Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-22-13 i c IN RE: : IN THE COURT OF COM I PLEA}S�Ol it ESTATE OF ROBERT J. LAPORTE, : CUMBERLAND COUNT WNNS)I VARI Deceased : ORPHANS COURT DIVM10N r n : NO. 21-11-00:26 €a OBJECTIONS OF SUSAN M. LAPORTE ° ; TO THE FIRST AND FINAL ACCOUNT v OF ANNE LAPORTE EXECUTRIX �T AND NOW COMES Susan M. LaPorte, a beneficiary of the Robert J. LaPorte Estate, by and through her attorneys, Law Offices of Craig A. Diehl, and respectfully objects to the First and Final Account of Ann E. LaPorte, Executrix,as follows: I. Items of personalty have been misrepresented and are erroneously accounted for, including but not limited to, items of personalty being duplicated, items of personalty are missing, and values associated with certain items of personalty are egregiously overstated. A. Items of Personalty Have Been Duplicated. The original Inheritance Tax Return filed by the Executrix presented personal property (appraised) at a value of$4,320.00. In Executrix's Answer to the Petition to Secure Order Directing Executrix to Disclose Itemization of Personal Property, the Executrix valued the items taken by Objectant at $25,976.00. In the Supplemental Tax Return filed by Executrix, she lists the personalty at a value of$26,221.00. The difference of$245.00 was items originally not reported by the Executrix for unknown reasons that she had retained. A closer review of the individual items shows the Executrix accounted for certain assets twice. Specifically, the following items have been duplicated distorting the true value of the estate and is indicative of the Executrix intentionally inflating the value of the distributions made to Objectant in order to gain financial advantage: Description Original Return Supplemental Return 1. 3 Piece Patio Set $150.00 $900.00 1 End Stands $50.00(3) $100.00(2) 3. Kitchen Table with 6 chairs $400.00 $1,750.00 4. Sun Room Furniture&Carpet $1,050.00 $2,750.00 (Objectant has never received the carpet) 5. WingbackChair $150.00 $250.00 6. Victorian Cane Bottom Chair $45.00 $250.00 7. 4 Piece Queen Bedroom Suit $600.00 $2,400.00 8. Lenox China Set, Service for 12 $75.00 $250.00 9. Pie Safe $300.00 $300.00 10. Deacons Bench $125.00 $100.00 11. Cash $500.00 $500.00 The amount of duplicative items of personalty is $9,550.00. B. Hundreds of Items of Personalty are Missing. Initially, the Executrix had an appraisal performed by Jones & Martin Auctions & Appraisals with a value consisting of$6,205.00. This Appraisal was altered by the Executrix and items allegedly auctioned were removed from the Appraisal. Of the fourteen (14) items allegedly auctioned, nine (9) of these assets were not auctioned and are unaccounted for. Additionally, hundreds of items of personalty are missing which can be substantiated by photographs within Objectant's possession. Executrix has intentionally misrepresented that certain items of personalty were auctioned when it is believed that these items were retained by the Executrix. Additionally, it is represented on the original tax filing that the Lincoln Town Car was sold to a third-party purchaser for $6,000.00. However, in previous drafts of the Inheritance 2 Tax Return and Inventory, the vehicle was valued at $6,215.00 from Kelly Blue Book. It is believed that the vehicle was not sold, but retained by Executrix. The disclosures to the Court misrepresent what has actually occurred. In a letter dated November 29, 2012, the Executrix mentions her father's handgun, safe, and power tools. However, none of these items are accounted for. C. Items of Personalty Have Inflated Values for Property Distributed to Objectant. Numerous items of personalty distributed to Objectant had their values inflated by Executrix to obtain a financial advantage in the distribution of the estate. A review of Section I A sets forth eight (8) examples of this belief resulting in a monetary difference of $6,105.00. Moreover, the itemization of personal property in possession of Susan LaPorte attached to Executrix's Answer to Petition to Secure Order Directing Executrix to Disclose Itemization of Personal Property and Reasons for Untimely Filing values personal property at $25,9 76.00. Objectant herein believes the fair market value of this itemized listing is $6,618.00 which includes the items that are duplicated. Values have been placed on items that belonged to Objectant. Moreover, the Executrix places values on items returned to the estate, returned to the rightful owner or interred with their Mother. Conversely, Objectant disputes the appraisal of$245.00 and questions whether the items appraised were actually the items taken from the estate. Specifically, Objectant disputes the following: 3 i Appraised Value Objectant's Value 1. Denby Dinnerware $5.00 $2,500.00 2. Television $125.00 $ 500.00 3. Honda Power Washer $35.00 $ 275.00 less than 8 months old) Executrix's actions have created a smoke cloud to obfuscate a problem with her lack of a proper accounting. 2. An IRA has not been reported on the First and Final Account of which the last known beneficiary was the decedent's predeceased spouse. It is believed that Executrix has obtained possession of this asset for her own benefit. 3. Cash is missing from Defendant's estate. The Executrix and Objectant equally divided the sum of$27,000.00 in U.S. currency. There were also 350 Euros and 2,390 British Pounds which Objectant received her half. There was also $1,500.00 of Canadian money. Objectant did not get any of the Canadian money. The Supplemental Tax Return sets forth a value of$28,700.00. The total for the money involved should have been$32,737.21, 4. Executrix liquidated Decedent's Dow Chemical Stock and an approximate sum of $14,000.00 was withheld in federal income taxes which would provide a tax benefit to both beneficiaries. The federal tax withholding is unaccounted for in the First and Final Account. 5. Although the First and Final Account suggests fiduciary tax returns were prepared and paid for, Objectant has never received a K-1 from the Federal tax form 1041 or the Pennsylvania tax form PA41. Objectant believes that the returns were never done, or were untimely filed without any justification. 4 i 6. During the Decedent's Iifetime, Executrix and Objectant each received the sum of $1,000.00 for their birthdays and at Christmas. The Executrix took her money in cash and Objectant had her parents place her money into Certificates of Deposit. Objectant believes she is entitled to $37,000.00. Although the Certificates of Deposit were titled in her Father's name, the entire family was aware of this arrangement and that they were truly Objectant's property. The Executrix's own handwriting on a paper substantiating the Certificates of Deposit acknowledges this occurrence. Furthermore, Decedent created a special account on his computer detailing financial spreadsheets which could be accessed in the case of his death. This information was included in these spreadsheets, as well as in his regular accounting spreadsheets. 7. Objectant believes that she is entitled to one half of the life insurance policy proceeds. Although Objectant acknowledges that her sister was the named beneficiary, the Decedent signed a letter indicating Susan was to receive one half of the insurance proceeds. 8. The Executrix's own malfeasance resulted in the estimated inheritance tax liability being paid one (1) day late resulting in the loss of the 5.0% discount. Objectant objects to being penalized for Executrix's negligence. This oversight cost the estate $1,784.50 despite the estate having in excess of $500,000.00 in the bank. (See Exhibit "A" which notes Decedent's date of death as December 13, 2010 and the estimated tax payment being paid on March 14,2011. 5 9. The Executrix's demand that Objectant obtain a professional appraiser was untimely and a ruse to diffuse the non-reporting of assets that she retained. A timeline of events shows that the last inventory of property distributed to Objectant was e-mailed to Executrix on June 4, 2011. On February 21, 2012, Executrix files the Inventory and Inheritance Tax Return. On June 22, 2012, Executrix requests the property distributed to Objectant be appraised. Property was distributed to Objectant as early as February 17, 2011. Virtually all property was distributed over eight (8) months prior to the Executrix making any filings. It was another four (4) months after the filings that the issue of an appraisal carne up. Each time property was distributed to Objectant, a list was provided to the Executrix with an itemized list within a day or two_ Further, each time Objectant stated, "As always, if I have forgotten anything or if you need any further information for the valuation of these items, just let me know. Please let me know what you've already taken and keep me informed when you take items in the future." It is believed that the request for an appraisal was an attempt to cover up the Executrix's misdeeds. 10. The Executrix's fee should be forfeited for the malfeasance, obfuscation, and negligence of her fiduciary duties. Although Objectant admits that the requested dollar amount of the Executrix fee is reasonable for a fiduciary fulfilling his or her duties and responsibilities, in the instant Estate administration, Executrix does not deserve an Executrix fee. Intentional omission of assets, inflated appraisals to obtain a financial windfall, a critical deadline being missed, failure to communicate by refusing certified letters addressed to the Estate, untimeliness in finalizing the estate, duplicating assets to gain a financial advantage, and an overall cavalier attitude in neglecting her fiduciary duties are the reasons substantiating this objection to the fee. 6 Objectant's beliefs are that this is a case of deliberate defalcation, not debatable strategy. Allowance of the Executrix fee by this Honorable Court would suggest that the failure to properly perform her duties has no adverse repercussions. Ii. Objectant requests a surcharge be imposed against Executrix for failure to exercise common prudence, common skill and common caution in the performance of her fiduciary's duties. A surcharge is appropriate where the Executrix failed to include assets belonging to the decedent and for failing to distribute the estate in a prompt manner. See In re Rfa ers Estate, 108 A.2d 924 (Pa. 1954); In re McCrea's Estate, 380 A.2d 773 (Pa. 1977). Both factors are present in the instant estate administration. The surcharge amount requested by Objectant to reimburse her out-of-pocket costs is $2,500.00. WHEREFORE, Objectant, Susan M. LaPorte, respectfully requests the Court to find that Ann E. LaPorte breached her fiduciary duties as Executrix of the Robert J. LaPorte Estate, that the First and Final Account be rejected as inaccurate, an Auditor be appointed to accurately finalize the Estate, and to surcharge the Estate of Robert J. LaPorte as compensation to Objectant for her damages. Respectfully submitted, LAW OFFICES OF CRAIG A. DIEHL Date: By. Craig A iehl, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 52801 3464'Frindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Tel: (717) 763-7613 Fax: (717) 763-8293 Attorney for Objectant, Susan M. LaPorte 7 / NOTICE OF INHERITANCE TAX pennsyLvani -!� /BEAU OF INDIVIDUAL TAXES APPRAISEMENT, ALLOWANCE OR DISALLOWANCE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE INHERITANCE Tax DIVISION OF DEDUCTIONS AND ASSESSMENT OF TAX PO BOX 280601 REV-1547 EX, AFP (12-11) HARRISBURG PA 17128-0601 / DATE 07-02-2012 ESTATE OF LAPORTE ROBERT J DATE OF DEATH 12-.13-2010 FI.LE .NUMBER 21 11-0026 BRADLEY L GRIFFIE COUNTY CUMBERLAND ACN - 200 N HANOVER ST 101 APPEAL DA�TE�: 06=31-2012 CARLISLE PA 17013-2423 (See reverse side under Objections) Amount LRemitted —� MAKE CHECK PAYABLE AND REMIT PAYMENT TO: REGISTER OF WILLS 1 COURTHOUSE SQUARE CARLISLE PA 17013 CUT ALONG THIS LINE --Y RETAIN LOWER PORTION FOR YOUR RECORDS_ t• .___.______________ _.____ ___________.__-__________-_____ _ _______________ REV-1547 EX AFP C12-11) NOTICE OF INHERITANCE TAX APPRAISEMENT, ALLOWANCE OR DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTIONS AND ASSESSMENT OF TAX ESTATE DF: LAPORTE �-ROBERT JF:ILE ND,:21 1L-0026 - ACN:- 101 -DATE: -D7-02-20'12' - TAX RETURN WAS: (X) ACCEPTED AS FILED ( ) CHANGED APPRAISED VALUE OF RETURN BASED ON: ORIGINAL RETURN 1 . Real Estate (Schedule A) (1). 272,000 . 00 NOTE: To ensure proper 2. Stocks and Bonds (Schedule B) (2) 94 ,290 . 90 credit to your account, 3. Closely Held Stock/Partnership Interest (Schedule C) (3) .D0 submit the upper portion 4. Mortgages/Notes Receivable (Schedule D) (4) of this form with your . 00. of payment. - 5. Gash/Bank Deposits/Misc, Personal Property (Schedule E7 (5) 471 .338.58 6. Jointly Owned Property"(`Schedule F) 7. Transfers (Schedule G) (7) 8,428. 26 e. Total Assets (g) _ 846.057 74 APPROVED ,DEDU C:TIONS AND EXEMPTIONS: � _ 9. Funeral Expenses/Adm. Costs/Misc. Expenses Cs.hedul¢ H).-" 51 90 77 EY)- 10. 'Debts/Mortgage LiabiliY'i es/LS e_ns"f S'c heCU le IJ- (10) ' '1 :042. 03 11. Total Deductions (n) 52,947. 75 12. Net value of Tax Return (12) 793, 109. 99 13. Charitable/Governmental Bequests; Non-elected 9113 Trusts (Schedule J) C13) . DO 14. Net Value of Estate Subject to Tax (14) 793,109. 99 NOTE: If an assessment was issued previously, lines 14, 15 Land/o-r 16, 17, 18 and 19 will reflect figures that include the total of ALL returns assessed to date.. ASSESSMENT .OF TAX: 15. Amount of Line 14 at Spousal rate (15) .00 X DO - DO 16. Amount of Line 14 taxable at Lineal/Class A rate (16) 793 109 99 X 045 = 35,689. 95 17. Amount of Line 14 at Sitilirig-"Tate -" 117T '0"R--X 12---'= --""---"'" '- 18. Amount of Line 14 taxable at Collateral/Class B rate C1BJ 15 - - . 00 19. Principal Tax Due - (19)= 35,689. 95 TAX CREDITS : PAYMENT RECEIPT DISCOUNT C+) - DATE NUMBER INTEREST/PEN PAID (-) AMOUNT PAID 03-14-201.1 CDO14124 . 00 45,000..DO e J -� TOTAL TAX PAYMENT 45,000. 00 m BALANCE OF TAX DUE 9,310.05CR a INTEREST AND PEN. , 00 TOTAL DUE 9,310 . 05CR ' IF PAID AFTER DATE INDICATED, SEE REVERSE IF TOTAL DUE IS REFLECTED AS A "CREDIT" CCR), YOU MAY BE DUE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, the o J day of November, 2013, the undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Objections of Susan M. LaPorte to the First and Final Account of Ann E. LaPorte was served upon the opposing party by way of United States first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Bradley L. Griffie, Esquire 200 North Hanover Street Carlisle,PA 17013 (� Z-L Debra A. Fike, Legal Secretary