Guardianship News:

Communication with New Mexico Chief Justice Daniels

New Mexico's Supreme Court Justices: (front) Justice Petra Jimenez Maes, Chief Justice Charles W. Daniels , Justice Edward L. Chavez, (back) Justice Barbara J. Vigil , Justice Judith K. Nakamura New Mexico's Supreme Court Justices: (front) Justice Petra Jimenez Maes, Chief Justice Charles W. Daniels , Justice Edward L. Chavez, (back) Justice Barbara J. Vigil , Justice Judith K. Nakamura

March 23, 2017

Most Honorable Chief Justice Daniels

Please accept my sincere thanks for taking a moment to read this e-mail.

I am the founder of the national organization Americans Against Abusive Probate Guardianship http://www.aaapg.net.

Recently, New Mexico victims created the independent affiliate chapter www.aaapg.net/NM.

It is my understanding that you graciously attended a town hall meeting last evening in which my esteemed colleague Kelley Smoot Garrett presented the dire concerns of a number of New Mexico citizens who are deeply concerned about issues with regard to professional guardianships and trusts in your State because of their collective experience as victims of what appears to be a very seriously flawed system of guardianship. We are of the informed opinion that there are many, many other victims in your state.

Our advocacy organization has studied many hundreds of case histories of guardianships from across the country and has become aware of a profoundly disturbing pattern of abuse in all but a few states in the country. In New Mexico, these issues are centered in the Albuquerque area. As we have found in Nevada where our efforts have led to indictments against a number of criminal guardians and their co-conspirators, in Florida where our efforts have resulted in a Supreme Court working group as well as substantial legislative reform of guardianship laws, in Colorado where dramatic reform measures are in the legislature, and even in Washington DC  where federal guardianship legislation has been proposed  by Sen. Grassley and is moving through process to become law, the State laws that were designed to protect the most vulnerable in our society have been perverted into a sophisticated legalistic methodology to abuse, neglect and exploit the most vulnerable in our society and their families. The primary beneficiaries of this methodology are court insiders including guardians and their attorneys. The endless staged legislation needed to execute this perverse methodology drains tax dollars from the courts and as you know the situation in Albuquerque became so desperate that the courts had to seek an additional $600,000 in funding to allow critically important criminal trials to proceed.

None of this could occur without the Court’s routine or even inadvertent cooperation.

The purpose of my communication with you today is to further raise your awareness of this critically important issue in your state. Chief Justice Hardesty of Nevada and Chief Justice La Barga of Florida have made it clear that this is an important issue for their court systems and that it requires urgent attention.

We pray that you will recognize the legitimacy and urgency of this issue and the need for an honest and comprehensive investigation of the stakeholders in abusive and exploitation of guardianship in your State.

The resources of our organization are at your disposal.

Gratefully

Sam J Sugar MD

Founder, Americans Against Abusive Probate guardianship

855 913 5337 x101

drsam@aaapg.net

Sam Sugar MD

 

Justice Daniels’ reply:

Dear Dr. Sugar,

Thank you for your input.  My court is now exploring creation of a mechanism for a comprehensive and objective assessment of New Mexico’s guardianship practices and laws and the ways in which either could be improved.  In doing so, it will be important to reach out to all who have perspectives on these issues, including your organization.  I will keep your contact information in my files on the subject and be back in touch in the near future.

 With best regards,

Chief Justice Charles W. Daniels

New Mexico Supreme Court

Admin Note: Chief Justice requests that the public “hold off sending [their complaints] until we create the mechanism for efficiently soliciting and reviewing the substantial input our committee (or whatever it will be called) can expect to receive and process in a project of this scope.”