this continued imprisonnment. In her home, Mom can get up and walk around, eat a snack, go to her own room, sit in her chair and be comfortable. You will not find any nurse or social worker to testify that the conditions that you are putting Mom through are conducive to her wellbeing. The visit on May 7, resulted in Mother being taken to two hotels for the visit which resulted in mother being agitated and miserable. This last visit on July 5, the room was so cold that mother was shaking. Since mother has lost significant weight, she does not have enough muscle mass to keep warm. I got a blanket for MOm. i called the front desk to try a get another room with Jane threatening me. I then had to open the front door to warm up the room. Jane did nothing. This is outrageous and supports the fact that Mom needs to be in her own home where she is free to receive her daughter and friends_ I have continously asked to take Mom shopping and Jane refuses. I have asked to have lunch with Mom and what I find when I arrive is Mom has already sat in the restaurant for an hour eating lunch and therefore also wants to leave earlier. I have never had a four hour visit with Mom which is in contempt of Judge Bayly's order. I do not think that this is the scenario that Judge Bayly had in mind when he made his decision in March. I am concerned as to your care of Mother. She is clearly not thriving under your care. You deliberatly left Mom alone in November which resulted in her injuries which you have not clearly explained. Your medical reports from Betra were clearly absent for that week in November and early December. Mom has lost excessive weight under you care. You have now submitted Mom to three different sets of medical specialists since January 2001. Mother looks like a Holocust victim. Her eyes are deep sockets. You have not provided her with her supportive corset which she has worn for 55 years. She is not even given a bra to support her breasts. If Mom should become seriously ill, she will not have enough body mass to survive. You also lost no time in removing Mom from her home of 34 years. You have taken her from all she loves in her home, her friends, her ChUrCh and I:)rlests, her community. You have subjected her to a less affluent homeenvlomment in a community where she knows no one. You have provided Mom with only homemakers. She has no nursing supervision. Jane clearly Is traveling frequently out of state. You also are traveling. What happened to your testimony of visiting Mom every weekend? I am outraged at your treatment of Mother. You have disgraced our parents in the entire community. You have clearly caused Mo~er great distress and sorrow, if our father was alive today, this would never have happened and I am certain that he would not approve at your treatment of me and especially of our Mother. You have gone out of your way in the last four years to cause me physical, emotional and financial abuse. I am not 9oing to allow you to victimize Mother or me anymore. I am putting you on notice that I will seek any legal means available to seek protection of my mother and myself. Your behavior is out of control. Whatever your "beef" is with me, you should have resolved it by now. You are an adult and you testified that you were a Christian soldier. Grow up Fred. I have never treated you this way and no one deserves your -brand of terroism. Every 'titary family that knew and loved D- -~ and Mom are outraged and saddened at your behavior. Several of them ha~.., shared that they are afraid of you. You have also defied every Judge and banl(ing institution in refusing to provide an accounting of two Trusts fun(Ss set up by Dad. For four years despite my request, you have refused to account for monies which are not yours. You have ignored your fiduciary responsibility as Trustee. Your attorneys, Herbert and Richard, for four years have stated that you were working on this. You have failed to protect assets or investments anti lost a sizeable amount of money which was never yours. You have deliberately refused me my share of monies from my Trust fund and tried to convince the courts that I have stolen monies which is unfounded and you cannot prove. You have not kept your word on any monies due to me from my TruSt. In fact, you have lied under oath more than once in the past four years. Now you have cost Mother over $10,000 in legal fees that PNC has had to incur just to order an accounting. Who do you think you are and why do you think that you above the law, the courts? What are you hiding,Fred? You are also still in contempt In Judge Oler's court for failure to supply a proper accounting from July 2001. Are you completely without any sense of responsibility or duty to the hard earned monies of Dad and Mom? July 22,2002 TO: Fred Gerber Richard Rupp FROM: Marilyn Gerber Dear Richard: I am writing you directly as my attorney, Stan Laskowski is on vacation all this week and will not return until July 29,2002. I am requesting a response to my requested visit with my mother on Friday, July 26,2002. As you know, this visit was requested weeks ago by Stan and to this date, we have received no answer on my visit. If you recall in your letter dated May 30,2002, you stated that my brother requested that I provide him with 30 days advance notice of my visits. My attorney also explained to you in many letters that it is not possible for me to give you 30 days due to the variability of my nursing schedule. What is remarkalbe is that even with several weeks advance notice, two weeks advance notice, Fred consistently waits until the very last minute to confirm my visit with mother. This causes me great distress as I never know is I am going to fly out on the requested date, confirm my reservations, purchase tickets at a discount and have to put all of my other activities on hold until I know if I will travel. I would think that with several weeks notice, my brother would already know what his schedule or my sister's schedule is as they already had their own 30 days agenda established! I am tired of waiting until 4:30PM (EDT) the day before my visit to hear if I will be able to visit my mother. Last week, you indicated in a letter that my mother would be going to a doctor's appointment in the morning and would be tired and not able to keep my court ordered visit with my mother. When I arrived on July 17,2002, at 1 PM (CDT) at the Embassy Suites, my mother stated several times that she had not gone to a doctor that morning. Joan Jackson was present to hear this and Jane refused to confirm this. I was also particularly distrubed at your letter last week to Stan stating that my mother is loosing weight and that I am responsible for her weight loss due to my visits. As a nurse, my immediate response is that since I was only allowed to see my mother once in May, and once in June, it is inconceivable that my brother and sister have this belief. Do you have a doctor's evaluation to support your accusation? I continue to express my concern for my mother's health and marked continued weight loss. I have continued to request a status of my mother's health and who has been overseeing my mother's nutrition and dietary needs. As you, my mother has enough financial assets to even have a full-time dietician live with my mother. In the medical reports from Betra given to us at 5PM the evening before the December 19,2002 guardianship hearing, it was clearly evident that mother had lost significant weight due to her fall on November 4,2001. This fall was due to my brother's neglegence in leaving her alone despite her caregivers advice. I believe that my mother's sudden decline and weight loss is directly related to her fall, her esential "kidnapping" from her home in New Cumberland to Chicago and her continued isolation in Chicago. I am also concerned that my brother is not present to monitor my mother as guardian and that my sister, Jane Heflin is frequently absent from Illinois, out of state on business. If you remember, my sister stated on March 23,2002, that her job was in New York. I again am asking my brother to inform me as to who is watching my mother when Jane is absent for a week,and sometimes weeks at a time? Are their nurses, CNA's with licensed experience supervising my mother? I am also concerned if my brother will confirm as to the protection of my mother from the extreme heat at my sister's home. Yesterday, it was 100F and to the best of my knowledge, there is no air-conditioning in my sister's home. If air conditioning has been recently installed for my mother's comfort, did my brother pay for this expense and thereby enrich my sister's home? I hope that my mother is not subjected to air fans or window air-conditioners which will drive my mother crazy as she hated the air currents or noise when she was at her best. My last concern is that during my last visit with my mother, my sister Jane refused to drop my mother off in front of the hotel and instead parked my mother's car many lanes away from the entrance. My mother required me and Joan Jackson to assist her to the front entrance. When it came time to leave the hotel, I asked my sister Jane to bring the car to the front entrance. My sister's response was, "it is good exercise for her". As a geriatric nurse of 17 years experience, I can tell you that it does not take very long in exposure to heat for an elderly person to become weak and dehydrated. This is unacceptable behavior and demonstrates the lack of medical knowledge and concern on my sister's part. What will my sister and brother do when my mother becomes infirmed and can no longer walk, get into a car and travel to a hotel room where my sister confines her for 2-3 hours? I need to have a confirmation of my visit with my mother for July 26,2002 from 1- 5PM (CDT) by Wednesday, July 24,2002. This is not new news. I am also requesting the following dates for August. August 7,15,and 22,2002. August 15,22 are Thursdays and I have fairly good knowledge that my mother is not attending Senior Day Care on a regular basis if at all. My sister let it slip out on my visit two weeks ago that mother has not been to the Senior Day Care Center for a while. I will remind you again, the Senior Day Care Centers have informed me that my mother can attend their centers form Monday through Friday from 8AM until 4:30PM. There is no reason why my brother insists that I cannot visit on Tuesdays and Thursdays. As my brother refuses me to visit my mother on any weekend or holidays, I am only left with Monday, Wednesday and Fridays. This is punitive and restrictive and a complete violation of Judge Bayley's order. If my brother refuses to allow me to visit my mother on Thursday, August 15 and 22, then I am requesting August 14 and 21,2002. However, I shall state and protest that this will be at a great difficulty on my part due to my at times exhaustive nursing schedule. In order to make discounted reservations, I will need two weeks advance notice and confirmation for each of my requested dates in August. This means that I will need to know by July 24 for August 7 and by August I for August 15 and by August 8 forAugust 22. If I am refused these two Thursdays, then I will need to know by July 31 for August 14 and for August 7 for August 21. I would also not like to wait until the last minute much less only two weeks notice as this is high season of vacation time. If I purchase these discounted tickets two weeks prior to my visit, there is no refund. II have not even gone into to difficulty in reserving a rent a car at the airport. Because I do not know which days I will be traveling due to my brother's relunctance to confirm until the last minute, I am forced to pay sometimes $60 or greater for a rent a car which I use for only six hours. This is punitive and deliberate on my brother's part. I have confirmed and paid reservations for July 26,2002, Friday. Marilyn G~rber, RN CALDWELL ~ KEARNS A PROIrE$SIONAL CORPORATION CARL G. WAS$ ATTORNEYS AT LAW OF COUNSEL JAMES R. CLIPPINGER RICHARD L. KEARNS CHARLES J, DEHART. III JAMES D. CAMPBELL, JR. 3631 NORTH FRONT STREET THOMAS D. CALDWELL, JR. JAMES L. GOLDSMITH HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17110-1533 STANLEY J. A, LASKOWSKI JEFFREY T. MCGUIREe DOUGLAS K, MARSICO BRE~ M. WOODaUR, July 30, 2002 DOUO,^s E. HE,.^. thefirmOcaldwellkearns.com Richard C. Rupp, Esquire VIA FACSIMILE RUPP AND MEIKLE P.O. Box 395 Camp Hill, PA 17001-0395 Re:Mildred J. Gerber - access visits Dear Richard: I have received today Judge Bayley's Order dated July 29, 2002 denying Mr. Gerber's motion to suspend the access visits and directing that the prior Order stands. As a visit was denied for July 26, 2002 based upon the reports that were submitted with the motion, a denial of further visitations by Marilyn is unwarranted. As a makeup for the lost visit of July 26, Marilyn can still arrange to travel to Chicago on Thursday August 1, 2002 (1:00pm to 5:00pm CDT). I understand that this is limited notice, but ask that you confer in any event with Mr. Gerber about accommodating this visit and advise me tomorrow. In addition, confirmation is requested for the August visitation dates noted in Marilyn's July 22, 2002 letter (attached as Exhibit G to the motion). A prompt response is requested so that travel arrangements can be completed as several options were given. Further, please advise and confirm the dates on which Mrs. Gerber has attended her Senior Day Care Center since April 17, 2002 to the present as well as the location and identity of the Center. We would also like to know what activities she engages in while at the center. Once again, I restate Marilyn's request to visit with her mother at Jane's home as opposed to an isolated hotel room. This would avoid the need for any travel by Mrs. Gerber, particularly if excessive heat prevails, allow Mrs. Gerber to remain in a familiar environment, accommodate any needed breaks and provide a more comfortable and quiet environmentl If you would like to discuss these matters further, please call me. '~_t~y yours, _(__~ Stanley J.A.~,,~Tkowski CALDWELI~v'& KEARNS SJAL:sl cc: Marilyn J. Gerber 01-607 FROM : Rupp & Meikle FAX NO. : ?30 0214 Aug. 06 2~2 05:06PM P1 LAW' OFFICES RUPP AND MEIKLE A PROFESSIONAl. CORPO~.ATION 856 NOR'T/-J ZlS"F STREET, surrE 205 HERB~,I~T G. llUPP, JR, R1CHAaD C. RUPp CA~Mp /-ll~./,, PA 17011 ~0 ~DR~ ~ (717) 7~-~ P.O. ~X A~ ~J~E E~K~ (1954-82) E-~: RU~WI~AOL.coM C~ ~, PA X7~1~95 ~: (717) A~gvst 6, 2002 VIA FAX - 232-2766 Stanley J. Laskowski, Esquire Caldwell & Kearns 3631N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 1 7110 Re: Marilyn Gerber - Access Visits with Mildred Gerber Dear Slam This letter will confirm my office's telephorm message to your office yesterday, Monday, August 5, that the Guardian will allow an access visit between Marilyn and her mother on Wednesday, August 7, from 1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. CDT if Marilyn insists on those times. We reiterate that the Guardian believes those limes may not be in the best interests of her mother for her health and well-being. However, if Marilyn insists on those times, the Guardian will allow the access visit at these times; in spite of the fact that there are planes that fly from Harrisburg to Chicago to permit an access visit beginning at 10:00 a.m. CDT. Furthermore, the Guardian has approved Marilyn's requested access visits for Wednesday, August 14, and Wednesday, August 21, also from 1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. CDT jf Marilyn insists on those hours, despite the potential detriment to her mother. The Guardian implements the following requirements for conduct of the access visit for these access visits and any further access visits: 1. The visits will be conducted whenever possible by a social worker or caretaker for the mother, Mildred J. Gerber, especially one trained in the care of elderly or geriatric patients, if available. -Ru~ & Mciklc FAX NO, : 730 02i4 Rug, 06 2002 03:07Pb1 P2 2. Mother's caretaker will be ultimately responsible for mother's health, well- being and mental state during the access visit. If at any time the caretaker observes displays of emotional upset, mental upset, frustration, agitation or anger in mother, the Guardian is authorizing the mother's caretaker to take a break during the access visit for the benefit of the mother. The Guardian will allow such a break to be at the complete and ultimate discretion of the caretaker. 3. The Guardian is suggesting to the caretaker that there be a 5 - 10 minute break every hour during the access visit. 4. The Guardian is suggesting to the caretaker that there may be a longer break needed for the benefit of the mother between the first half and the second half of the access visit for the mother's benefit. Again, these breaks will be at the absolute discretion of the caretaker who is assigned at that time to taking care of the mother and such discretion may not be questioned nor challenged, as said discretion is to be exercised solely for the benefit of the mother. 5. If the caretaker observes constant agitation in the mother which cannot be mitigated, mollified or corrected by the caretaker, including the use of break times, the caretaker will be authorlzed to terminate the access visit for the health, mental and emotional well-being of th~ mother. 6. Questions concerning the mother should not be made by hAarilyn to either the caretaker or any other person present during the access visit but should rather be placed into writing and sent to the Guardian. The purpose of these requirements is to protect and promote the best interests and welfare of the mother. Also, we note that certain questions by Marilyn indicate that Marilyn believes that she is "super-Guardian" over and above the Court-appointed Guardian, her brother. The Guardian will be happy to respond to appropriate questions which should not be raised durinc/an access visit for the benefit and well-being of the mother, but any inquiry should be directed in writing to the Guardian and will be promptly responded to. Thank you for your attention to these imp~ /~ /...//, RCR/lin cc: Col. Frederick E. Gerber, II, Guardian 2 F~OM :. Rup[~ Meikle FAX NO. : ?50 0214 Aug. 07 200~ 12:00PM Pi LAW OFFICES RUPP AND MEIR2LE A ~'~O~'~-$$1OI~AL COnPORATIO~ HE~B~CHARD C. G' R~p~PP' ~R, C~P ~L, PA 17011 MA~G ~D~8 A~ ~IK~ ~N (19~2) E-M~L: R~P~wI~AOL,~M CA~ ~, PA Au~us~ 7, 2002 VIA FAX - 232-2766 Stanley J. Laskowski, Esquire Caldwell & Kearns 3631N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 1 7110 Re: Marilyn Gerber- Access Visits with Mildred Gerber Clarification Dear Stan: It has been brought to my attention that I should make a clarification to my letter dated August 6, 2002 to you regarding the August 7 access rules and the requirements that the Guardian is imposing for the proper conduct for the access visits between MarJlyn Gerber and their mother, Mildred J. Gerber. The clarification is that the Guardian proposes to have a social worker conduct the access visit and be in charge of the access visit for the benefit, welfare and well- being of the parties' mother, Mildred J. Gerber. For example, if the Guardian employs someone from Sanders & Warren, that social worker from Sanders & Warren will be in charge of the access visit and to see that it is properly conducted to both effectuate the access vislf as well as promote and protect the health, mental and emotional well-being of Mildred J. Gerber. FROM : Rupp~& M~ikl~ FAX NO. : ?30 0214 Aug. 0? 2002 12:01PM P2 In my letter to you, I meant to use the word caretaker or caregiver as a synonym to social worker. However, as Jane Gerber or others may be considered a caretaker or caregiver, as distinguished from the social worker employed by Sanders & Warren or any other firm, I wish to clarify to you that the social worker from Sanders & Warren will be designated the party in charge of the access visit. I hope this clarification is helpful to you. Best regards. Yours sincerely, Richard C. Rupp RCR/lin cc: Col. Frederick E. Gerber, II, Guardian Sanders & Warren Ms. Jane Heflin EMBASSY SUITES EMBASSY SUITES HOTELS® HOTELS® 1-800-EMBASSY . -' 1-800-EMBASSY FROM : Rupp & Meikle FAX NO. : ?~ 0214 Ma~. 30 2002 12:05PM Pi iaw OFFICES RUPP ,~ND MEIKI,E ~8~ NOaTZI 21ST s~, SU~ z~ ~ ~, ~e?, ~2, CAMP ~TT.T., PA 17011 MA~-mG ADD~ ~C~ C. RUPP (717) 761~59 P,O. ~X 095 ANN M~K~ ERIK~N (19~-82) ~-MAIL: ~WI~L,~M CAMP ~, FA 17~1~295 ~F~: (71~ 7~14 May 30, 2002 VIA FAX - 232-2766 Stanley J. Laskowski, Esquire Caldweil & Kearns 3631N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 1 7110 Re: Marilyn Gerber - Mildred Gerber access visits Dear Stan: This letter both responds fo your request for an access visit for AAarilyn on 31 May 2002 as well as future access visits. 1. As I previously informed you, the Guardian has respectfully requested and advised that access visits not occur on Tuesdays nor Thursdays of a week by mason of Mom's enrollment in pm-scheduled Alzheimer's activities at an adult care facilily in order to provide a weekly routine in mom's best interests which provides needed and appropriate stimulation for Mom. By reason of these prescheduled Alzheimer's activities on Tuesdays and Thursdays, mom is unavailable for access visits. 2. Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays are perfectly fine for Marilyn's access visits. However, the times of the visits should be from 10:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. local time (CDT). The visits will occur at Embassy Suites Hotel in Lombard, IL, unless otherwise specified by the Guardian. FROM : Rupp & Meikle FAX NO. : 73~ 0214 Mag. 30 2002 12:05PM P2 3. The Guardian respe~'tfully requests and advises that there can be no access visits on Sundays as Mom is unavailable as Mom routinely goes to Church and brunch with family and Js unavailable for Sunday access visits. ', 4. The Guardian respectfully requests and advises that there be no visits on holidays as Mom is often away with family and, therefore, unavailable for access visits on holidays. 5. With respect to Saturdays, the GUardian respectfully requests that Saturday visits be avoided as Mom is also away with family and, therefore unavailable. 6. The Guardian further requests 30-days advance request for Marilyn's access visits. This time frame is requested in order to assist the Guardian to avoid scheduling activities, coordination of'persons needed to allow the access visit, to insure the obtaining of a location, and thereby better allow Marilyn's access visits so that mom is available for said access visits. Presumably, this time frame would also better assist Marilyn in planning her access visits to Chicago. 7. With respect to the visit requested for 31 May 2002, please be advised that Mom has a previously scheduled dental appointment from 10:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. CDT. The Guardian cannot obviously guarantee what condition Mom will be in after sitting in the dental chair immediately prior to another required visit from Marilyn. The Guardian personally asked Mom if Mom thought she would feel up to visiting with Marilyn this Friday after her dental appointment. Mom replied "No! I don't want to see her this Friday or any other day. I certainly don't want to see her after someone has been poking around in my mouth." However, if Marilyn wishes to continue her request for this Friday, 31 May 2002, the Guardian will produce mom for an access visit from 1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. CDT at Embassy Suites in Lombard, IL. In summary, per the Guardian's request, there should be no access visits requested for Tuesdays and Thursdays by reason of Mom's prescheduled Alzheimer's activities which are for mom's benefit and best interests whereby Mom is unavailable for access visits. Monday, Wednesday and Friday access visits are fine, occurring between 10:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. CDT. FROM : Rupp & Meikle FAX NO. : ?~ 0214 Mag. 30 2002 12:06PM P3 There should be no access visits on holidays or Sundays as mom is unavailable and Saturdays are requested to not occur to ensure availability of Mom. The Guardian requests 30 days advance notice in order to effectively plan, coordinate and schedule the access visits into mom's schedule. Marilyn's access visits will occur at the Embassy Suites Hotel, Lombard, IL, unless otherwise specified by the Guardian. Please advise whether Marilyn still wishes to continue the 31 May 2002 access visit which will occur immediately after Mom's dental appointment. I look forward to hearing from you with respect to the 31 May 2002 access visit request. Best regards. Yours sinc ird C. Rupp RCR/lin CALDWELL & KEARNS A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CARL G. WASS ATTORNEYS AT LAW OF COUNSEL JANES R, CLIPPINGER THONA$ D. CALDWELL, JR. CHARLES J, DEHART, III RICHARD L. KEARNS 3631 NORTH FRONT STREET JANES D, CANPBELL, JR. JANES L. GOLDSNITH H ARRISBUR G, PENNSYLVANIA 1 7110-15 3 3 STANLEY J. A. LASKOWSKI JEFFREY T, NCGUIRE' DOUGLAS K. NAR$1CO 717-:~32-7661 BRETT N. WOODBURN DOUGLAS E. HERNAN FAX: 717- 232-2766 RAY J. NICHALOWSKI thefirmOcaldwellkeerns.com · ALSO A MEMBER OF NJ SAR April 4, 2002 Richard C. Rupp, Esquire RUPP AND MEIKLE P.O. Box 395 Camp Hill, PA 17001-0395 Re: Mildred Gerber Dear Richard: Thank you for your letter which you faxed to me yesterday. We appreciate your acknowledgment of the visits to occur on April 12 and 17. Please advise whether April 24 or 25 would be suitable. For each of these dates please confirm that they will be taking place where Mrs. Gerber is staying (Jane's home) and who will be present to implement them. I believe clarity in our communications as to these arrangements will be beneficial to all particularly upon consideration of the distance of travel involved for Marilyn. As to the April 7 visit and remaining matters noted in your letter, issues of access brought to the court on Marilyn's petition have been addressed and the record completed. This is noted in the Court's order of March 15, 2002. All of the past incidents to which you allude are refuted by Marilyn. The claims which you continue to attempt to reassert regarding Marilyn's prior alleged conduct are unfounded, particularly those concerning purported stalking and harassment. The testimony at the prior hearings clearly indicated that at no time did Marilyn cause physical harm to her mother in the care she was providing. ! would concur that, given the condition of Mrs. Gerber that was observed at the March 21 hearing, a stress free environment should be maintained as much a possible. We have concerns too, however, regarding Mr. Gerber's and Jane's continued preemptive confrontational nature with Marilyn, which was exhibited in the hearings and the February 9 visit, and its stressful effect upon Mrs. Gerber. I believe the Court order entered March 27, 2002 is clear that visits are to be allowed and when Marilyn can arrange to be available where her mother is located. Mrs. Gerber has been in Chicago for the past three months and we were informed at the March 21 hearing that she would be returning to and remaining at Jane's home. Although Mr. Gerber may not be available on April 7, as Mrs. Gerber is presently at Jane's home and is being attended to by caregivers daily, Richard C. Rupp, Esquire April 4, 2002 Page 2 either Jane or such caregivers are available to implement a visit. I find from your response no impediment or basis not to implement a visit by Marilyn with her mother on April 7. Marilyn is available and has committed to arrangements to travel to Chicago for April 7. Please advise as to what arrangements yet otherwise need to be made as this was not elaborated upon in your reply. I communicated Marilyn's request to you promptly last week, as you noted, after entry of the Court's order. It appears that adequate notice has been afforded and therefore Marilyn respectfully declines to forego her visit on April 7. We will object strongly to a declination of a visit by Marilyn on April 7 based upon your reply. Please confirm by the end of the day whether Mr. Gerber will allow Sunday's visit. Please confirm who will be present to implement the visit so that Marilyn can make appropriate contact upon her arrival Sunday. If the visit will not be accommodated we have no alternative but to take the matter to the Court tomorrow accordingly. If you should have any questions, please call me. Otherwise, I shall look forward to heating from you. Very truly yours, Stanley J.A. Laskowski SJAL:sl cc: Marilyn Gerber Via Facsimile and U.S. Mail CALDWELL & KEARNS A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CARL G, WASS ATTORNEYS AT LAW OF COUNSEL JANES R, CLIPPINGER THOMAS D, CALDWELL, JR. RICHARD L. KEARNS CHARLES J. D£HART, Ill 3631 NORTH FRONT STREET JAiVlES D, CAMPBELL. JR. JANI£S L. GOLDSMITH HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17110-1533 STANLEY J. A. LASKOWSKI JEFFREY T. NIcGUIRE' DOUGLAS ~..A~SlCO April 5, 2002 717.~,3~.7~8I BRETT M, WOODBURN DOUGLAS E. HERI~tAN FAX: 717-232-2766 RAY J. NIICHALOWSKI thefirm~caldwellkeams.com 'ALSO A MEMBER OF NJ BAR Richard C. Rupp, Esquire RUPP AND MEIKLE P. O. Box 395 Camp Hill, PA 17011-0395 RE: Mildred J. Gerber Dear Richard: Thank you for your letter of April 4, 2002. I take your comments, however, as indicative of the disdain, contempt and disregard your client holds for Marilyn as well as the Order issued by Judge Bailey. The actions of he and Jane demonstrate that they indeed advocate their own interests above that of Mildred. I further take exception with any accusation or implication that your client has been threatened or is acting under any duress to accommodate the visitation which the Court has ordered. A valid Court Order was issued by Judge Bailey in providing for minimal contact ultimately as a consequence of your client's steadfast refusal to accommodate any contact. Clearly the Court disagrees with his exercise of judgment and discretion in these matters. I look forward to your advising me today of the location of the visit for Sunday. Marilyn objects, however, to conducting the visit at another location other than Jane's home and certainly under any conditions and circumstances as were arranged for Febrnary 9. We ask that Mr. Gerber reconsider his decision in this matter. If the visit occurs Sunday at a location other than Jane's home, Marilyn certainly will still attend, but under protest as this apparently will be the only circumstances under which it appears that Mr. Gerber will comply with the Court Order. Therefore, Marilyn's visit on Sunday under these circumstances is not to be deemed as a consent to the accommodations for this or future visits. We have concern over the location and accommodations to be arranged for this visit generally. Being in an unfamiliar environment does not promote a stress free atmosphere for Mrs. Gerber. It may tend to make her uncomfortable and detract from any communication between her and Marilyn. Conducting the visit under conditions similar to February 9 are unacceptable also. If the visit, for example, is confined to a small room, has no ability for Mrs. Gerber to be able to walk around, change locations, rest or nap, or even get something to eat or drink at her leisure, then the visit will be set up for failure as such conditions will lend itself to disorientation, confusion, fatigue and impatience by Mrs. Gerber. Such conditions will not be tolerated as an excuse to terminate or shorten the visit. Any efforts to persuade or impress upon Mrs. Gerber that these accommodations are caused by Richard C. Rupp, Esquire April 5, 2002 Page 2 Marilyn are wholly inappropriate as Marilyn is willing to go wherever her mother is staying and conduct herself appropriately. For the interest of all parties, and particularly Mrs. Gerber, it is in her best interest to be in at least the surroundings, i.e. Jane's home, with which she has some familiarity and is oriented. Longer term best interests and a proper care and treatment program for Mrs. Gerber would dictate that she be returned to her own New Cumberland home where she resided for 34 years, close to her friends and community, as well as closer to Mr. Gerber, whom I surmise has not seen her but perhaps once in the last three months. If I am not accurate concerning Mr. Gerber's visits with his mother, I would appreciate your updating me. Both Mr. Gerber and Ms. Herin have known full well that Marilyn has been seeking access visits with her mother. This was certainly known at some time when Mr. Gerber decided that Mrs. Gerber was to remain in Chicago. Originally as you recall, her visit to Chicago, according to Attorney Verney, was for merely a holiday visit. Mr. Gerber then is exercising his judgment apparently to allow Mrs. Gerber to stay in Jane's home. As such, this is Mrs. Gerber's location in accordance with the stated Court Order. Mrs. Gerber certainly still has some rights, desires and interests in establishing her own living environment. Over approximately the past 20 years prior to these proceedings, Marilyn has been a frequent visitor, including longer term stays, at Ms. Heflin's residences in Dallas, California and Chicago. Over approximately the last 12 years Marilyn has stayed at times in Lombard at Ms. Heflin's home and is familiar with its rooms, layout and facilities. We suggest that Mr. Gerber revisit this matter with Ms. Heflin as to whether some other arrangement may be made for the four-hour visit. It is regrettable that Ms. Hefiin will not interact with Marilyn. For the best interests of Mrs. Gerber, Marilyn remains willing to work towards a resolution with Mr. Gerber and Ms. Herin of their differences. If you would like to discuss these matters further, please call me. __e~___~y yours, . -, Stanley J.A.~' Skowski CALDWELL & KEARNS SJAL/lb FACSIMILE cc: Marilyn Jo Gerber 01-607/31435 CALDWELL ~. KEARNS A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CARL G. WA$$ ATTORNEYS AT LAW OF COUNSEL JAMES R. CLIPPINGER THOMAS D, CALDWELL, JR, CHARLES J. DEHART, III RICHARD L. KEARNS JAMES D. CAMPBELL. JR. 3631 NORTH FRONT STREET JAMES L. GOLDSMITH HARRISBUR G, PENNSYLVANIA 17110-1 5 3 3 STANLEY J. A. LASKOWSKI JEFFREY ?. McGUIREe DOUGLAS K. MARSICO BRETT 14. WOODBURN 717-232-7661 DOUGLAS E. HERMAN FAX: 717-232-2766 RAY J. MICMALOWSKI ~hefirrnOcaldwellkeems.com -A-SO A .~.BE. O~ .J SAR April 15, 2002 Richard C. Rupp, Esquire RUPP AND MEIKLE P.O. Box 395 Camp Hill, PA 17001-0395 Re: Access visits - Mildred Gerber Dear Mr. Rupp: This letter is to confirm arrangements for the next visitation by Marilyn with her mother on April 17, 2002. Marilyn's same day flight arrival and departure from Chicago provide that she can be available from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. (CDT). She would like to have lunch with her mother during this visit. My letter of March 29 did indicate that Marilyn was making single day travel arrangem,ents allowing her availability between 2 p.m. and 6 p.m. on April 7 and 12. Since Marilyn was traveling to and meeting with her mother in Chicago, I believed the times stated were understandably local (CDT) and without need of further clarification. I will however accommodate your request for further clarity. Also, flight scheduling for day travel by Marilyn is necessarily limiting as to time. Marilyn must also contend with such matters among others as time delays when they may occur associated with domestic flights, boarding and departure security regimes and transportation from the airport. Thus, the visitation times provided to you afford little flexibility. I would think that the visitation times would not provide much difficulty as they are generally mid-day and I believe Ms. Heflin's home is approximately 15 minutes away by car from the Embassy Suites. Marilyn's concerns over the accommodations at the Embassy Suites expressed in my letter of April 5, 2002 continue and are reiterated. Limiting the visits to a small hotel room is not in Mrs. Gerber's best interests. As Marilyn may have the visitation with her mother only under the circumstances and at the location directed by Mr. Gerber, she will attend the visits but under protest. We ask that he reconsider his position and endeavor to arrange visits also were Mrs. Gerber is living for her continued comfort. Richard C. Rupp, Esquire April 15, 2002 Page 2 After April 17, 2002 the next visitation is scheduled for April 24, 2002. Marilyn will have same day travel arrangements to and from Chicago and will be available from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. (CDT) for the visit. Please confirm the location for the visit and foregoing to avoid any potential misunderstandings. Also, Marilyn would like an additional visit on May 1, 2002 between 1 p.m. and 5p.m. (CDT). Thank you in advance for your cooperation. If you should have any questions, please contact me. V~ yours,/,./9 CALDWELL & KEARNS SJAL:sl Via Facsimile and U.S. Mail O1-607 BILLING SUMMARY - TOTALS HOURS AMOUNT APRIL 11.3 $1,695.00 MAY 3.4 510.00 JUNE 7.5 1,125.00 JULY 7.3 1,095.00 AUGUST 1.4 180.00 SEPTEMBER .6 90.00 OCTOBER 6.3 945.00 TOTAL $5,670.00 CALDWELL & KEARNS 3631 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-1533 T~LX I.D. #23-2015480 (717) 232-7661 INAfOICE #33623 MONTHLY BILLING Nov 13 2002 Marilyn Jo Gerber 42 Drexel Place New Cumberland PA 17070 MATTER 01607 Guardianship Contest FEES HOURS - 0.80 Entitlement and Appeal Oct 11/2002 Research Appeal of Guardian 0.80 Appointment as Basis for Deferral Oct 17/2002 Draft Motion 0.70 Oct 18/2002 Draft Motion -.Review Client Faxes 0.40 Complete Draft. of Petition for 1.70 Review Hearing Oct 24/2002 Revise--Edit Motion for Review 1.10 Hearing Telephone Call from J. O'Halleran 0.80 and with Client RE: Illinois Order TOTAL FEES AT $150 PER HR. Photocopies Telephone charge - long distance Fax charges Sep-30-02 Lexis Charges month of September, 2002 FEEES AND COSTS OUTSTANDING BALANCE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE ................................. SAL:slb CALDWELL & KEARNS 3631 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-1533 TAX I.D. #23-2015480 (717) 232-7661 INVOICE ~33357 MONTHLY BILLING Oct 10 2002 Marilyn Jo Gerber 42 Drexel Place New Cumberland PA 17070 MATTER 01607 Guardianship Contest FEES HOURS Sep 2002 Telephone Conference with Client 0.60 RE: Rupp Letter of 9/26; Petition for Review Hearing Page 2 TOTAL FEES AT $150 PER HR. Copies Telephone charges - long distance Fax charges FEES AND COSTS TOTAL AMOUNT DUE .......................................... SAL;slb CALDWELL & KEARNS 3631 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-1533 TAX I.D. #23-2015480 717) 232-7661 INVOICE #33166 MONTHLY BILLING Sep 20 2002 Marilyn Jo Gerber 42 Drexel Place · New Cumberland PA 17070 MATTER 01607 Guardianship Contest FEES HOURS ReView Rupp Letter 8/7/02 RE: 0.20 Visits Aug 08/20'02 Telephone Call from Client RE: ~ 0.30 Re ~ort on Visit Aug 20/2002 Telephone Call from J. O'Halloran - 0.90 RE: Visitation Issues, Proc Enforcement of Order Page 2 FEES HOURS TOTAL FEES $150 PER HR. Photocopies Telephone expense Fax Expense FEES AND COSTS OUTSTANDING BALANCE FROM PREVIOUS INVOICES TOTAL AMOUNT DUE ..................................... SAL:slb CALDWELL & KEARNS 3631 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-1533 TAX I.D. ~23-2015480 (717) 232-7661 INVOICE #32901 MONTHLY BILLING Aug 15 2002 Marilyn Jo Gerber 42 Drexel Place New Cumberland PA 17070 MATTER 01607 Guardianship Contest FEES HOURS Jul 08/2002 Review Letter of Client to F.E.G. 0.20 & R. Rupp Complete & Revise Motion 2.00 Jul 09/2002 Proof Petition,. Final Revisions 1.10 Filing 0.40 Telephone Call from Client and 0.20 Call to R. Rupp Telephone Call from R. Rupp and 0.40 with Client RE: 7/10 Visit Jul 15/2002 Telephone Call from Client RE: 0.40 'Visitation Review J. Baylay Order; Letter 0.30 from Rupp and Telephone Call from Client Jul 19/2002 Telephone Call from Client RE: 0.40 Visitation Jul 29/2002 Telephone Call from Client RE: 0.70 ermlna Visits Review Motion to Suspend Visits 0.30 Page 2 FEES HOURS Jul 30/2002 Review Judge Bayleys' Order and 0.60 Telephone Call with Client RE: Visitations ~ Letter to Rupp RE: August 0.30 Visits TOTAL FEES AT $150 PER HR. Photocopies Fax charge FEES AND COSTS ..................................... ----~~ TOTAL AMOI/NT DUE ..................................... SAL:slb CALDWELL & KEARNS 3631 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-1533 TAX I.D. ~23=2015480 (717) 232-7661 INVOICE #32716 MONTHLY BILLING Jul 25 2002 Marilyn Jo Gerber 42 Drexel Place New Cumberland PA 17070 MATTER 01607 _ Guardianship Contest FEES HOURS Jun 04/2002 Letter to R. Rupp RE: Visits 0.20 Jun 07/2002 Telephone Call from Client RE: 0.50 Visitation Today; Jun 12/2002 Telephone Call R. Rupp 0.40 Telephone Call Client 0.30 Jun 13/2002 Review Letter of R. Rupp and 0.80 Prepare Reply Telephone Call from R. Rupp RE: 0.50 .Visit Telephene Call te Client RE: 6/14 0.30 Visit Jun 17/2002 Letter to R. Rupp 0.20 0.00 Jun 19/2002 Letter to Rupp 0.20 Jun 21/2002 Prepare & Revise Petition for 2.80 Review Hearing Conference with Client RE: Hearing 0.70 issues Jun 2'7/2002 Telephone Call from Marilyn 0.20 Letter to Rupp 0.20 Page 2 HOURS FEES Telephone Call to Rupp 0.20 TOTAL FEES AT $150 PER HR. Photocopies Fax charge FEES AND COSTS TOTAL AMOUNT DUE SAL:slb KEARNS 3631 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-1533 TAX I.D. #23-2015480 (717) 232-7661 INVOICE #32576 MONTHLY BILLING Jun 28 2002 Marilyn Jo Gerber 42~Drexel Place New Cumberland PA 17070 MATTER 01607 re: Guardianship Contest FEES HOURS May 03/2002 Prepare Letter to R. Rupp & Review 0 50 Correspondence for Rupp May 06/2002 Review R. Rupp Letter 0.10 Telephone Call from Client Re: Reply 0.40 Prepare Reply Letter to R. Rupp 0.30 May 07/2002 Telephone Call from Client Re: Visit 0.10 Review Letter from R. Rupp 0.20 Page. 2 FEES HOURS 0.20 ~ Telephone Call from Client RE: 0.50 Visitation, ~ Review Hearing Issues Letter to R. Rupp RE: 5/21 Visit 0.20 May 21/2002 Telephone Call to R. Rupp and 0.20 Review Letter Received by Fax Telephone Call to Client RE: 0.20 Todays Visit May 30/2002 Telephone Call with Client 0.20 Telephone Call with R. Rupp RE: 0.30 Visits TOTAL FEES AT $150 PER HR. Photocopies FEES AND COSTS ..................................... TOTAL ~MOUNT DUE ................................... SAL:slb CALDWELL & KEARNS 3631 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110-1533 TAX I.D. #23-2015480 (717) 232-7661 .INVOICE #32236 MONTHLY BILLING May 14 2002 Marilyn Jo Gerber 42 Drexel Place New Cumberland PA 17070 MATTER 01607 RE: Guardianship Contest Outstanding balance .......................................... FEES HOURS Apr 03/2002 Telephone Call with R. Rupp 0.70 Telephone Call with-Client RE: 0.70 Visitation & Order Compliance with R. Rupp Review Letter from R. Rupp 0.20 Apr 04/2002 Telephone Call with Client, 1.30 Discuss Response to 4/7 Visit - Possible Contempt/Enforcement Proceeding Prepare Letter'to R. Rupp 0.70 Begin Outline of Petition to 0.40 Enfcrce Order Apr 05/2002 Prepare Le :er to R. Rupp RE: 1.60 Visitation Apr 09/2002 Review Client Phone Messages & 0.30 Comments RE: Visitation Apr 10/2002 Telephone Call & Message from 0.30 Client .- Apr 11/2002 Telephone Call from Client 0.20 Apr 12/2002 Review Correspondence from R. Rupp 0.20 & Prepare Fax to Client Apr 15/2002 Messages from Client; Telephone 0.30 Call to Client Prepare Letter to R. Rupp 0.40 Review Letter of 4/12/02 & Case 0.80 Page 2 FEES HOURS Evaluation for Further Motion Apr 16/2002 Telephone Call from Client 0.20 Review Letter from Ro Rupp; '0-20~ Telephone Call to Client Draft Reply Letter RE: 4/17 0.20 Telephone Call with H. Rupp 0.30 Conference with Client 0.30 Apr 17/2002 Review Fax from R. Rupp and 0.40 Telephone Call from Client Apr 18/2002 Prepare Letter to R. Rupp & Review '0.40 Letter of 4/17 Apr 22/2002 Telephone Call with Client RE: 0.20 4/24 Visit Apr 24/2002 Telephone Call from Client RE: 0.30 Visit Apr 30/2002 Telephone Ca : 5/1 0.20 Visit Prepare Letter to R. Rupp & 0.30 Telephone Call to Office Review Reply from R. Rupp 0.20 Page 3 TOTAL FEES AT $150 PER HR. Photocopies Fax FEES i~ND COSTS TOTAL AMOUNT DUE SAL:slb