HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-08-11
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
FOR CLAIMANT
Robert G. Frey
by Mr. Yahn
by Mr. Faller
Linda Stull
Harvey Shapiro
by Mr. Yahn
by Mr. Faller
INDEX TO WITNESS
DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS
9 31
20 --
30 -_
35 -- -- __
41 70
57 76, 80I
69 78
2
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
INDEX TO EXHIBITS
FOR CLAIMANT IDENTIFIED ADMITTED
Ex. No. 1 - list of property lg gl
FOR DEFENDANT
Ex. No. 1 - letter dated 10-23-08
Ex. No. 2 - dictation dated 9-12-07
Ex. No. 3 - writ dated 4-10-09
IDENTIFIED ADMITTED
21 gl
62 gl
65 gI
3
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Monday, November 9, 2009
Carlisle, Pennsylvania
(The following proceedings were held at 9:07 a.m.:)
THE COURT: Okay. Why don't we have
everybody identify themselves so the court reporter knows
who is here and who you represent. You can start, sir.
NIIZ. BOSWELL: I'm Jeff Boswell, and I
represent Harvey Shapiro who is the Claimant.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. YARN: Good morning, Your Honor. Neil
Yahn, Y-A-H-N. We represent Alice Phillips.
MR. FALLER: George Faller, Jr., representing
the Executor, Rob Frey.
THE COURT: Okay. All right. You represent
the Claimant --
MR. BOSWELL: Yes.
THE COURT: -- in this matter. Are there any
other claims or claimants that are going to be testifya_ng
today?
MR. YARN: Your Honor, may I?
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. YARN: Procedurally, we didn't know
whether the Court today was going to address solely the
issue surrounding the claim by Dr. Shapiro against the
Estate and then as to whether we were then going to address
4
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
what I will call the outstanding tangible personal. marital
property issues that continue on with regards to the Estate.
It was our understanding that we were focussing initially on
Dr. Shapiro and his claim. And then in the interest of
time --
THE COURT: All right. Let's do that first,
and then we'll see what time we have left. Proceed. Do you
want to make an opening statement at all? Or you feel
comfortable just having your client come up and start to
testify?
Ngt. BOSWELL: Well, my client will testify
and then with the Executor as well. But essentially, the
claim regards personal property that was on the real
property of the Estate, the personal property owned by
Harvey Shapiro who was resident on the Estate.
And it's our contention that the Executor
knew of that personal property; and then when Dr. Shapiro
made arrangements to go get that property, the property was
gone. And essentially, Harvey Shapiro had contact with the
Executor, provided a list, etc., and some property was
recovered. But by far and away, most of the property is
still missing.
THE COURT: Okay. Do you want to say
something, sir?
MR. YARN: Your Honor, if I could, please.
5
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Neil Yahn on behalf of Alice Phillips. One of the critical
points to note for this matter is Dr. Shapiro was an expert
who was engaged through Shienvold office, Shienvold and
Associates, a psychologist out of Harrisburg.
Dr. Shapiro was an employee of
Dr. Shienvold's office. Through his office, Dr. Shapiro was
engaged to perform not only a psychiatric assessment on
Miss Phillips but also to provide for her care. It was part
of that care that began in or about August of 2006.
We'll provide this via the evidence today.
Dr. Shapiro at one point through the course of his care
engaged in then a relationship with Miss Phillips. The
context of that relationship are now a matter currently
before the Dauphin County Court.
There is a writ of summons that has been
filed. There is also a certificate of merit to that writ.
I understand the complaint has not been filed today; but it
would be our position, Your Honor, Dr. Shapiro ultimately
provided an analysis of Miss Phillips that included but not
limited to depression, anxiety, the IQ of that an individual
at or about fourth or fifth grade.
It would be our position, Your Honor, that
any matters surrounding the tangible personal property of
Dr. Shapiro should be addressed in that matter. There is
currently a writ filed. If he would like to file a
6
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
counterclaim or any third party cross claim, he should file
that in that matter. And, Your Honor, this is an
inappropriate forum for Dr. Shapiro to be making his claim
against the Estate given he was the physician caring fcr
Miss Phillips.
He is now arguing that he would like his
property returned when the nexus to that tangible personal
property that's allegedly missing that he placed in the
hands of a fourth grade individual that he diagno:~ed, he's
now coming before this Court and saying, I'd like my
property back, when the appropriate jurisdiction for that
matter, Your Honor, is Dauphin County.
THE COURT: What type of that action is that.
in Dauphin County again?
Ngt. YARN: Your Honor, that is a medical
malpractice claim under negligence.
THE COURT: Okay.
NIlZ. FALLER: Yes, sir. And if we might, Your
Honor, I think this is a claim against the Executor of the
Estate. The Estate did own the real property as you well
know. But the Estate was not in possession of the real
property when Mr. Shapiro put the property there.
So we feel we're just kind of here as a
bystander because we never had possession of this tangible
personal property. As far as we're concerned, the personal
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
property left when we got possession of the real property
back.
THE COURT: Okay. So there was no personal
property of the Doctor's at the real Estate when you
regained possession. Is that what you're saying?
MR. FALLER: That's correct. And we went
through with Mr. Yawn. We went through -- well, right
before, didn't we?
NR2. YARN: Your Honor, I believe -- we did go
through the house itself. It was an understanding at least
pursuant to the order that we were going to have the
opportunity to go back through. But that relates to
tangible personal property between Miss Phillips and L.L.,
not with regards to Dr. Shapiro.
MR. FALLER: Correct. Sorry. There is one
treadmill and some clothing that was on the list; and we're,
you know, ready to turn it over.
THE COURT: Okay. Anything else initially?
Do you want to respond to his statement that the -- this
Court should not hear this claim?
MR. BOSWELL: This claim does -- just with
regard to the tangible personal property, there is nothing
in this claim with regard to care. The professional care
relationship with Dr. Shapiro ended sometime before this
property claim arose. I don't have knowledge with regard to
8
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the claim in Dauphin County.
THE COURT: You don't?
MR. BOSWELL: I don't believe that the
professional claims alleged with regard to that action in
Dauphin County has anything to do with the personal
property.
THE COURT: All right. I'll allow you to
proceed. Go ahead.
MR. BOSWELL: I'd like to call Robert Frey,
please.
THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Frey. Where do you
want him to sit?
ROBERT G. FREY,
having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. BOSWELL:
Q Mr. Frey, would you please identify yourself?
A My name is Robert G. Frey. My office address
is 5 South Hanover Street, Carlisle.
Q And you're the executor of the Phillips'
Estate?
A I am, yes .
Q As executor of the Phillips' Estate, you're
aware of the real property?
9
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,3
L
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A Yes.
Q And when did it come to your attention that
Harvey Phillips was residing --
A Harvey Shapiro?
Q I'm sorry. Excuse me. Harvey Shapiro.
A I received a -- I guess it would have been
late October of 2008; and I received a telephone call_ from
Dr. Shapiro. Our hearing with Judge Rehkamp, I believe, was
October 21st. I have to check my calendar, and ttlis would
have been sometime after that but before when we went
through the house on October 28th I think.
Q During the month of October, did you go
through the house two times with Linda Stull?
A We went through one time before Alice
Phillips had vacated the property; and that would have been
around the, I think, October 28th time frame, somewhere --
I'm not exactly sure on that date and then subsequently went
through one time with Dr. Shapiro. It was a Saturday maybe
a week or so later I believe. Maybe it was longer.
Q Now when you went through with Dr. Shapiro
then later, did you notice that personal property that had
been there previous inspection of the house or walked
through the house and was not there?
A Yes. There was a large amount of property
that had been moved when. -- when Alice moved from the house.
i0
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Q When you went through the property with Linda
Stull previously, did -- in mid October, did -- you were
aware that on the -- in the house there was property of the
Estate, correct?
A Yes.
Q And property of Alice Phillips as well?
A Yes. Yes, I believe so.
Q You were aware there was also property of.
Harvey Shapiro?
A There appeared to be in that the only item
that I could speak of specifically was a dismantled pool
table which I knew was not the Estate's property.
Dr. Shapiro had mentioned that he had one there. I do not
know whose property it was, but that was my impression.
NHt. YARN: Your Honor, may I object? He's
continuing down a line of questions that the Executor does
not have actual knowledge as to who the ownership of certain
property as to whether between Miss Phillips or Dr. Shapiro.
As a result, the better party to provide testimony to that
would be Dr. Shapiro himself as to the specific items.
THE COURT: Okay. I understand. Where are
you going with this?
MR. BOSWELL: Well, Dr. Shapiro will testify
as to those items; but I'm -- with these questions, I'm
trying to establish that the Executor knew there was other
11
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
property on the -- on the Estate property -- on the Estate
real property.
THE COURT: All right.
BY NHt . BOSWELL
Q And you were aware of the -- the Estate's
personal property?
A Well, there's a lot of property, yes. In the
general sense, I was aware of it, yes. I had not been in
the house very often since Mr. Phillips died, I think on two
other occasions. So as far as having an intimate knowledge
of all of the furnishings and things of that nature, no; but
I was generally familiar with it.
Q As Executor, you had obtained appraisals of
the personal property, correct?
A Yes.
Q So -- and you had reviewed those personal_
properties when you filed the tax returns; is that correct?
A I certainly did, yes.
Q Did you have a dispute with regard to Alice
Phillips with regard to any of the personal property cf the
Estate?
A Yes. Yes.
Q Does that dispute still exist today with
regard to some items?
A We still believe there was property that
12
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
should not have been removed and was. That's our position,
yes.
Q And in -- when did you establish that.
position that -- was it before this October hearing you
referred to, October 2008 hearing?
A No. It would have been after the October
hearing. And -- well, it was my understanding or thought
that procedure was set at that hearing that we would meet at
the property and decide what was to be taken out and what
was to remain. But by the time we were able, allowed to get
into the house, a lot of things had already been moved or
were boxed up ready to be moved.
Q You're aware that Dr. Shapiro was residing at
the house for some time?
A I was not aware until he told me in October
of 2008.
Q And was that -- when he told you that, did he
tell you that before you and Dr. Shapiro went to the
property?
A Yes.
Q And was that -- was that before or after your
-- your walkthrough with Linda Stull?
A It was before the walkthrough.
Q What was the purpose of your walkthrough with
Linda Stull before the hearing?
13
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A Well, as I said, my thought was the purpose
was to get an understanding of what was to -- what was
definitely Estate property remained, what was definitely
Alice's property that would be allowed to go, and what was
still in dispute.
But as I said, in the days following that
hearing and before we were there, moving had already started
to occur. And so what eventually -- essentially was the
purpose, I guess, when we got there was to get an idea of
what still remained and what would was required to remain
and what we needed to try to retrieve.
Q When did you then learn that the property --
personal property was removed from the residence?
NII2. FALLER: Objection to the extent that
we're not talking about any particular piece of property. I
mean -- he wasn't in possession of the property. So how
would he know what personal property was going in and out?
MR. BOSWELL: Your Honor, if I might address
that? The witness testified that he was aware that from the
walkthrough with Linda Stull that there was a significant
property and then soon there was a second walkthrough and
much of that personal property had been removed.
THE COURT: Right.
MR. BOSWELL: My question is -- and maybe I
could address the question better at that time period.
14
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
BY NIlt . BOSWELL
Q Is it during the second walkthrough that that
was the first time that you were aware that property was
removed?
A No. I can't give you the exact date but
sometime between those -- the -- the hearing in New
Bloomfield and our meeting at the property, I received a
telephone call. And I'm not sure if it was from Linda Stull
or her brother Lynn Phillips, III, that they noticed a -- a
van at the property.
And I recall at this time we were not really
allowed inside the fence as we described it. We were
allowed on the exterior property area but not on the
curtilage of the residence. And I did drive out and confirm
that there was a -- a U-Haul truck backed up to the house at
which point I called the attorneys that are representing me
in this matter.
Mr. Faller wasn't available, so I spoke to
his partner No Otto. And it's my understanding that No
and Mr. Yahn had some conversations, and I thought at that
point that there was agreement there wouldn't be anything
more moved.
I happened to have a real estate settlement
sort of on that direction on west side of Carlisle later in
the afternoon. After that settlement, I drove out again,
15
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
saw that the U-Haul had been moved which I thought was a
good sign. It was parked away but then noticed there was a
second truck backed up to -- to the house. And although I
could not stop what was going on, I thought I needed to at
least confirm that there were things moving.
And I did look in the back of the truck and
saw that one the inclinators that had been installed for
handicap access tc the second floor had been removed and
that was sitting in the back. That's really the only thing
I noticed there regarding any other property. So that's
basically the extent of my knowledge of things moving.
Q At that time as Executor, did you have are
agreement that Alice Phillips, with anyone, could remove
property?
A I thought the -- well, the -- this is my
opinion. I thought that there was not going to be moving
before we met; but obviously, there are other opinions
differently.
Q Then perhaps two weeks later -- recognize you
don't know the exact time -- you went through the property
with Harvey Shapiro?
A Yes.
Q And did he identify then the pool table that
was still there?
A No. I don't think the pool table was there
16
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
then. I think it was gone.
Q Did he tell you at that time that items of
personal property that belonged to him were no longer there?
A Yes. Yes, he did.
Q Did he at that time identify particular items
that you -- you can recall?
A He mentioned various things. There were some
things that were his that were there; and he gathered them
up. And -- but he certainly named other things that had
been in a certain spot and were no longer there.
Q Did he then eventually send you a list of
those items?
A Yes.
Q And do you recall when he sent you that list?
A I'm thinking it may have been that December.
Q But some months --
A Still in 2008 I think it was. But several
weeks or mont hs later, yes.
Q Did he revise the list then at a later time?
A I believe so, yes.
Q Okay. I'm going to show you a -- may I have
this identifi ed?
MR. FALLER: For the record, Your Honor, I
believe it was also attached to the petition that we are
here on today. It's an exhibit to the petition.
17
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. YARN: I'll stipulate it's the same list
attached to the petition..
MR. BOSWELL: May I show this, please?
THE COURT: Yes.
BY MR. BOSWELL:
Q Can you identify that list? Now, I note that
that says revised list. And you testified that there was a
first list, and then it was later revised. Is that --
A This looks to be the list he sent to me, yes.
Q Does that list refresh your recollection as
to any items you discussed with Harvey Shapiro when ycu
walked through the house?
A Yes. And again, this is a fairly long list;
but I -- I do recall him mentioning paintings and some
glassware and a -- I don't see it on here. But I know he
mentioned a spoon table, but I don't see that here. I'm
sure it's on here somewhere.
Q And in your inspections then or walkthroughs
of the house, did you ever then -- then find those
particular items?
A No.
Q And mister -- and Dr. Shapiro made a -- sent
that list to you, you understood that he had contacted you
with regard to the recovery of those items; is that correct?
A Yes.
18
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Q Did you then. encourage Dr. Shapiro to make a
claim against the Estate?
A Well, yes, in that he had asked me what --
what I could do for him and to assist in this matter. And I
said, I really -- and he had some other concerns also that I
couldn't -- I couldn't do anything in regard to those. But
if he felt I had some obligation he should file a claim and
that that would at least provide a center for it to be
resolved somehow. So to that extent, yes, I did suggest it.
He thought he had a claim he should file.
Q When -- referring to that list and your
recollection of your walkthroughs, are you aware of items
that were returned to Harvey Shapiro that had been in the
house?
A That were returned?
Q Yes.
A The only ones I'm aware of are what we
returned to him that day, we being Linda and I went through
the house with him. And we picked up items.
Q Are you aware of any items now that -- that
are his that are at the house or the property?
A There is a -- a treadmill which we -- which
we identified at the time but did not move it at that time.
Dr. Shapiro was on crutches, so he couldn't be of much
assistance. And I didn't -- we drove out in my SUV but
19
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
l8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
didn't have room for large items. So we just set that
aside. Since that time in cleaning up, Linda found clothing
not her father's size, men's clothing not her father's size.
So she assumes that they may be Dr. Shapiro's. That is all
that I'm aware of.
Q And did -- as Executor, you would be willing
to return those to Dr. Shapiro?
A Certainly, yes.
Q Are you aware of any time that the police
have been contacted with regard to items removed from the
Estate?
A With regard to items?
Q Any items removed from the Estate property?
A No, I don't think so.
MR. BOSWELL: I have no other questions at
this time.
THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Yahn.
CROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. YARN:
Q Good morning, Mr. Frey. I'm Neil Yahn on
behalf of the -- of Alice Phillips. Could I just clarify a
few things for the record? You referenced a Linda Stull.
Just for the record, could you clarify who that party is?
A Certainly. I'm sorry. Linda Stull is the
20
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
21
2
3
4
5
6
i
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A Yes, I believe so.
Q And if you could, go down to the very first
paragraph. It's directed to you and says, In Re: Illegally
held belongings, does it not?
A Yes, it does.
Q And it's directed to you as the Executor of
the Estate of L.B. Phillips, correct?
A Yes, it is.
Q Is Dr. Shapiro an intestate heir under the
Estate of L.B. Phillips?
A No.
Q Is he beneficiary under the Estate of L.B.
Phillips?
A No, he is not.
Q Within any testamentary document was
Dr. Harry Shapiro named?
A No.
Q It appears to be that Dr. Shaprro then writes
this to confirm you as the Executor for the Estate of L.B.
Phillips that a great number of my belongings have been
wrongly seized from me and are being illegally held 93 Encks
Mill Road, Carlisle, the home of the late L.B. Phillips. I
would like to just for backdrop clarify who actually was in
possession of the property pursuant to a court order at the
time of this letter?
22
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A Alice Phillips.
Q Alice Phillips was, and that was pursuant to
an order of this Court that provides that Miss Phillips
would stay on the residence and what I will define as the
curtilage you referenced earlier, correct?
A Yes.
Q And what curtilage was that specifically
pursuant to that order?
A Well -- and there are exhibits filed -- but
if you view the property, there is -- it's a farm in large
part acreage wise. But in the center of that acreage is
finished residential area. It's for the most part setoff by
a white fence that surrounds it and the house and a two-unit
rental property in that residential area as well as
landscaping.
Q And that order from this Court stems from
litigation surrounding certain testamentary documents and a
prenuptial agreement between the decedent, L.B. Phillips,
and Miss Phillips, correct?
A Yes.
Q In fact, that order was merely a stay pending
a resolution of that matter between Mr. Phillips and the
Estate -- Miss Phillips and the Estate?
A I believe that's correct, yes.
Q And so in fact, during the period the Estate
23
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
I8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
actually wasn't in ownership of the property pending the
period what I'll call adjudication of the matter before the
Court?
A That's -- certainly not in possession. That
we -- neither I nor any of the heirs crossed over that fence
unless it was -- I can recall one instance at your request
and then otherwise, in October of 2008.
Q Okay. When was the first time that
Dr. Shapiro contacted you about his personal property?
A Well, from this letter I would have to sa:~ it
was before October 23rd if that's a correct date. My
recollection it was after -- well, yes, it was after the
settlement agreement had been agreed to. And I don't
remember that date. And I believe it was after our hearing
that confirmed that agreement, but there's a possibility it
could have been been before that but not much before that.
Q And how did Dr. Shapiro introduce himself to
you?
A He left a phone message which I did not
return because I had concerns. If you may recall, issues of
discovery were at one point important in this matter; and I
did not want to have communications that might be thought of
as crossing the discovery line. But he identified himself.
i think the words were the infamous Harvey Shapiro I think
was how he introduced r~imself.
24
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
And -- to be honest, I didn't recognize the
name because I did not know him at that time. But
subsequently, there was either another contact which I
believe also was a voice mail in which he stated concerns of
property being removed from the residence. And at that
point, I felt I needed to contact him because that was a
concern of mine as Executor.
Q And during the course of that conversation --
well, tell me about that conversation and contact.
A Well, Dr. Shapiro said that he had been
living at the property and that he was no longer there, that
the relationship between he and Alice -- I don't want to pu.t
any special inference on relationship -- just that they were
no longer on friendly terms, that it was an adversarial one
at that point. And he -- ask further. I don't know what
else you want to know.
Q If you could, I'm going to direct you back t.o
the letter for a moment.
A Certainly.
Q And it provides this list, and you'll see it
begins on important this list is very incomplete from Ray
K's house. Do you know who Ray K is?
A I do not know personally, only what
Dr. Shapiro told me.
Q And what did he tell you?
25
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A Well, he told me that I believe that he was a
friend of Alice's I think in the landscaping business and
had some -- they had somehow become acquainted and that
Dr. Shapiro knew him from his time when they -- when he
resided there at the property.
Q Okay. And then it further states from the
office area. Do you know what he's referencing there? I'm
on the first page of --
A Yes. Thank you. Yes. A part of the house
but set off on the -- if you're looking at the front door on
the right-hand side was an office that also had a separate
entrance and was used when Mr. Phillips was alive for
managing the rental properties. And he had an employee that
had her desk and computer there.
Q Okay. And earlier you referenced that
Dr. Shapiro actually came over and did remove some items; is
that correct?
A Yes.
Q Do you recall specifically any of these items
on this list that he removed? And please take your time to
examine the document.
A Well, third item on the page 2 books in LB's
office. I know he did pick up a few books that he found one
or two, but I don't think there was any large number. I
can't really tell you I see anything else that jogged a
26
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
memory for me.
Q At that point, do you recall if Dr. Shapiro
created a list of the items he removed that day?
A I believe that's what he did, yes.
Q He did create a list? I'll restate the
question. The day that Dr. Shapiro removed items from the
house, did he create a list of the items he removed?
A Not while we were there, no. I received the
list later. And my recollection is this is -- your Exhibit
1, Respondent Exhibit 1 is that list.
MR. FALLER: He misunderstands. He is asking
did he make a list of what he took with him.
THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. A list of what he
took, no. No. I did not see a list of what was taken.
BY MR. YARN:
Q Okay. Nor aia ne proviae you wiLii clue:
A No.
Q Thank you. Okay. I'm going to direct your
attention to the second page. And it says on page 2
Phillipsl2l and references from Miss Lucy's murder room.
A Yes.
Q Could you please describe for us what
Miss Lucy's murder room is if you have any knowledge?
A Well, my -- my understanding from -- from
speaking with Dr. Shapiro is that one cf the things that he
27
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
was told while he was living there was that the decedent. had
his first wife killed medically somehow. His first wife was
named Lucy, and she had been ill for a considerable period
of time.
And because of her illness, a room had sort
of been set up for her on the first floor behind the kitchen
area. And that I believe probably is where she eventually
did pass away, and I think that's the room he's referring
to.
Q Okay. Do you have any other foundation of
the belief of that sentence?
A No.
Q And what is your understanding? Where did
you come about to hear that information by way of the
Miss Lucy murd er room?
A From Dr. Shapiro.
Q And Dr. Shapiro communicated that to you in
the context of your initial conversation?
A Yes.
Q And what -- what if anything did he tell you
or where did h e tell you he learned that information from?
A He told me he learned it from -- from Alice.
Q From Miss Phillips?
A Yes.
Q Were you aware of the patient/client
28
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
relationship bind between Dr. Shapiro and Miss Phillips?
A Yes.
Q And did he advise you that he was perhaps --
strike that. What else, if anything, did Dr. Shapiro
communicate to you with regard to Miss Phillips'
confidential communications to him?
A Weil, there was probably a number of things
made which I don't remember anymore. One that for personal
reasons I do remember is that he said that Miss Phillips
said that the decedent had my sister murdered. My sister
died when she was 14; and -- and I think Dr. Shapiro
believed that.
And I remember discussing with him I was
pretty sure that wasn't the case because I had read her
autopsy and she died of cancer. But there are -- there are
a number of other statements of murders and criminal
activity I think by the decedent during his lifetime.
Q By the decedent that Dr. Shapiro was
communicating to you that he learned from Miss Phillips?
A Yes.
Q Are you ware of a certain cause of action
currently against Dr. Shapiro in the Dauphin County Court of
Common Pleas?
A Not before your statements this morning.
Q If you could turn to the third page date
29
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
stamped Phillipsl22? If you could, there's a reference to a
trailer licensed to me and it says from the driveway?
A Yes.
Q Is there a trailer there today?
A No.
Q I just want to confirm again that Dr. Shapiro
is not a intestate or testate heir under the Estate of L.B.
Phillips, correct?
A That is certainly my understanding, yes.
NIlZ. YARN: We have nothing further, Your
Honor?
THE COURT: Do you have any questions for
your client?
MR. FALLER: Just briefly.
CROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. FALLER:
Q Mr. Frey, when you did learn and got that
letter, did -- was that communicated to Mr. Yahn whose
client was in possession of the property at that time?
A Yes, it was. I don't think it was immediate,
and I don't remember what the time frame was. But= I think
it was part of the communications we did have concerning
personal property that I felt was -- was Estate property. I
think was included in that.
30
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. FALLER: I don't have anything else.
THE COURT: Any redirect?
NHt. BOSWELL: Yes, briefly, Your Honor.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. BOSWELL:
Q With regard to the mentioned trailer, are --
are you aware of, well, that Harvey Shapiro did claim there
was a trailer there on the property?
A Yes.
Q And do you have a recollection of ever seeing
that trailer there?
A No, I don't. Although it's -- as I said, I
did not go into the -- the residential area; and it's fairly
well treed along that fence line. So it's not easy to see,
and there are buildings that could have concealed it. But
no, I do not recall seeing it.
Q As I recall your testimony, there is no
trailer there today?
A That is correct.
Q In the conversations that you had testified
as to the contact made by Harvey Shapiro, the first contact
made, do you recall the date when that contact was made?
A No, only that I can somewhat place the date
because of what I recall of the message in that I believe
31
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
there was some reference to his knowledge of a settlement
agreement. So it would have been after that settlement
agreement was reached.
What I'm not clear of is whether it was
before or after -- I think I initially testified I thought
it was after the October hearing in New Bloomfield.
Certainly my first communication would have been after that
time.
There may have been a message before that
time; and the reason I'm thinking about this is as said
before, I had concerns about talking with anyone that might
overstep discovery issues and I certainly would not have had
any communication with him before we had that hearing where
Judge Rehkamp had confirmed the order of settlement. But it
is possible he could have called me before then. I'm not
sure, but it be would have been somewhere in that October
2008 time frame.
Q But you did go through the property with
Linda Stull prior to that hearing?
A No. No. I went through that a week to two
weeks after that hearing.
Q And at that hearing, did items of personal
property and -- claimed by Alice Phillips and that was
claimed by the Estate be subject or part of that hearing?
A We didn't -- it's my recollection we dial not
32
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
get into any details on that other than that jurisdiction
would be retained to resolve any issues regarding personal
property.
Q But it is your recollection that at the
hearing that there was a dispute with regard to personal
property items?
A Well, I think there was at least a concern on
my part and on the part of the children that as part cf the
moving from the residence there could be issues of what
should be allowed to go and what should not be allowed to
go.
Q And is it that concern that prompted your
walkthrough with Linda Stull who is one of the children as
-- as to a concern or claim that she may have with regard to
items that should be retained by the Estate?
A Yes. Yes.
Q And thereafter when you had the second
walkthrough, was Harvey Shapiro with you at that time and
Linda Stull?
A Yes. It was -- it was -- the purpose of that
walkthrough was really I think mainly as a courtesy for
Dr. Shapiro to allow him to see what was there and retrieve
what he thought was his that we did not have any dispute
regarding.
Q And at that hearing, he did express to you
33
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that those items were -- were not there that he had left
there?
A Yes. He -- he was rather emphatic that there
were a lot of things that were missing.
Q And then did Linda Stull also tell you that
items were missing that had been there before that were
Estate items?
A Yes.
Q And were those Estate items as to which she
had asserted claims as one of the children?
A Well, not formally. She has not filed any
claim. But yes, she has certainly asserted that there are
there -- they should be Estate items and not the property of
Miss Phillips.
Q And these are family items that she had an
attachment or sentimental attachment to; is that correct?
A A number of them are, yes.
Ngt. BOSWELL: No other questions. Thank you.
THE COURT: Do you have anything else?
MR. YARN: Your Honor, the only thing I ask
is that we reserve our rights to ask questions of this
witness as it relates to tangible personal property that
we're not waiving that right between the Estate.
THE COURT: All right.
NHt. YARN: Nothing further.
34
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
THE COURT: You may step down, sir. Next
witness.
MR. BOSWELL: Like to call Linda Stull
briefly.
THE COURT: Okay.
LINDA STULL,
having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. BOSWELL:
Q Good morning, Miss Stull. Am I saying your
name correctly?
A Yes.
Q Okay.
yourself?
Thank you. Would you please identify
A My name is Linda Stull, and L.B. Phillips wasl
my father.
Q And when did you come to learn that -- know
Harvey Shapiro. When did you first meet him?
A I didn't meet him until like Mr. Frey said
after we had been in New Bloomfield and after he -- he had
originally talked to Mr. Frey and then had placed a call to
me.
Q Did you talk to Harvey Shapiro by telephone
or any other - - or any person prior. to your walkthrough of
35
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the property in October?
A The walkthrough with Harvey?
Q No, with your first walkthrough with
Mr. Frey?
A The first walkthrough we went through with --
all the attorneys went through. That was before Alice left.
The second one I was able to go through with all of the
attorneys after she left, and it was the third trip through
that Mr. Shapiro had asked if he could retrieve any of his
personal things. That's when when we went through.
Q At the first or second walkthrough, Harvey
Shapiro was not present, correct?
A No.
Q In the first walkthrough, were you aware of
any property at the residence or the curtilage as we call it
property that belonged to Harvey Shapiro?
Q Actually at that point in time when we went.
through, it was -- it was so hard on me to see the condition
of the property that I wasn't thinking clearly. But I can
remember Mr. Frey and one of the other attorneys --
actually, I think it was Mr. Yahn -- saying, well, treat must
be the pool table. I did not know -- it was a -- a pool
table that had the legs removed.
And I remember looking across from that and
there were many pictures that were piled up, and they did
36
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
not look like pictures my parents would have liked. And I
don't believe they would have been pictures that Alice would
have understood. They were more of an artsy type, and I
just assumed that maybe they could have been Mr. Shapiro's.
But I have -- I have no knowledge of that.
Q In the second walkthrough, did any of that
change? Did you have more knowledge as to what might belong
to Mr. Shapiro at that time?
A I think the only thing that was there was a
dog training book. I think there was a pair of shorts that
we saw that he said were his, and I think he took those
home. And there was a -- a treadmill.
Q This would have been at the walkthrough that
you were with Mr. Frey prior -- not the walkthrough when you
were with Harvey Shapiro present. You testified there were
three walkthroughs?
A Three walkthroughs and Mr. Shapiro was the
third.
Q In the second walkthrough, did you have more
knowledge as to items that belonged to Harvey Shapiro?
A No, I did not.
Q And the second walkthrough, did you also see
the -- the pictures or the paintings and items you
testified?
A No. No.
37
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Q Was there a difference in the quantity of
personal property on the site between the second walkthrough
and the third walkthrough when Harvey Shapiro was present?
A The second walkthrough would have been after
Alice had moved. And I -- I didn't see any difference
between that time and the time that Mr. Shapiro came
through, no.
Q So that time -- was the amount of personal
property moved significant? I'm trying to understand. The
first time you went through, were there a significant number
of personal property items on site? And you're indicating
ves?
A You mean our property or Mr. Shapiro's?
Q Either. Either, both, or --
A The only thing I recollect the first time
were pictures, and I don't know if they were his and a pool
table. The second time, I didn't see the pictures or the
pool table. There were just -- it was just too hard on me
to see what I was seeing.
Q I understand.
A And -- and when we took Mr. Shapiro, the only
thing that I think was a dog training book -- I mean,
everything else was gore that he said could have been his,
believe, other than that and the treadmill.
Q And the second walkthrough was after the
38
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
hearing in New Bloomfield?
A Yes.
Q Okay. And --
A It was after Alice was out; and that was
after the -- yes, I think she moved the very same day or
next day after the heari_r~g.
Q Is it your recollection of that time period
that there was a disagreement with regard to personal
property items that the Estate claimed and perhaps Alice was
claiming?
A Yes, there was.
Q And is it your recollection when you went
through the second time at the hearing that the items that
belonged to the Estate were gone?
A That's true.
Q Do you recall in any of the walkthroughs the
existence of a trailer on property?
A I had seen the trailer on the property. I
was the only one permitted on the outskirts. There was a
court order we weren't even allowed on the other property
other than myself. And I would take my brother so that I
had proof of anything that went on because I managed the
townhouses. And we had go to the warehouse for the
supplies; and I did -- I could see early on there had been a
trailer there. But I don't know whose trailer it was.
39
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Q Do you have any recollection the trailer
belonged to the Estate?
A No.
Q So would your answer then be that the trailer
-- you don't believe of the trailer belonged to the Estate;
is that correct?
A I'm sure that we did not have -- all of our
trailers are much larger; and they were all locked in the
barn.
Q Is -- now to your knowledge, does the Estate
still have a claim with regard to personal property items
that the Estate no longer has?
A I would have to ask Rob if there's a -- I
know that I'm claiming that there are personal things that
would have been my parents that are not there; but I don't
think there's anything in writing. There's no claim in
writing.
Q You would agree with the Executor you've
communicated your concern with regard to personal property
items that belonged to your parents --
A Right.
Q -- that are no longer present?
A Yes.
MR. BOSWELL: Thank you.
MR. YARN: TrJe have nothing for this witness,
40
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1 ?_
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Your Honor, provided we're reserving our right.
THE COURT: Okay. Very good.
NHt. FALLER: Nothing, Your Honor.
THE COURT: You may step down, ma'am. Okay.
NIlZ. BOSWELL: Call Harvey Shapiro.
HARVEY SHAPIRO,
having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY NH2 . BOSWELL
Q Would you please identify who you are?
A Harvey Shapiro. I reside at 8 Oak Lane
Drive, Carlisle, Pennsylvania.
Q At one time, did you reside at 93 Encks Mill
Road, Carlisle?
A Yes.
Q And to your knowledge, who owned that
property?
A The Estate of L.B. Phillips.
Q Did you at -- when you moved to the property,
did you take any personal property that belonged to you
there to that property?
A Yes, quite a bit.
Q You're aware of two lists that have been
reviewed by Mr. Frey, correct?
41
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A Yes.
Q The list that was identified as Respondent's
No. 1 dated October 23, 2008, did you fashion that letter
and the list?
A Yes, I did.
Q When did you do that?
A I would have done that at the time that --
the date on the list.
Q Did you send that to Mr. Frey at that time?
A Yes, I did by mail.
Q And was that mail returned to you?
A No.
Q Was that list then later faxed to Mr. Frey?
A I believe -- I believe it was. I don't
recall precisely.
Q Do you recall why it was later faxed?
A No, I don't recall that. I don't recall, but
I would have mailed. It was very important to me obviously.
Q Why was it important for you to mail it at
that time?
A I wanted him to have an original copy with my
original signature of the letter which was composed by a
nonlawyer.
Q At that -- at that time -- and you identified
that as October 23?
42
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A I'm not sure it was mailed that day. That's
when it was composed. It may have been mailed --
Q Is there any particular reason or anything
that you recollect about that date or time period as to why
it was important to mail him a letter at that time as
opposed to a month later or two months later?
A Yes. I spoke with Mr. Frey. My recollection
of the time is a bit different from his. It would have been
in early October, early October to mid at the latest. This
was after -- and it hasn't come up in the hearing yet -- an
attempt I made to recover my property with Mrs. Phillips'
permission.
But I was not allowed to recover very much of
it. I can explain that to the Court. That was on 9-27
realizing that my property would not be returned to me or at
least believing so, I contacted Mr. Frey I believe i.n the
first 10 days or 15 of October.
At that time, he recommended to me that I
file against the Estate, which was a rather direct
recommendation. I did ask him what if anything he could do
to help me thinking he could do nothing, and it never
occurred to me to file against the Estate.
I had never heard of such a thing. I'm not
an attorney. But he directly I might almost say strongly
recommended that. At that time, as now I suppose but much
43
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
more then, conflicts were going on and I was able to provide
him with information that could be useful I felt. And
that's why I call him to help him. But in the end --
Q Now you had testified -- you had just
mentioned with regard to conflicts. What conflicts and at
what time? This was in early October; is that correct,
early October 2008?
A Yes. There were extensive -- there had been
extensive conflicts over the prenuptial agreement; and they
had extended over several years as I'm sure ,the Colzrt i.s
aware. There was a -- Mr. Frey had -- there was property in
the house that was not marital property that I believed
Miss Phillips was going to remove. I realize this is not
about her or who removed what, but I felt I could be of
assistanr_e with reference to that property especially --
Q Were you believing at that time that was
Estate property?
A Yes, I did believe that, many, many boxes as
it turned out of valuable glassware, collector glass.
Q And was that collection of glassware
eventually given to the Estate or placed in the possession
of the Estate through Mr. Frey?
A I'm sorry. Placed in possession of the
Estate by Mr. Frey? I didn't quite understand that.
Q Or to Mr. Frey, Mr_. Frey being the Estate?
44
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A When I was last at the Estate --
Q When was that?
A -- the third walkthrough that Mrs. Stull and
Mr. Frey have referred to, there were in the garage many
boxes sealed, apparently neatly packed boxes; and there had.
to be 15, probably 20, stacked 3 deep along the wall.
Mr. Frey told me that that was the glassware
which previously had been in display cabinets througho~.~t the
house and on -- I may not be using the term correctly --
valances above windows. All throughout the house was this
so-called amethyst glass that is valuable collector w~iich
Mr. Phillips and his first wife had collected.
Q Is it your understanding that --
A My understanding at that time was treat it had
been removed in those boxes and subsequently returned.
That's what Mr. Frey told me.
Q And with your conversation witr~ Mr. Frey, is
it your understanding that Mr. Frey was trying to obtain
possession of that collection?
A Very much so and other times.
Q As Estate property?
A Absolutely. Yes, sir.
MR. YARN: Your Honor, I would like to
object. We are here on behalf's the Claimant's claim with
regard to his property. He's providing testimony with
45
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
regards to a matter that's currently not, as I understand
it, before this Court.
THE COURT: That's right. Let's get to his
claim, please.
BY Ngt . BOSWELL
Q And the boxes in the garage were not your
property, correct?
A Correct.
Q When did you -- when you contacted Mr. Frey
then, had you removed -- had you moved from 19 Encks Mill
Road?
A Yes, as of September 8 -- well, September
9th.
Q So in your discussion with Mr. Frey with
regard to the Estate property, did you also tell him that
you wanted to recover your property?
A Yes. Yes. I would have mentioned that of
course. I wanted to. I didn't see how, but I wanted to of
course.
Q And in those conversations with him at that
time, you learned that the Estate had dispute with regard to
personal property also; is that correct?
A Yes. I may have known it -- forgive me for
pausing. I'm trying to recall. There were a number of
items that Mrs. Phillips claimed they could legally take and
46
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
she had -- again, it's not about her. But she had told me
that they were in contest, that the Estate might not agree
with her but as far as she was concerned she would take
them.
Q I'm not asking you questions with regard to
those items. In your conversation with Mr. Frey, you knew
there was a dispute over disagreements with regard to
personal property?
A Yes. Yes.
Q Are you aware that Mr. Frey then went through
the property with Linda Stull before your walkthrough the
property in November?
A Yes, I am, for it was Mr. Frey who called me
after the second walkthrough and said, I have some bad news
for you.
Q What did he tell you?
A And the news was your thing -- your
possessions are not here anymore. He might have said some
of them -- some of them might be here but the bulk of what
you claim is yours is no longer here.
Q And this is -- this is before your
walkthrough with him, correct?
A Yes, my walkthrough with him was to see if
anything of mine remained.
Q So it's your belief that he was in possession
47
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of this letter, the first letter was Respondents No. 1 prior
to that second walkthrough; is that correct?
A Absolutely because I wrote my broke my foot
I believe, on November 2nd, certainly early November. And I
was, as he said, on crutches at the time of that
walkthrough.
Q Thereafter in November when you went through
the property with Mr. Frey, you were on crutches?
A Yes.
Q And did you confirm that the items that you
had listed in the Respondent's No. 1 which was the October
23 letter were not there?
A Yes. The October 23 letter was composed
based on that walk -- that -- what was there. Let me see if
I can remember. The October 23 letter was composed --
NHt. BOSWELL: Your Honor, may I show him the
letter?
THE COURT: Yes.
THE WITNESS: That's not quite right. Let me
correct that. It was -- it was composed based on what --
let me explain this. On September 27th with permission of
Mrs. Phillips and in an arrangement also confirmed or
supported by Mr. Yahn and my then attorney, a rainy Saturday
I rented a U-Haul truck and had two gentlemen to help me
because Mrs. Phillips and mister -- as I understood it
48
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
through my attorney then, Mr. Yahn and my then attorney had
agreed that I could pick up all my belongings.
I rented a large U-Haul truck and went there.
To my surprise or at least I was un -- I was not allowed in
the house. Neither I nor those gentlemen helping me nor my
attorney were allowed in the two garages. The -- the
gentlemen with me were allowed to pick up a number of items;
but they were, in general, the less valuable ones.
BY NBt . BOSWELL
Q Are those items on this list? Are those
items you picked up on this list?
A No. No. Of course, they are not on the
list.
Q Does this recollect -- this list is your list
of those things that had not yet been recovered at tre end
of September?
A Yes. And the reason -- the reason they
weren't recovered is that Mrs. Phillips after an hour or so
of this loading the truck said she had somewhere to go and
the effort would have to be continued on another day.
Mr. Yahn, my attorney told me, was planning to be there.
But in the end he assigned -- and forgive me. I'm not an
attorney -- any legal oversight of that day to my then
attorney.
Q You then notified Mr. Frey?
49
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A That again the turning point I thought. I
realized then I was in an adversarial relationship although
there had been hints if it before certainly. And at that
point, I did call Mr. Frey to try to be of assistance to him
because I realized that for a long period of time I fe]_t I
had been mistreated -- again, it's not about that time -- or
misrepresented or told untruths.
Q You then composed, a second list, correct?
A Yes, I did.
Q Is that list -- this was stipulated as part
of your claim?
A Yes.
Q Could you identify that, please?
A Yes, that's the second list. I remembered
more items I did not remember on the first list, and I added
them.
Q And had any of those items been recovered
since that time? And I asked you to identify what is that
time.
A What is what time? I'm sorry.
Q When did you compose the second list?
A In February of '09. It' s dated February 11th
of '09.
Q Did you send that to Mr. Frey?
A Yes, I did.
50
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Q Did you recover any of those items from
Mr. Frey?
A Not frcm Mr. Frey. I have recovered one item
for reasons I don't understand.
Q What item did you recover?
A The very first item, the antique disr~lay
table that my grandmother bought in France in 1906. It was
returned through Mr. Yahn's office for reasons that I don't
understand. I don't know why it was returned, but it was.
And I have it now.
Q Now, you made a claim against the Estate for
return of the items?
A Or compensation although some of the items
could never be compensated for. I mean, they're
irreplaceable. No money can make up for them.
Q What items are you referring to now?
A My mother is a very recognized artist in
Washington. She's been an artist for 70 years. She's 97.
My grandmother is -- her mother is a recognized artist.
Boh of their works are in museums, and the paintings that
Mrs. Stull referred to and perhaps some sculptures as well
in bronze were among the items that were there, many of
them. And they cannot be replaced obviously.
Q Do they have a value? Are you aware of the
value?
51
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
l2
13
14
15
16
,~
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A No. I am not an art connoisseur or
evaluator. But I know that my mother's work is in her
lifetime she has probably sold at least $50,000 worth of
art. She's had many shows.
MR. YARN: Your Honor, I would like to
object. He's speculating. He's not an art expert.
THE COURT: I understand.
NIlZ. GILROY: May I interrupt, Judge, and come
in?
THE COURT: Yes, you may.
BY MR. BOSWELL:
Q When these items were at 93 Encks Mill
Road -- I understand these items that you are claiming were
definitely at -- on -- at 93 Encks Mill Road, correct?
A Absolutely.
MR. YARN: Your Honor, I'm going to object.
There's been nothing to provide documentation or otherwise
other than -- that those items were specifically at the
property. He gave a general reference to painting, but no
specific painting has been identified.
Ngt. BOSWELL: Your Honor, we can go through
each of the items and ask if they were on the property. But
my understanding is and -- could I ask just a general
question and maybe we can go from there?
THE COURT: Go ahead.
52
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
BY MR. BOSWELL:
Q In your Respondent's Exhibit 1 which was the
October 23 item, to your recollection when you -- you lived
at 93 Encks Mill Road, correct?
A Yes, I did.
Q Were all of those items on that site when you
lived there?
A Yes.
Q Were those items there when you left that
property?
A They were.
Q When did you leave that property?
A September 9th, 2008.
Q With regard to Claimant's No. 1 which is the
revised list --
A That's the revised list?
Q The revised list, your Claimant's No. 1, the
revised list in February --
A Yes. If that's -- yes. I'm sorry. Go
ahead. The February '09 list.
Q Did you -- when you lived at the property,
did you take those items to 93 Encks Mill Road? Were those
-- in other words, were those items also at 93 Encks Mill
Road?
A All of them except the first, the table.
53
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
I5
I6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
That I had left with -- not for safekeeping but safer than I
felt the apartment I lived in at the time -- this was before
I moved to Encks Mill Road --
Q But that table is not part of your claim?
A Not anymore. It has been returned to me, I
I mean, it's on the list; but it's been returned much later,
a couple of months ago.
Q Now the revised list is somewhat duplicative
cf the earlier list; is that correct?
A Very much so. But there are some items that
are not. They were added that I remembered later. There
was a great deal there.
Q Does the revised list include the items that
were on the first list?
A Oh, yeah. Yes, it does.
Q Now, were the items on the revised list to
your knowledge ors the property at 93 Encks Mill Rcad?
A Yes.
Q Were those items there when you left the
property in September of 2008?
A Yes.
Q As to those --
A Again, the -- the table is not.
Q As to everything except the table, were any
of those items on the revised list, which is Claimant's No.
54
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1, returned to you?
A No.
Q And those are the items that -- that are the
items of your claim today; is that correct?
A Yes.
Q When you were a resident at 93 Encks Mill.
Road, did you have any of those items insured?
A Not as such. I had -- no, I didn't. I have
renter's insurance where I lived before. No, I didn't. I
didn't.
Q The artwork itself and the sculpture that you
testified to, you did not have a rider or anything with
regard to insurance for those items; is that correct?
A Yes, that is. I'm afraid I'm a bit less than
businesslike in that.
Q When did Mr. Frey first tell you to make a
claim against the Estate?
A It would have been obviously after he
discovered that the items were missing; and through him, I
discovered that. And he discovered it in the second
walkthrough which if my recollection -- if there's testimony
definitely pinning down the time of the second walkthrough,
I will revise my memory of when I spoke with him.
But it would have been -- he called me and
told me it was missing while he was at the Estate and the
55
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2~
J
second walkthrough. It would have been shortly after that,
probably within a week after that when I recovered from the
shock I would have -- well, it wasn't a shock. Really, it
wasn't; but I would have spoken to him shortly after that.
Q When again Linda Stull aware of any items
that may have -- that did belong to you?
A Well, I suppose the technical answer would be
in the first walkthrough when she saw the pool table and --
the pool table and other items that I believe she would have
recognized as not part of the Estate or belonging to her
father. But when did she communicate with me or --
Q Well, when did she have a discussion with you
or when did you talk to her at any time during that time
period with regard to items that belonged to you?
A It would have been -- she called me -- I was
driving to work. Let me think. It would have been --
that's difficult. It would have been in October, certainly
obviously before the third walkthrough when I was present.
It probably again the middle or the second
half, early in the second half of October she called me and
I called her right back. She left a message, but I called
her right back.
Q Did you then talk to her?
A Yes.
Q And did you discuss your personal property
56
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
items?
A Yes. And she discussed similar
correspondence -- items of concern to her.
Q That were what she testified to as the Estate
items of family and memorabilia?
A And missing, I remember she mentioned these
were items of tremendous and nostalgic meaning to he r_. She
mentioned a cradle, specifically a cradle.
MR. BOSWELL: I have no other questions at
this time, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Mr. Yahn.
MR. YARN: Your Honor, may I have a moment
please?
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. YARN: Thank you. We're all set.
THE COURT: Go ahead.
CROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. YARN:
Q Good morning, Dr. Shapiro. I'm Neil Yahn ors
behalf of Alice Phillips.
A Good morning.
Q Dr. Shapiro, you're familiar with Alice
Phillips, are you not?
A Yes.
57
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Q When did you first meet Miss Phillips?
A I first spoke with her in late October of
2006.
Q Earlier you had referenced 93 Encks Mill
Road. When did you specifically move into 93 Encks Mill
Road?
A March 31st, 2008.
Q And when you moved in, these items you allege
are missing are they reflected in Respondent Exhibit 2 --
Respondent's Exhibit 1 you have in your possession?
MR. BOSWELL: Claimant's No. 1?
BY MR. YARN:
Q No. Respondents. The letter dated at or
about October 2008 directed to Attorney Frey?
A I'm sorry. Are they reflected in that
letter?
Q Correct. When you moved in, are those the
items you brought with you?
A They did not all arrive at that time. I
mean, many of them did; but some of them were moved there
later. But they were all there when the letter again
written.
Q Prior to that, where were you residing?
A In Harrisburg.
Q Where in Harrisburg?
58
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A In an apartment. I'm don't remember the name
of the development. Anyway, it was Country Club Road. It's
a -- it's a development. It's an apartment complex and
housing complex off of -- my goodness. My memory is failing
me. But at any rate, it's a well known one off of tTnion
Deposit Road, off of Union Deposit Road.
Q And how long did you reside there?
A One year.
Q You referenced the first time you met
Miss Phillips to be October of 2006. Under what auspices
did you meet her?
A Under the auspices of Mr. Connelly, Mr. Yahn
as filtered through Dr. Shienvold.
Q So as an employee of Dr. Shienvold, you met
with her as a psychiatrist?
A My initial contact again I spoke with her as
Dr. Shienvold told me that it was an emergency, that your
office had contacted him, and would I please step intc the
emergency and help. And I had leave, so I had to drive to
Philadelphia with my family. So I spoke with her on the
phone. That's why I say I didn't meet her that day.
Q You ultimately diagnosed Miss Phillips, did
you not, with regards to her psychiatric care?
A Yes.
Q And in fact, ycu diagnosed her with
59
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I1
I2
13
14
15
16
17
I8
I9
20
21
22
23
24
25
depression, did you not?
A I believe so.
Q And you in fact diagnosed with her with IQ at
or about a fourth grader, did you not?
MR. BOSWELL: Your Honor, I object. I don't
understand what -- the basis. I'd like to have an offer as
to how his diagnosis has anything to do about claim for
personal property.
MR. YARN: Your Honcr, Dr. Shapiro is a
psychiatrist, a licensed medical professional within the
Commonwealth. If he's ultimately allowing his chattel to
stay with someone who he has also then provided arl
assessment of a fourth grade education, ultimately I'm
providing a nexus to how this matter relates to the Da~zphi.n
County Court matter.
THE COURT: I'll give you some leeway. Do
you want to answer the question, please?
THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honor. When I first
interviewed Mrs. Phillips, I wrote that she had above
average intelligence. To my shame, I yielded to pressure by
-- by Dr. Shienvold, his son, and yourself and Mr. Connelly.
Ycu may recall meeting in Dr. Shienvold's office --
MR. YARN: I'm going to move to strike that
as unresponsive.
60
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
BY MR. YARN:
Q The question again, did you diagnosis
Miss Phillips with an IQ of that of a fourth grader, yes or
no?
A A fourth grader could have a high. IQ. I
hedged because I didn't -- she -- I was under -- put under
pressure by yourself, Mr. Connelly, and Dr. Shienvold
because they wanted her and said that she was retarded. I
-- I hedged because she does have -- at that time I believed
she had a fourth grade education. But she is of well-above
average intelligence. Yes, I did write that and to my
regret and shame.
Q And in fact, Miss Phillips again under your
care for a period of a year and a half to two years, again
she not?
A She was under my care until August of 2007,
not 2008. August of 2007.
Q And at that point, she was no longer under
your care; is that correct?
A At that point, I turned her -- I wrote a
letter and turned her care over to another physician.
Q You wrote prescriptions on behalf of
Miss Phillips, did you not?
A Yes.
Q Including prescriptions for depression?
61
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A Yes.
Q Including prescriptions for Attention Deficit
Disorder?
A Yes.
Ngt. YARN: May I approach, Your Honor?
THE COURT: Yes.
BY Ngt . YARN
Q If you would take a moment to examine that
document?
Ngt. BOSWELL: Do you have another copy of
that, sir?
MR. YARN: I'm sorry. I do not.
BY MR. YARN:
Q Do you recognize that document, Dr. Shapiro?
A Yes, I do.
Q And how do you recognize it?
A On date entered, 9-11-07, Alice had --
actually, it would have been, yes, 9-11-07, Alice Phillips
contacted me because she felt very ill. I implored her to
seek medical care from the doctor I referred her to. She
was often resistant to medical care. I'm talking physical
medical care.
But she did on my treaty go to that doctor
who immediately put her in the hospital at Holy Spirit. I
don't remember if I called her there or she called me, but
62
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
she asked me to come over to the hospital. She said I was
the only person she could trust.
And over -- and she said she wanted to
dictate a will. And so I sat there for a brig while and
took this at her dictation. At the end of it over my firm
and repeated protestations, she made me an heir to -- to
some of her estate. I didn't want to do it.
The reason she did it she said again that
only I understood the 11 people -- the problems of the 11
people who were totally dependent upon her because of
.retardation, because of severe end stage multiple sclerosis,
because of drug abuse, because of youth, because of mutism,
and because of severe ADD and because of autism.
She wanted me to take responsibility for
those people, and she told me that if she died the next day
in the procedure which she told me again mandatory, a
pneocardiac cath, I was the only person she trusted to be
responsible for those people.
Q Okay. So you acknowledge she continued to
view you in a confidential, trusted relationship'?
A Yes.
Q And that's in or about September of 2007?
A Yes. That's the date. That's the date on --
on this.
Q Again, and this is your handwriting, correct?I
63
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A Yes, it is.
Q With the exception of it appears to be
written in the margin. or the column rather Alice Phillips
9-12-2007. Is that her signature to the best of your
knowledge.
A It is. And she -- I asked her to sign every
page. I believe I did or maybe she wanted to. You see the
dates are different because I went there at 11:30 as it says
23 -- well, it says from 2350 on 9-11 to 12:40 on 9-12. It
was the room she was in at the hospital.
Q In fact, it's under this document that she
left a significant portion of her estate to you outright,
correct?
A I haven't read it recently; but, yes, if you
say so, yes.
Q Well, no. Let's read it. Go to if you could
please --
A She did. ShE
MR. BOSWELL:
THE WITNESS:
MR. BOSWELL:
left him. To my knowledge,
So the question with regard
irrelevant.
did leave me -- let's see.
Your Honor, I object as to --
I need to review.
-- the question as what was
Alice Phillips is still alive.
to what was left is -- is
MR. YARN: Your Honor, we're establishing the
64
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
level of control that Dr. Shapiro had over Miss Phillips.
And so from that what we've established is he's drafting a
document purportedly on her behalf leaving her assets
ultimately in part to him.
THE COURT: Are we going to get to the items
of personal property?
MR. YARN: We will, Your Honor. We will.
THE COURT: This is the last question then.
BY N.~t . YAHN
Q You acknowledge this document leaves a
portion of Miss Phillips residue to you?
A I do. And if it please the Court, I would
like to read the wording. But I would have to search for
it. Yes, I acknowledge.
Q Okay.
A And may I indicate she trusted to care for
the 11 people I referenced?
Q Do you want to take a moment to review this
document?
A Yes.
Q Do you recognize this document?
A Yes, I do.
Q And in fact, there's a claim filed against
you in the Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas -- I'm
sorry. Strike that. There has been a writ of summons
65
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
?_2
23
24
25
filed, has there not, against you in the Dauphin County
Court of Common Pleas?
A Yes.
Q Has a complaint been filed in that matter to
your knowledge?
A No.
Q Has to a rule -- a rule to issue a complaint
been filed.
A I don't understand what that is.
Q I'll rephrase. Have you required
Miss Phillips to file a complaint as opposed to just a writ
at this stage?
A I don't know. My attorney mentioned that hi_s
employer medical protective company might have pressured him
to do that or he might have done it. I honestly don't know
the answer to that question.
Q Okay. And your attorney for purposes of that
matter is not your attorney today?
A That's correct.
Q Who is that?
A Mr. Grill.
Q Could you state Mr. Grill's full name for the
record, please?
A I'm embarrassed to tell you I don't recall
his first -- Daniel. Daniel Grill.
E6
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Q I'm sorry. Did you say Daniel?
A Daniel Grill.
Q Okay. Thank you. I'm going to direct ycur
attention then back to Respondent's 1, the list of items you
had the opportunity to review. It's the letter dated
October of 'OS to Attorney Frey?
A Yes.
Q Have you provided receipts to this Court with
regard to the value of those items?
A Receipts? You mean purchase receipts?
Q Correct.
A No.
Q Okay. You have averred that you have over
$100,000 worth of items that are missing, correct?
A Yes.
Q But you haven't provided any document to
support that claim, have you?
A If you mean purchase receipts, no.
Q Have you provided any statement of value from
any expert as to this artwork that you have allegedly that's
missing?
A No.
Q Have you provided any documentation as to an
appraisal by any independent party setting forth the value
or these items that are missing?
67
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A No.
Q In or about you testified 9-27 of '08, you
had the opportunity pick up items from the house, correct?
By house, I'm referencing specifically 93 Encks Mill Road?
A That's right. I thought I did. I was
allowed to pick up some items, yes.
Q At that time, did you take an itemized list
of the items you removed?
A No.
Q And did you provide anyone a list of the
items you removed?
A Did I provide anyone with a list?
Q Correct.
A No.
Q Okay. Are you an heir under estate of L.B.
Phillips?
A No.
Q You're not a beneficiary?
A No.
Q And nor are you a relative of any of the
decedent L.B. Phillips?
A No.
MR. YARN: Your Honor, I have nothing further
at this time.
MR. FALLER: Just briefly.
68
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CROSS EXAMINATION
BY Ngt . FALLER
Q Dr. Shapiro, did you talk to Rob Frey when
you moved in in September?
A In March.
Q Oh, in March. I'm sorry. March of '08 you
moved in. S eptember you moved out?
A No.
Q Okay. It's a yes or no questions. You
didn't talk to Mr. Frey when you moved in in March, correct?
A Correct.
Q Do you know if he even knew you were there?
A I don't know if he knew it or not.
Q Okay. How would he have known it?
A I don't know.
Q Okay.
A He might have observed me come in and out.
Or he or miss -- I don't know. That's speculative.
Q Okay. Let's not speculate. Were you aware
there was a court order barring Mr. Frey and any of L.B.
Phillips' children from going on the property?
A Again, I'm riot an attorney. I was told that
69
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
they were not allowed there. Whether there was a court
order, I don't know.
Q Okay. And who told you they weren't allowed
there?
A Alice Phillips.
Q You said you did go and try to get some of
your property back?
A Yes.
Q Okay.
A On the 27th of September.
Q 2008?
A Right.
Q And who prevented you from getting what you
claimed again all your property?
A Alice Phillips.
Q Mr. Frey wasn't there that day?
A No.
MR. FALLER: I don't have anything else.
THE COURT: Anyone else have any questions?
MR. BOSWELL: Yes, Your Honor. I have brief.
redirect.
THE COURT: Go ahead.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. BOSWELL:
70
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Q Dr. Shapiro, you were asked a question with
regard to value of the items. On what basis did you
establish these items were worth more than $100,000? Did
you purchase them? What did you pay for them?
A I purchased a number of them; and I attached
on -- I attached -- before proposing letter of 10-8 to
Mr. Frey with the accompanying list, I attached values to
the items, added them up. Some of them are obviously --
people have an idea of what a Nikon SLR camera is worth.
The Venetian glass, for example, was
purchased by my grandmother at the World Exposition. It's
very special, very special. It was Italy's choice of what
to put in the Italian pavilion in the 1893 famous Chicago's
World Fair, so very valuable stuff.
And I went through -- some items I purchased
for -- I'm just glancing at this. I think the Court
wouldn't want me to take time to go item by item; but I will
if that's the wish of the Court.
For example, on page 2 near the middle, Snow
and Nealy is a very special and old maker of axes and forest
equipment. And I bought those, and I know what they cost.
So some of these items I do know what they cost. Some of
them I did buy. Others like a large freestanding power
tools, I have an idea of what they are worth, what it would
cost to replace them. You are right, I don't show that
71
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
calculation here.
Q But the basis for the value next to the
hundred thousand dollars is based upon in part what: you paid
for them, correct?
A Yes, in part. And in part, collector's value
and value of art. I recognize artists whose work is in
museums.
Q And how did you value the collector's value?
How did you -- you placed the value on that to make this
claim.
A I discussed it with my -- my mother and tried
to remember all of the paintings and sculptures that were
there which I -- and added the glass, the other collector's
items, antiques. Plus -- that's the figure I came -- came
to.
Q So is the value of the artwork based in part
on your discussions with your mother?
A Yes.
Q And your mother had value -- had knowledge as
to what she had sold some of her artwork for?
A Oh, yes .
Q Same questions regard to the sculptures, were
these sculptures made by your mother?
A Yes. And some of the paintings I believe
were by my grandmother.
72
MR. YARN: Your Honor, may I object? The
2 continued line of questioning is setting no foundation as to
3 the value of any of the property listed on this. And unless
4 they have some other independent corroborative evidence --
5 THE COURT: An owner can testify to the value
6 of property that they -- a person owns. It doesn't mean
7 that I'm going find in favor of Claimant for the amount that
8 he's claiming, but he has a right to say what he thinks it's
9 worth.
10 BY MR. BOSWELL:
11 Q Dr. Shapiro, when -- you don't -- you don't
12 have possession of these items for which you could seek. an
13 appraisal at this time, correct?
14 A Precisely. Correct.
15 Q And --
16 A How can I have them appraised? I don't have
17 them.
18 Q If you had the sculptures or if they were
19 provided, the sculptures and the paintings, those items
20 could be appraised, correct?
21 A And the Venetian glass, of course.
22 Q When you moved from the property, did you
23 have any intent that you were going to sell those items?
24 A Yes. Yes. Some of them. Some of them, yes.
25 Q But at that time wrien you left --
73
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2~
2~
2~
2'
A In time, I would.
Q Eventually?
A Yes.
Q You didn't -- at that time, those -- those
items were yours and you intended to keep them, correct?
A Some of them I intended to keep, yes.
Q So --
A Most of them, I suppose.
Q So when you had those items, you hadn't
sought to establish a sale value at that time, correct?
A No. Some of them I had for years and years.
Q But what were those -- but the items that
come from your mother and your grandmother, what were they
worth to you?
A Inestimable. You can't convert that to the
dollars, but I did my best market value. To me emotionally?
Q Well, we understand that they're valuable
emotionally; but from a sales standpoint, what do you think
they were worth?
A I would want to look at my breakdown table,
my breakdown figures. I don't have it with me. It's hard
to answer that because there's so many things here, but I
certainly think 5C at least.
Q And so -- so the items that you purchased
such as the trailer and the tools and the compressors and
74
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
wrenches, etc., those items that you purchased, those are
the other $50,000 worth of your claim?
A The 50 is a very rough, broad estimate. Yes.
And I calculated this on the basis of the replacement
because if I replace them, I -- I can't buy things I bought
years ago.
Q But you think if you replaced them that the
cost to replace them knowing what items that you no longer
have would be in excessive of $100,000?
A No. Not the ones I could purchase.
Q Okay. So would you answer that question'?
A A high end Nikon SLR digital camera that was
almost new, no, I don't think that -- that that would be
$100,000 to replace all those. It would be sizeable.
Q So would you establish you thought that the
artwork and the sculpture you had a value of $50,000?
A Roughly,
Q The --
A It's hard to estimate that without doing a
lot of arithmetic but roughly.
Q Well, with regard to -- your claim with
regard to the items you could purchase, not artwork and
things like that, but cameras and the other items that are
on your claim, is it your testimony that those items would
exceed $50,000 if you were to add those items?
75
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A I have to answer that I'm not certain. The~,~
-- it would be sizeable. But again, I don't have the
arithmetic with me; but it would approach 50 I believe. It
would be in the ballpark of that.
Q So when you made your claim, it was your
estimate that you -- you added these together and that's
where you got $50,000 for those items and the artwork again
at least $50,000?
A Right. That's it.
Q And is that the reason why you established
your claim and said it would be in excess of $100,600 for
those items?
A Yes. That's right.
MR. BOSWELL: No other questions. Thank you.
THE COURT: Anything else?
MR. YARN: Your Honor, if I may, please?
RECROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. YARN:
Q Dr. Shapiro, you testified you have a list
that you created with regards to the damages; is that
correct?
A With regard to the --
Q With regard to your calculation for your
damages?
76
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A I may have it.
believe I have it.
Yes, I believe I have it. I
Q And did you produce that list as part of this
proceeding?
A No.
Q Did you provide that list today to anyone
prior to coming to this hearing?
A No.
Q This hearing again continued from a previous
date, again it not?
A Yeah, I believe so.
Q So you had ample time to provide that list to
us, did you not?
A Yes. But no one asked for it. The whole
question of valuation didn't come up, I mean, item by item
valuation.
Q You acknowledge that you were in ari intimate
relationship with Miss Phillips, were you not?
A No, I was not in an intimate relationship
with her.
Q You never engaged in sexual relationships
with Miss Phillips?
A Absolutely not. Absolutely not.
MR. BOSWELL: Your_ Honor, I would object. I
don't think that was any place in the testimony and outside
77
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the scope of redirect for recross.
MR. YARN: Nothing further, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Okay
RECROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. FALLER:
Q We talked about when you moved in. When you
moved out, that would have been September 2008?
A September 9th.
Q Why did you move out?
A Because I realized into what a network of --
of vile lies I had been drawn.
Q I didn't hear the answer.
THE COURT: Of what?
THE WITNESS: A network of vile lies I had
been drawn.
THE COURT: Vile lies.
BY MR. FALLER:
Q Vile lies. What do you mean by that?
A It would take a long time to answer your
question completely. But in brief, I was extensively,
massively deceived by Mrs. Phillips in a whole -- in an
immense number of ways and drawn into a web by a very
intelligent master manipulator.
To give one example that is in evidence,
Miss Lucy's murder room again pointed out. It was Linda who
78
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
was present at Miss Lucy's death. She was no more murdered
than anyone in this room has been. Other deaths that --
murders that Mrs. Phillips ascribed to her late husband,
tortures, tortures that he inflicted on her for years,
monstrous wrongs and abuse, confining her to the, quote,
time out room in the basement, depriving her of food, of
bathes, of the right to drink soda, tripping her with his
cane, all lies, all, all lies.
MR. YARN: Your Honor, I'm going object.
This line isn't relevant to the matter at hand. Moreover,
some of the issues that he's disclosing are ultimately
protected by and between our client and the relationship she
had with Dr. Shapiro.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. FALLER: How about another question?
THE COURT: Go ahead.
BY MR. FALLER:
Q The day that you physically vacated the
premises, what happened?
A As I said, I realized, came to my senses. I
woke up to what had happened, and I left precipitously
leaving my belongings behind.
MR. FALLER: I don't have anything else, Your
Honor.
THE COURT: Anything else?
79
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. BOSWELL: No questions, Your Honor.
MR. YAHN: Your Honor, can we take a brief
recess? I would like the opportunity to confer with my
client.
THE COURT: Okay. Take a 10-minute recess.
MR. YAHN: Thank you, Your Honor.
RECROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. YAHN:
Q Dr. Shapiro, do you have any pictures of the
items in the house that you allege are on this list?
A No. It never occurred to me to take any. I
have a picture of the table in your office.
Q But you don't have any pictures of_ the items
in 93 Encks Mill Road by the house I mean?
A I don't believe so, no.
Q And you left in -- I just want to clarify was
it September 9th of 2008?
A It was -- I -- it was a decision I made over
the night of the 8th to 9th. But I -- since -- the day that
I definitely left again the 9th.
Q Did you have a contract with the Estate to
hold your property?
A No.
Q And did you have a contract with
80
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Miss Phillips to hold any of your property that you allege
again there?
A No. She had invited me to keep it there
saying that she had plenty of room and I would be welcome to
store things there a number of which -- well --
Ng2. YARN: We have nothing further, Your
Honor.
THE COURT: Anything else for this witness?
MR. BOSWELL: No, Your Honor.
Ngt. FALLER: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: You may step down.
THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Is that it?
MR. BOSWELL: I have no other witness. I ask
for the introduction of and admission of Claimant Exhibit 1
and Respondent's Exhibit I.
THE COURT: I assume you have no objection to
Respondent's Exhibit 1?
MR. YAHN: No.
THE COURT: They're admitted.
NH2. YARN: Your Honor, we so move to have our
Respondent's other than Respondent's 1 moved in.
MR. BOSWELL: I would object to Respondent's
No. 3 as being irrelevant to the matter at hand which is the
written summons in Dauphin County.
81
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
THE COURT: I will admit it. Anything else?
Do you have anything else, sir?
MR. YARN: No.
THE COURT: Do you have anything to present?
MR. FALLER: Just I want to make sure its in
the record that possession again turned over November 8th.
I don't know if that's in the record that you have from -- I
think it's in the record from the prior hearings in this
case because we had the hearing in New Bloomfield where you
granted, I think, preliminary approval. But if need be, I
will call one witness.
MR. YARN: Can we clarify what you mean by
possession?
MR. FALLER: Possession of Encks Mill Road
because there had been a prior court order barring the
Executor and any of the family members. And I just want to
make sure that as of that date through November 8th. And I
think, correct me, if I'm right it was November 8th.
NHt. YARN: I believe that to be correct.
THE COURT: November 8th, 2008?
NHt. FALLER: Correct .
THE COURT: Okay. That's a stipulation.
Everybody agrees with that, or do you want testimony to that
effect?
MR. BOSWELL: Agreed.
82
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
THE COURT: Agreed?
MR. YARN: I believe that to be the date,
Ycur Honor.
THE COURT: Okay. Will that close the
testimony then?
Ngt. FALLER: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you have any arqument you`d
like to make at this time, sir, on behalf of your client?
MR. BOSWELL: Very briefly. We believe the
claim is rather simple that Dr. Shapiro did come on the
premises with permission of A1_ice Phillips. As we
understand, she did have rightful possession of the
premises.
And thereafter when he left the premise, he
did notify the Executor of his property that again on the
premises of the Estate albeit in the curtilage area as we
understand from the testimony again so provided to Alice
Phillips.
However, during that time period, the
testimony will also reveal that the Executor knew of a
dispute as to personal property, chiefly personal property
with regard to the Estate and Alice Phillips but then also
found that there was a dispute as to personal property of --
of Harvey Shapiro.
During the time period of the various
83
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
inspections, it was then discovered by the Executor that not
only again property removed from the -- the Estate's real
property that the Estate had. a claim to but also the real
property -- the personal property of Harvey Shapiro.
Dr. Shapiro testified as to the value of that
property based on what he paid for and what he thought the
value again. He testified that he did not have ar, appraisal
done because, first of all, he wasn't in possession of that
to get an appraisal for this proceeding.
And secondly, he didn't intend at that time
to sell the property; and he had no reason to establish a
market value for them at that time because he intended to
recover those items which is the reason why he then
contacted Mr. Frey after he was denied the ability to remove)
those items the end of September 2008.
So the testimony then established that
sometime in October Mr. Frey did learn about this. There
was a hearing. The point of contention about personal
property again a known issue at that time, and Mr. Frey at
that time also knew the claim of Harvey Shapiro.
It was after that proceeding and after the
inspections he then found that not only the property -- the
personal property of the Estate had been removed from the --
triis area that had been cordoned off but also the property
of mister -- of Dr. Shapiro.
84
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
It's our contention that the Executor knowing
of a dispute of not only of the Estate property but also of,
mister -- Dr. Shapiro's property again -- had a heightened
awareness and with that heightened awareness should have
done something more to protect all of the property that has
since disappeared.
Dr. Shapiro testified that everything again
there when he left. And when he returned at the permission
of the Estate, very little again still there. We understand
the Estate is willing to turn over that; but that -- what is
there is of really insignificant value.
So it's our contention that the Estate does
have responsibility and can't be an innocent responsibility
because the -- the Estate knew of a dispute and should have
taken steps to protect the property that was there on the
real property of the Estate for which reason Dr. Shapiro
made a claim. Thank you.
MR. YARN: Your Honor, I'll be brief. Today,
Dr. Shapiro has not presented any evidence truly setting
forth what was placed within Encks Mill Road whether it be
photos or otherwise other than his own testimony.
He hasn't presented any other documentation
or oral testimony to provide support for the list that's
ultimately set forth in the documents before this Court.
Other than that, there isn't anything setting forth that
85
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
these items were specifically in Encks Mill Road.
Secondly and critical to the point, there's
been nothing established by .way of evidence of how much
ultimately each item costs. It's a blanket approach of
$100,000. He claims to have done a calculation as it
relates to $50,000 to artwork and $50,000 to other tangible
items. But there's, again, nothing before this Court to
prove his case.
Even assuming those points, Your Honor, this
matter is ultimately appropriately to be handled before the
Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas. There's a writ
currently against Dr. Shapiro. If he wants to aver, bring
his rights with regards to Miss Phillips, he can do so at
that time.
But as it relates to this matter and the
Estate, it's an inappropriate party, Your Honor; and we
would, therefore, ask that the Estate be ordered to --
pursuant to the settlement agreement distribute the balance
of the moneys with the exception of the damages that are
currently continue to remain in dispute as it relates to 93
Encks Mill Road without certainly conceding that point.
But we're agreeing that has to be handled i.n
a separate forum. But there's $100,000 that they're
specifically reserving for Dr. Shapiro's claim. We request
this Court so order that those moneys be distributed to
86
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Miss Phillips consistent with the spirit of the order
originally executed on or about November of 2008 -- I'm
sorry -- October of 2008, Your Honor. And they continue to
this day hold those moneys premised upon the claim of
Dr. Shapiro. Thank you, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Uh-huh.
Ngt. FALLER: Just very briefly, this is kind
of like a bailor/bailee situation. And here you have them,
and we're just kind of observers. It would be like if I
rent a building from Mr. Frey to run an ice cream store, I
lease equipment from somebody, and when I close down my ice
cream shop I take the equipment.
They can't go back against the landlord who
didn't have possession of the property. I mean, that's what
they are trying to do here. We were not in possession. We
were prohibited from going into the property.
Mr. Frey testified shortly after we had the
hearing in New Bloomfield it came to his attention that
property again going missing. We contacted Mr. Yahn's
office and tried to settle that and get it done. But, you
know, if -- Dr. Shapiro has a claim, it's clearly against
Alice Phillips.
THE COURT: Okay. Can we all agree that as
of November 8, 2008, when the possession of the real estate
again turned over to the Estate that Dr. Shapiro's property
87
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
again not present, again not there that he's claiming? Can
we agree to that?
NIl~. GILROY: With the exception of ~ahat I
believe to be a treadmill and some miscellaneous personal
items.
THE COURT: Which will be turned over to him
promptly?
Ngt. FALLER: Absolutely.
THE COURT: Okay. Obviously, I've been a
judge throughout these proceedings. And I do recall the
order that was entered because of a physical type dispute
between the parties that -- well, it may not have been
physical; but it was verbal.
And I was afraid it was going to be -- to get
physical; and I decided to enter that order. So tree Estate
did not have possession of the real estate because of my
order. And I agree with the Estate's attorney that without
possession they don't have control over Dr. Shapiro's
property, personal property until it was removed by a third
party, not the Estate.
Dr. Shapiro has established a claim today of
personal property that he says is missing. A11 indications
are that the property again removed from the real estate by
Alice Phillips or her people under her control.
Therefore, you're claim is against her, not
88
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the Estate, sir. I tend to agree with counsel for
Miss Phillips that you have not proven the monetary value cf
your claim by a preponderance of the evidence.
That's the standard in a civil case. I
assume that's the standard here in this case. However,
those items should be returned to you especially the artwork
by anyone that's in possession of those items under the
jurisdiction of this Court.
And by the way, Alice Phillips is under the
jurisdiction of this Court and remains under the
jurisdiction of this Court until all issues have been
revolved, all personal property issues.
So if Alice does know where those items are
and if they're still in her possession or she can obtain
possession of those items, I would strongly suggest that she
return those items to Dr. Shapiro. However, the Estate is
not responsible for either the value of those items or the
return of those items.
There is no -- there's no implied contract
that I can think of that would require the Estate too
indemnify a person who is in -- is living on -- on estate
property without paying rent or anything to the Estate,
without really knowledge of the Estate.
I just can't think of any implied contract
and there's no expressed contract where they would be
89
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
required to indemnify a person that leaves his property --
personal property under these circumstances in the custody
of Alice Phillips or whoever is living there on the Estate
property.
I think she lived there. I believe there
were other individuals living there. I'm not sure, her
family members. So I'm going to deny your claim, sir, as
against the Estate.
But I feel you do have a claim against Alice
Phillips which you can litigate either in this Court of
Common Pleas of Cumberland County or perhaps in the Dauphin
County matter. I'm not sure. I don't know about that.
You're not the attorney for that action?
MR. BOSWELL: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: So that's my decision. Any
clarification needed?
MR. YARN: Your Honor, may we request under
the initial petition the Executors list of damages pursuant
to its order dated March 24th, of '09 they listed or set
aside $100,000 from this Court's original order dated
October of '08. We would request that they release those
proceeds consistent with the original settlement agreement.
MR. BOSWELL: Can I have a moment?
THE COURT: Go ahead. You can talk. I
excused, Dr. Shapiro.
90
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2~
MR. FALLER: Okay. The thought that came to
our mind, Your Honor, given the strength of your suggestions
at the end of your decision I think we need to wait 30 days
until the appeal period would pass for any order to take
effect.
And in that same 30 days, the itemized list
of things that we said that belonged to Estate were missing
include like Denault prints, cherry frames, a crock pot
collection that had been in the family for 50 years,
hopefully some of those things can turn up one way or
another in the next 3C days in which the appeal period would
run as well.
THE COURT: Okay. Sounds reasonable.
MR. YARN: Your Honor, may I clarify?
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. YARN: Just so that our understanding is
this order related to solely to Dr. Shapiro's claim?
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. YARN: We're not handling the disputes
between the marital and personal property that is so alleged
on our side and also Attorney Faller?
THE COURT: No. We're going to talk about
that next. Would you like to be excused, or do you want to
remain?
MR. BOSWELL: Yes, Your Honor I would like tol
91
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
i2
14
15
16
17
. Q
1
20
21
22
G _.
92
ERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the proceedings are
contained fully and accurately in the notes taken by me on
the above cause and that this is a correct transcript of
same.
r
~ ~ %~
~Ia~idy"L. Cortez, RPR
Official C~g'urt Reporter
The foregoing record of the proceedings on
the hearing of the within matter is hereby approved and
directed to be filed.
Date
C. Joseph Rehkamp, S.J.
41st Judicial District
Specially Presiding
93