HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-08-12 (2)IN RE: DANIEL SHAFFER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
An Alleged Incapacitated Person CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
ORPHANS' COURT DIVISION
NO. 21-12-0626
OPINION
At issue in the present case is whether the now adult,
Daniel Shaffer, should be adjudicated an incapacitated person on a
permanent basis and if Susan M. Shaffer and Steven E. Shaffer
should be appointed jointly plenary guardian of his person and
estate. A hearing was held on the matter on the 2nd of August,
2012. The alleged incapacitated person was partially present for
the hearing. Subsequently, he was excused. He was represented
throughout the hearing by court-appointed counsel Mark Bayley,p
=C~ ~
Esquire . ~ ~ ~ ~~~
~~,~
~
~ c
'
Based on the evidence presented at the he~=~;g, ~ --, ' ~~-
c ' ~i _ ~
~. ..r - .. __ .,._
.._ ... .....
~~
following findings of fact are made:
~; ~ r
-~
_.r,
` ;
~ adult
1 . The alleged incapacitated person is Daniel Shaffer;~a ~~.
individual resident of Cumberland County whose current ~ddressc,,~is ~-'~
74 Horn Road, Shippensburg, Pennsylvania 17257. '='
2. Petitioners are Susan M. Shaffer and Steven E. Shaffer whose
address is 74 Horn Road, Shippensburg, Pennsylvania 17257.
3. The alleged incapacitated person suffers from CHARGE syndrome.
4. As a consequence of his condition, Daniel Shaffer's ability to
receive and evaluate information effectively and communicate
decisions is impaired to such a significant extent that he is
totally unable to manage his financial resources and totally unabl e
to meet essential requirements for his physical health and safety.
5. Daniel Shaffer's estate is zero, and he has no annual income.
6. The progress for Daniel Shaffer is unfavorable at the present
time.
7. Daniel Shaffer is in need of a plenary guardian of his person
and estate.
8. The duration of the necessary guardianship must be considered
at best indefinite and for practical purposes permanent.
9. The proposed joint guardians, Susan M. Shaffer and Steven E.
Shaffer are appropriate to serve as guardian of Daniel Shaffer's
person and estate and both are qualified under the statute to do
so.
y
10. The proposed guardians have given thought to future financial
resources and care, custody, and control over Daniel Shaffer upon
his reaching the age of 21.
11. There is no other less restrictive alternative.
12. The foregoing findings of fact are made on the basis of clear
and convincing evidence.
DISCUSSION
The Petitioner has substantially complied with the
provisions with respect to the adjudication of the incapacitated
person contained in 20 Pa. C.S. ~ 5501 et sec., and based on the
findings of fact, the following order of court will be entered:
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 2nd day of August, 2012, upon
consideration of the petition to adjudicate Daniel A. Shaffer an
incapacitated person and appoint joint plenary guardians of his
person and estate, and following a hearing at which Daniel Shaffer
was partially present, subsequently excused, and was represented by
Mark Bayley, Esquire, and at which evidence was presented by the
Petitioner in support of the petition and based upon the findings
of fact, the Court finds that Daniel Shaffer is an incapacitated
person. He is subsequently adjudicated as such, and Susan M.
Shaffer and Steven E. Shaffer are appointed joint plenary guardian
of his person and he estate. No bond shall be required of the
guardian. The joint guardian shall be responsible for filing a
report on an annual basis.
By the Court,
Thomas A. Placey
Thomas A. Placey, C.P.J.