HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-09-12 (3)
~'~
4
10
1
• 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
•14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
•2 5
manager and director of finance administration for the
Diocese of Central Pennsylvania. I'm here because our
chancellor, who is our legal representative, was unable to
make the hearing because of the change that occurred.
THE COURT: Okay. Can you spell your name for me
sir?
MR. ZWIFKA: Sure, Z-W-I-F-K-A.
THE COURT: I wasn't even close. Thank you. All
right. Attorney Boswell.
MR. BOSWELL: May it please the Court, I assume
that our principal interest will be Henry Chapman. The -- as
Mr. Sullivan had noted that there may be divergent issues
here with regard to the two trusts. Is it the Court's
pleasure to have Mr. Chapman testify with regard to both
issues at the same time?
THE COURT: I think we should keep it separate
just because of different parties with each. It'd be easier
I think for your side of the•case if we did it all at one
time, but I think overall it's going to make for a cleaner
record if we keep the two issues separate.
MR. BoswELL: The -- perhaps then as the trustees
have -- MBiT has the burden with regard to the Chapman Lodge
Trust that I don't know if it'd be appropriate to go --
MR. oTTO: If I might interrupt, Mr. Boswell, that
is, in fact, what I contemplated might occur is that M&T
11
1
• 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
•14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~_
would proceed with their case on the termination of the lodge
trust. And that matter might be handled separately from --
THE COURT: If all counsel would rather handle it
all at once if you think it's going to be easier, especially
for the folks that the issues are split, I don't have a
problem doing it that way either. You're the ones who's
going to be presenting your case or all of you. So I will
allow you the leeway and please don't, you know, worry about
what I just said. If you rather handle it all at once, I do
not have a problem with that.
MR. FLOWER: Your Honor, I'd like to suggest -- it
seems to me they're pretty separate issues, and I think it
will be more orderly if they are separated that way.
THE COURT: I thought that was my take on the
briefs that I have, but yet I wanted to give you that option.
MR. oTTO: I'm prepared to proceed on behalf of
M&T with the termination of the lodge trust.
MR. BOSWELL: Prior to your proceeding, I'd like
to request that I have made copies of the last will and
testament of Sarah McCrea Chapman ]ones dated September 8th,
1976, which was admitted to probate in Cumberland County and
also the codicil, which is first codicil to the last will and
testament of Sarah McCrea Chapman ]ones, which is dated
October 6, 1977, and I'd ask those two documents to be --
because those are the dispositive documents to be marked and
39
conversations -- I understand he didn't have that
conversation with you because Mr. Caverly, then Mr. Gority
handled the account. So it's going back years before you
were there. But do you have any knowledge as to what the
delay was in making the transfer to the life tenants?
A. In looking through the file, I think the biggest
question was, would Alfred ever need the use of the lodge?
Q. ~o you know who used the lodge in all those many
years?
A. I know that at least Mr. Chapman had, Hank -- or
Henry had been at the lodge. I know that )ohn McCrea. I
know that Mrs. Tones' sisters-in-law had used the lodge with
their families in the early years.
Q. were there -- to your knowledge, were there ever
any charges or reimbursements made by any of the users at the
lodge for any purpose?
A. There may have been small reimbursements. At one
point, we had suggested that anyone using the lodge should
pay a set amount to help cover expenses, but that was never
implemented.
Q. why not?
A. It was suggested, and it was not enforced.
Q. so is it fair to say suggested by M&T?
A. M&T, yes.
Q. And the primary user of the lodge at that time was
48
1
• 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
•13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
•25
I've also marked as Exhibit 26 a letter of Linda
A. Fisher, who is an attorney at pecker Price and Rhodes,
addressed to George P. Flower, 7r., with regard to the
establishment of a guardianship for Alfred Chapman with a
Rule to Show Cause for the appointment of games o. Flower,
fir., Esquire, as Guardian Ad Litem for Alfred McCrea Chapman.
And Mr. Flower may know that Mr. Flower. If there's some
recollection --
MR.
MR.
MR.
MR.
I'm not famili
MR.
MR.
FLOWER:
BOSWELL:
MCCREA:
FLOWER:
ar with m
MCCREA:
FLOWER:
I'm not familiar with that, no.
well, this is the first I've --
with the person, not the paper.
No, I'm not familiar with the paper.
e being proposed as a guardian.
Your father.
oh, excuse me. This is far in the
past.
MR. BOSWELL: This is your father.
MR. FLOWER: Okay.
THE COURT: That's why he said you may be familiar
with the person.
MR. FLOWER: Sorry.
MR. BOSWELL: I understand these things, because
my father was a lawyer as well. So these things sometimes
come up that we have no idea.
MR. FLOWER: You threw me off base there. Excuse
3
~4
15
16
17
18
19
84
• 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~5
total of $124,519.46, correct?
A. Correct.
Q. Now, are you aware of -- call your attention to
Exhibit Number 25, which is a letter of Dennis Caverly to you
and your sisters and the Episcopal Diocese of Central,
Pennsylvania. Are you aware of that letter? Do you recall
this letter?
A. I do recall this letter.
Q. And so your knowledge that account and the
distribution to you was being withdrawn, correct?
A. Correct.
Q. And that -- copies of that letter were sent to
many people. Do you know who all those people are?
A. I do recognize everybody except Lawrence v.
Robinson, fir. I don't remember who he is.
Q. Are these -- many of these people relatives?
A. They are. They are cousins of my fathers.
Q. why would -- do you have any idea why they would
be noticed on this letter?
A. Probably because they had ongoing use of the
property at the time and still do under the terms of the
property trust.
Q. So, based upon what's happened, your knowledge is
prior to the filing of the first and final account and
distribution, these people had access to the property, right?
14
15
16
17
18
120
1
• 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
•13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Z3
24
•25
the -- in order for the life tenants to take this property,
do they owe the expenses? I don't know -- I don't know where
else it will come from because it is -- will be our position
clearly it's not coming from the CRUT. At the end of the
day, the County has its super position as a tax lien holder
and that has to be paid.
THE COURT: Okay. I can't agree with all that
more. You know, what comes next is the big question. So --
MR. BOSWELL: Well, Your Honor, respectfully we do
have some time between now and September 9th that hopefully
that we can have some discussions and present a plan at that
time.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. BOSWELL: It -- there are multiple parties
that have to contend with that issue.
MR. SULLIVAN: Your Honor, this may be
housekeeping for the next proceeding as well.
THE COURT: You get a medal for today by the way.
MR. SULLIVAN: I have a hard time understanding
why a hearing on September 9th would be the vehicle in which
a plan is presented. It's not what is before the Court. And
if the parties are inclined to engage in discussions between
now and the 9th, that's fine; but let's not take up the
hearing on the 9th with presentment of a plan. That's not
the issue that's poised for hearing on the 9th.