Can we expose bk467p191?       Where did the money go?      

       

 

Approvals

Please judge for yourself:

  • Are there a higher than usual requests for approvals of the accountings?
  • Can the accounting trails actually be exposed?
  • Is it made to appear that they were or could be exposed?
  • Are requests for approvals; precedures that are intended to insure tranparancy, used to opaque?
  • Test: Bk467p191

I don't understand why the accountants ask the IRS, the State, and the Court for approvals of their accountings when the accountants shut out my attempts to expose their accountings. If my not appearing in Court on the scheduled day for the "Debts and Demands'", the Show Cause, and the "Order of Distribution" is interpprteed as an approval of their accounting the reason I did not appear is because the accountants kept the procedures a secrect from me until after they were done. Please see the correspondence. Doesn't the secrecy turn what is supposed to be an exposing of the accounting trails into a cover? [up?].

You, please, be the judge. Does this fit the two paper trails pattern? One trail making it appear that the accounting trails were assessable with lots of official approvals, and one trail, the actual trail, showing that the accounting trails were inaccessible? Can we test the assessability by trying to expose the accounting trails behind Bl467p191?

Warnings

(1) When the accountants use an innocent member who does not have a background in accounting to give their accounting instructions to other family members, it makes the family appear as the source of the resultant confusion and conflict rather than the accountants. Why is Joanne Barnes silent? Why does Edward White speak for Joanne Barnes, why doesn't Joanne Barnes speak for herself? What are Joanne Barnes and Edward White using an innocent family member who has no background in accounting to carry out their instructions?

It is a mistake for a family member to carry out the accountants instrustiuins whgen the accountants will not put their instructions uin writing so that it can be traced back to them.

(2) Does it look as if character assination against a family who tries to assess their accountings is an effective way to stop that family member? I know of no defense against this. If I respond it makes it worse, and diverts attention from the fundamental issue: where does the money go?

 

Correspondence

(1) 1992.04.21 Lynch payment of $125,188 to Jean O'Connell not reported.
(2) undated Signed blank "Stock and bond power". See note 4 at bk467p193.
(3) 1992.03.30   (Anthony O'Connell to Edward White) (Copy to Jean Nader)
(4) 1992.04.04   (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, copy to Jean Nader)
(5) 1992.04.21 Lynch payment of $545,820 to Jean O'Connell's estate planned to not be reported.
(6) 1992.04.22   (Edward White to Jean Nader)
(7) 1992.05.04    (Edward White to Jean Nader)
(8) 1992.06.11 Two versions of payment to the IRS.
(9) Two versions of payment to the IRS.
(10) 1992.12.16   (Edward White to E. A. Prichard, copy to Jean Nader)
(11) 1993.02.02   (Edward White to Jean Nader)
(12) 1993.04.18   (Edward White to Jean Nader) Enclosure:
(xx) 1993.04.18  (enclosure to above) (Edward White and Jean Nader to IRS Memphis, copy to IRS Richmond)
(13) 1993.06.29  Certified  (Anthony O'Connell to Jesse Wilson)  (Copy to Jean Nader, Joanne Barnes and E. A. Prichard)
(14) 1993.07.20   (Jesse Wilson to Anthony O'Connell)
(15) 1993.08.16   (Anthony O'Connell to Jean Nader and Edward White) (Copy to E. A. Prichard)
(16) 1993.09.13   (Anthony O'Connell to Jean Nader and Edward White) (Copy to Sheila O'Connell and E. A. Prichard)
(17) 1993.09.14   (Edward White to E. A. Prichard, copy to Jean Nader) version 1
(18) 1993.09.14   (Edward White to E. A. Prichard, copy to Jean Nader) version 2
(19) 1993.09.21   (Edward White to Clerk, Circuit Court)
(21) 1993.11.05   (Edward White to E. A. Prichard)
(22) 1993.11.12   (Edward White to Judge Bach, copies to Jean Nader and E. A. Prichard)
(23) 1994.01.19   (Edward White to E. A. Prichard, copy to Jean Nader)
(xx) 1994.04.13   (Edward White to Jesse Wilson, copies to Jean Nader, Sheila O'Connell and "Edgar A. Prichard, Esq. Counsel for Anthony M. O'Connell")
(xx) 1995.01.30 (Anthony O'Connell to Judge Thomas Kenny)
(xx) 1995.02.01   (Judge Kenny to Jesse Wilson)
(xx)1995.02.13  (Jesse Wilson to Judge Kenny)
??Enter my letter to Judge Kenny about exceptions
(24) 1995.02.28   (Edward White to Judge Kenny)
(xx) 1995.07.25   (Judge Kenny to Anthony O’Connell)
(25) 2000.08.08   (Jesse Wilson to Anthony OConnell)
(26) 2000.08.08   (Jesse Wilson to Anthony OConnell) Report

 

Does this fit the two paper trails pattern? Telling or implying to innocent Jean Nader that I should not see the accountings then telling the Judges who sign the Show Cause and Order of Distribution that I could see the accountings?

If you researched the Court records and saw what the accountants had put in the Couert records, would you see a paper trail that would convince you that the accountings were secrect or not secrect? If you tryied to expose the accountanting trails today would you find them secrect or not secrect? Can we look at the evidence before judging?

On Does this fit the two paper trails pasttern? Is innocent Jean Nader being instructed/advised one thing (keep me away from accountings) and to Mr. Prichard (after a while) and the Judges another (I could see the accountings at any time).

I don't understant why the accountant's ask for all these approvals when they shut out attempts to expose their accounting trails. I don't understand why, in my 12 to 15 or so visits to the Commissioner Office to look at the estate file, I never saw anything in the file, or heard anything from the Commissioners office, that there was to be a (1) Debts and Demands, (2) Show Cause, and (3) Order of dustributuion, until after they were done and it was too late to appear.

Direct intervention, Direct solution; expose the accounting trails, etc and stop the accountants from

I don't understand why the accountants ask the Court (Debts and Demands, Show Cause, Order of Distribution) the IRS, and the State to approve their accounting and/or release them from liability while blocking the Trustee's attempts to expose the accounting they are asking to be approved.

If the Debts and Demands, Show Cause, and/or Order of Distribution allowed me to appear in Court, I did not appear because I did not know about them until after they were past even though I visited the Commissioner of Accounts Office about 12 to 15 times.

Can we connect the dots between an unusually high amount of approval requests for the accounting when the accounting trails remain secret? Can we please remove the secrecy and find out where the money went?

  • Only one way to the truth; expose the accounting trails at Bk467p191, untangle the accounting entanglements, and find out where the money went.
  • Would asking for approval while keeping what is to be approved secret change the approval procedure from what is intended to be transparent into opaque? Misleading the approver into an unwitting cover up?

Color code:

Blue = I try to expose the accounting trails.
Red = I am shut out from exposing the accounting trails.
Purple = I am made to appear that I could expose the accounting trails.


1991.04.21
Lynch payment of $125,188 to Jean O'Connell not reported.

undated
Signed blank "Stock and bond power". See note 4 at bk467p193.

1992.03.30   (Anthony O'Connell to Edward White) (Copy to Jean Nader)
"I have a few questions I hope you would be kind enough to answer.
1. As you know, the Lynch Limited Partnership plans to pay my Mother's estate $545,820.43 on April 21, 1992. What is your best guess as to when and in what amount(s) you will make distribution(s) to the beneficiaries?
2. The license plates on my deceased Mother's Van expire in April of 1992. Virginia DMV requires a new title with the new owners name before they will issue new plates {The plates cannot be renewed by the co-executors signing for Jean O'Connell). The bank will give the co-executors the title if you simply pay them the interest on the loan. I understand the principal on the loan has been paid and I am guessing that the interest is something in the range of $1200 to $1400. Would you please pay the bank the interest so they will give you the title? What is your decision as to who gets the van and how much will it costs?
3. What is your fee for being co-executor of my mother's estate?
Yours truly, Anthony O'Connell "

1992.04.04   (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, copy to Jean Nader)
"I have received your letter of March 30, 1992.
The answers are: 
Question 1. As soon as the money is received, the tax liabilities evaluated and upon consultation with the Co-Executor.
Question 2. Paid. It is not my decision as to what it will cost you, though I have been informed that you know full well.
Question 3.  2 Y % of the receipts into the probate estate if approved by the Commissioner of Accounts.
I would call to your attention that on two separate occasions I drove to Sovran and spent a lengthy period of time on the question of the car loan. I did this in person since: I knew that you had the vehicle, that your sisters wanted you to have it, that the insurance and tags were due to expire soon and I did not want you to be inconvenienced. I could have done all of this by mail and it probably would have taken about three months, knowing the nature of the loan problem. I assumed I was doing you a favor.
Now I receive you letter asking that I "simply pay them the interest" I paid the interest and principal in one check on March 12, received the title on March 22 and mailed it to Mrs. Nader to sign over to you on March 23. Have you any suggestions as to how it could have gone faster?
The information of the commission was given to you previously by Mrs. Nader.
I do not know what your problem is, but in the future, please address all correspondence to Mrs. Nader.
I am trying to be patient with you, but I find that this estate is time consuming enough without having to deal with letters such as the last two that I have received.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1992.04.21
Lynch payment of $545,820 to Jean O'Connell's estate planned to not be reported. No mention of payment and payment not recorded in accounting.

1992.04.22   (Edward White to Jean Nader) No mention of $545,820 the previous day.
"Enclosed is an agreement which should satisfy Tony as to the car. It cannot be any clearer.
Also enclosed is a preliminary analysis of the estate tax, which should be close to being accurate. I do need to check with Jo Ann Barnes as to a technical question as to whether or not any of your father's trust comes into this. I do not think it does, but there have been many changes in the law since that trust was established. I will have to ask her to bill us for that advice and any other technical tax matters I am not comfortable with. I can do most of the rest of the tax work and save the estate some money.
The executors' commission shown on the analysis is not figured on the value of the realty; however it does not include the 5% commission on the receipts of the estate in addition to the inventory.
In order to file that return and the subsequent Fiduciary Income tax return we will need an accounting from Tony from the date of his last accounting to the date of death. If he does not want to prepare it, I will not agree to any preliminary disbursal to him at all, and will seek your approval to file suit against him to compel the accounting, plus damages to the estate for his delay. Since that trust terminated on your mother's death, his final accounting is due now and not in October.
There will be no further explanations or written entreaties to him as far as I am concerned. He has the duty and he will perform it under a court order if necessary. Of course he will furnish that receipt.
The preliminary analysis contains three alternatives on Accotink at the bottom for your consideration.
In the event that we do seek a reduction in the assessment Tony will be given written notice that his prompt cooperation is necessary and that if he fails to cooperate that he is aware of the adverse consequences to the estate and is responsible for them.
As far as further steps are concerned, we have a lot to do. No gift tax returns were filed for 1989 and 1991 which will have to be done. The results of those gifts are factored in under "Unified Credit used for gifts 9,784".
The paper trail in the court and IRS is as follows:
File Estate tax by June 15, 1992
File First Accounting (16 months after qualification but can be sooner)
Ask for posting of Debts and Demands against the estate.
File Fiduciary Income tax returns for period 9/15/91-9/15/92, due January 1, 1993.
File Motion for a Show Cause why distribution should not be made. Submit Show Cause Order.
Request Executor's exoneration letter from IRS and Virginia.
Obtain closing letter from IRS and Virginia as to estate tax returns.
File 1993 Fiduciary tax returns (Sept. 1992-distribution)
File for Order allowing distribution.
Distribute estate.
File Final Accounting.
Normally distribution is withheld until the Order of Distribution is entered. As I indicated the creditors have one year to press claims against the estate. No prudent executor will distribute before that period, the entry of the Order of Distribution and the receipt of the tax closing letters.
Sincerely, Edward J. White
(See pdf for enclosures)

 

1992.05.04    (Edward White to Jean Nader)
"Enclosed is the form for appealing the tax assessment of the Accotink property. On page 2, it states that there is a June 1 deadline. I do not think we can make a claim of a lesser value on the estate tax return if we do not file an appeal with the county. To fail do appeal it would hurt our argument with the IRS.
The summary of the estate tax computation and the interplay of the gift tax is as follows: 1. In computing the estate tax, the gross estate (which includes anything which passes due to death whether in the probate estate or not) is figured, the debts subtracted and the "taxable estate" is ascertained. 
2. The tax is then computed on the taxable estate. From this figure is subtracted a "unified credit" of $192,800 (equivalent to a taxable estate of $600,000).
3. Lifetime gifts in excess of $10,000 to any one individual are taxable at the estate/gift tax rates. Each year the donor should have filed a gift tax return, though no Lax is due unless the entire $192,800 credit has been used in making the gifts.
4. Each gift over $10,000 uses a portion of the unified credit, thus reducing the amount of that credit available to apply to the estate tax.
In our case the lifetime gifts used up $9784.00 of the available credit. A list of the gifts is enclosed. Returns for 1989 and 1991 must be filed. As fiduciaries we must certify to the IRS that the return is true and correct. We have personal liability in that regard. If we have knowledge of a gift to Tony of $15,000, we must report it. Tony is going to have to answer that question before we can be satisfied. If he claims he did not receive the money, he will have to supply us with an affidavit to that effect.
As far as the management of an estate undergoing the probate process is concerned, the Executors are entitled to some latitude within the confines of their fiduciary duty. The decisions about the estate are theirs.
My personal operational mode in these matters is to keep the heirs fully supplied with the paperwork of the estate, and consult with them fully as to strategic and long range issues, such as the valuation of property in the Accotink situation. The day to day matters and the justification for tactical positions taken such as the contents of forms and accountings are the prerogative of the Executors and subject to the scrutiny and approval of the Commissioner of Accounts or the taxing authorities only. With regard to the filing of the income tax return, my file indicates that I received a fax copy of the K-1 from the Harold O'Connell Trust on April 9, 1992, only six days before the tax return was due.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1992.06.11
Two versions of payment to the IRS.

?Insert Uneven distribution Note about car ? With Order of distribution

1992.12.16   (Edward White to E. A. Prichard, copy to Jean Nader)
"Enclosed is a copy of a letter I received today from your client, Anthony M. O'Connell.
The fiduciary tax return including the K-1's were sent by express mai1,to Mrs. Nader, the other Co-Executor yesterday (the same day I received them from the accountant). I asked her to distribute them to the heirs.
Your client seeks my "best estimate" of taxable income from the estate, and a schedule of events with his usual request for specificity.
Thus far your client has received $108,230.14 in discretionary, preliminary distributions. No further disbursements will be made until the Final Order of Distribution is entered.
The remainder of the information he seeks can more appropriately be produced to Mr. O'Connell either by you or his accountant, or is otherwise unavailable.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1993.02.02   (Edward White to Jean Nader)
"At present the status of the estate is as follows:
Debts and Demands: A hearing following publication, for any creditors of the estate to come forward and press their claims was held on December 30, 1992 by the Commissioner of Accounts. No one appeared.
 First Accounting: is still awaiting approval. I spoke to the Commissioner's office on January 29, and they said they are just beginning to review accounts filed in October. The account must be reviewed and any questions answered. (I have never known of a Commissioner who did not have some questions.) The account is then approved or disapproved, and the Commissioner files his report with the court. No time prediction can be made here as this is soley in the hands of the Commissioner.
Estate Tax Closinq Letter or communication in lieu of a closing letter. No time prediction can be made here as this is soley in the hands of the IRS. In estate's of this size an audit of some or all of the return is not at all unusual.
Motion for an Order to Show Cause why the estate should not be distributed. Filed by the estate after the report of the accounting has been filed with the Court by the Commissioner.
Order to Show Cause why the estate should not be distributed. This is entered by the Court upon the request (and appearance) of the estate, following two weeks publication. Order of Distribution. Presented to the Court following the
Show Cause proceeding. The Show Cause - Order of Distribution statutory scheme is the protection for the executors.
Distribution in accordance with the Order.
Second (and Final) Accountinq. Filed after distribution
showing all transactions since the First Accounting.
Second Fiduciary Income Tax Return Filed after distribution for the period following the first return (9/1/92 - ?)
The unknown factors as far as time is concerned are: 1) the federal and state tax closing letters, 2) When the Commissioner approves the accounting, 3) When the Commissioner makes his report to the Court, 4) Delays in the Clerk's office. The fiduciary has no control whatsoever over any of these items
Enclosed are checks to be signed to the Commissioner and to Keller-Bruner for the tax preparation. The accountant's bill is reasonable considering the complexity of the return involving tax free income, preliminary distributions and capital gains.
As far as an income prediction for the Estate is concerned, I can make no intelligent prediction since I do not know how long it will remain open. I have been continuously burned in making gratuitous comments about the tax liability of the heirs, and counsel and other attorney friends have stated to me, that given the performance of Mr. O'Connell, that I should make no comment at all. I tried to be helpful, but that did not work. I can only say that had I not been adamant about re-valuing the Accotink property, Mr. O'Connell's initial approach would have cost this estate dearly. From the comments in his recent demands for "information", I can see that he is jumping to conclusions based on no knowledge at all. I will not reply directly to him on any future aspect of this estate. As a matter of fact I am precluded as an attorney from dealing with an adverse party who is represented by counsel. I have no intentions of having him dictate the duties of the fiduciaries. If his counsel wishes to discuss anything, I am certainly available.
The present assets of the estate are: 
(See this part in the pdf reference; this part is figures)
This totals $315,695.03, but is out of date since there have been additions since 12/31/92. These figures are taken from data at hand and do not represent any formal accounting by me. They are not furnished for any individual's use for personal tax purposes, and I disclaim any personal tax liability which might arise.
I am enclosing Edwards 12/31/92 statement which contains an entry for each asset's estimated annual yield. The amounts received from all of these funds will vary with market conditions. All of these Edwards assets are being reinvested, either in the specific funds or in Edwards Centennial Money Market Account. The estimates on Franklin, Kemper and ICA are much harder to figure. A complicating factor is that Nuveen, Kemper, Franklin and the Fairfax bond are tax free, though not all of them are Virginia tax free.
The following are the earnings from 9/1/92, the beginning date for the next fiduciary income tax return.
(See this part in the pdf reference; this part is figures)
It should be noted that some of these items are tax free.
Since the tax laws now require payment of estimated taxes after the first estate tax year, I will have to compute these later. They will be due in April, if the estate is still open then.
Finally, I would like, for the record some memorandum from you and Sheila concerning my earlier comments as to attempting a further reduction in the Accotink valuation.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"
(See pdf for enclosure)

1993.04.18   (Edward White to Jean Nader)
"Enclosed is a formal request for discharge of liability letter to be signed and mailed to the IRS.
Also enclosed is a copy of a less formal request that they get off the hands and issue the closing letter.
Finally there are copies of the latest financial statements that I have received.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"
(An enclosure to the above is the same as the letter below)

Enclosure:
1993.04.18  (enclosure to above) (Edward White and Jean Nader to IRS Memphis, copy to IRS Richmond)
Please regard this letter as a request by the undersigned Co- Executors of the captioned estate for determination of tax due on this estate and as a request for discharge from personal liability therefor under IRS Code Section 2204. The Estate Tax return was filed in September 1992.
Also, please regard this letter as a request by the Co- Executors to be released from personal liability for any and all Federal income and gift taxes due by the deceased. This request for discharge of personal liability of the Co-Executors for the decedent's Federal income and gift taxes is made pursuant to IRS Code Section 6905.
I would appreciate you or your delegate receipting and returning the enclosed copy of this letter to signify the date on which it was received by you.
Sincerely, Edward J. White   Jean M. Nader Co-executors"

 

1993.06.29  Certified  (Anthony O'Connell to Jesse Wilson)  (Copy to Jean Nader, Joanne Barnes and E. A. Prichard)
"As a beneficiary of the above estate, I respectfully request your permission to review the accounting and receipts of the estate before you approve any of the accounts. If you need justification to grant me this, I will provide it.
I thank you in advance.
Sincerely, Anthony O'Connell "

1993.07.20   (Jesse Wilson to Anthony OConnell)
"RE: Estate of Jean M. OConnell
Fiduciary No. 49160
Dear Mr. OConnell
This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of June 29, 1993 concerning the above estate.
The first account in this matter was approved in March of this year and has been sent to the Clerk's Office and may be reviewed there.
The second account, for the period ending December 10,
1993, is due on or before April 10, 1994. While these papers are in this office, they are a public record which you may review. However, they will be audited and approved in due course regardless of whether they have been reviewed by you.
Yours very truly,
Jesse B. Wilson, III
Commissioner of Accounts"


1993.08.16   (Anthony O'Connell to Jean Nader and Edward White) (Copy to E. A. Prichard)
"In your 1etter.to Mr. Prichard of July 7, 1993, you mention that you have chosen to file a Motion to Show Cause.
If the Motion to Show Cause means I am supposed to approve something by my signature, or by my failure to appear somewhere or remain silent is a de facto approval of something, would you please tell me what it is? If the issue includes accounting, would you please send me copies of these accounts?
Because I would be reluctant to approve something I don't understand, I ask you this now in order that there be no possible delay later. This is only a request for information. I thank you in advance.
Sincerely, Anthony O'Connell "

(no response)

1993.09.13   (Anthony O'Connell to Jean Nader and Edward White) (Copy to Sheila O'Connell and E. A. Prichard)
"Would you please send me a copy of your final estate accounting in time for me to go over it before it is approved?
I never knew you had a hearing for "Debts and Demands". Would you please let me know when you do your "Show Cause" for distribution?
Sincerely, Anthony O'Connell "

1993.09.14   (Edward White to E. A. Prichard, copy to Jean Nader)
"I have received the enclosed letter 1 from your client. Needless to say I will not reply to same.
As we both know, he is not the fiduciary, and I do not have to submit documents to him for prior review. His comments regarding debts and demands and wanting to be a part of the Show Cause process indicate that he would profit from advice from someone.
Please advise if you have any questions
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1993.09.14   (Edward White to E. A. Prichard, copy to Jean Nader)
"I have received the enclosed letter 1 from your client.
He is not the fiduciary, and I do not have to submit documents to him for prior review.  His comments regarding debts and demands and wanting to be a part of the Show Cause process indicate that he would profit from advice from someone. Most of his problems throughout this affair have been from jumping to conclusions based on little or no legal knowledge.
Now that a closing letter has been received, I am moving as fast as possible to get this estate settled. I am frankly sick and tired of your client's actions.
Since you do not see fit to communicate with me despite numerous offers on my part I will admit to being more than frustrated.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1 If the letter Edward White is referring to is my letter of September 13, 1993, isn't this about as clear as it gets that my attempts to expose the accounting trails are refused? I'm guessing that this message is for innocent Jean Nader (copy to), that I am out of order for asking to see the accountings and asking about the Show cause .

 

1993.09.21   (Edward White to Clerk, Circuit Court)
Re: Show cause order
Estate of Jean M. O'Connell
"Enclosed is a Motion and Order for Show Cause Against Distribution and my check in the amount of $10.00. 
Please send me a copy of the Order when it is signed
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

The text in bold purple makes it appear that the accountings were assessable

1993.11.05   (Edward White to E. A. Prichard)
"On October 29, 1993, Judge Bach entered the Order of Distribution, a copy of which is enclosed.
I am also enclosing the full financial history of the estate including receipts and disbursements from which the final accounting will be prepared, as well as the statements from A. G. Edwards and the mutual funds which will give the approximate value of the assets on hand.
Mr. O'Connell had expressed the desire to be paid in cash, but now has stated to Mrs. Nader that he desires to have the stocks and funds distributed to him. His sisters also desire an in kind distribution. As long as all three want the same thing, I have no problem with in kind or cash distribution.
The commission requested will be 5% of the assets and income received by the estate. Items upon which no commission is due are noted in the Receipts listing. Mrs. Nader has stated that she does not want a commission. Since we took a deduction for the full 5% commission on the 706 and saved money thereby, Mrs. Nader is going to split her share three ways less the income tax which she will pay on it.
The second fiduciary return will be ready next week and copies will be distributed as soon as I receive it.
I wish I could end this letter at this point, but there are some other matters which I did not think would arise after Mr. O'Connell's civil tone in his letter of June 30 and my reply.
Enclosed is a copy of Mr. O'Connell's letter to the Commissioner of October 25, 1993. (Earlier he had written the Commissioner requesting that I be denied reimbursement from the estate for expenses in defending myself from his charge to the Bar. I wrote Jesse Wilson that I never entertained seeking such payment. ) On October 27, 1993, I wrote Jesse and told him that you were representing Mr. O'Connell or at least advising him.
Next, I was informed by Mrs. Nader last week that Mr. O'Connell has demanded that we be bonded. The will flatly states otherwise and to do so would be in violation of our office.
I will admit that I am furious about this continual petty harassment. From inception of this estate including the time that his sisters gave him the vehicle and I merely asked for a receipt so that a proper accounting might be filed, Mr. O'Connell has tried one stunt after another to disrupt the flow of administration, notwithstanding my repeated attempts to calm him down.
I am including Mr. O'Connell's complaint to the Virginia State Bar and the Bar's reply. I have omitted the 44 pages of enclosures he filed. His outright malicious lies about me (Page 7: "to deliberately mislead a seventy-nine year old woman", "abuse of the fiduciary trust" and "license to steal") in his complaint to the Bar are unforgivable and most decidedly actionable. In this regard please inform him that I would accept a full written apology for these remarks and let the matter drop even though no one has ever made such a statement about me.
I am fully aware of the root cause of all of this; however, it is not my fault that Miss Jo Ann Barnes refused to serve as a Co- Executor with Mr. O'Connell or that his mother came to me and directed his removal from that clause of the will.
I would fervently pray that he be counselled insofar as possible to let this estate be wound up in a normal fashion. He does not have to like me; he needs only to get off my back.
I assume that if he does not let matters drop, the next step will be to try and deny all or part of the commission due. I have spent well over 110 hours in this case without any payment of any sort and will most certainly expect to be paid the customary commission (2 1/2%) which I have explained to Mr. O'Connell in the past, provided it is approved by the Commissioner.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1993.11.12   (Edward White to Judge Bach, copies to Jean Nader and E. A. Prichard)
"Today I received a copy of a letter to you from one Anthony M. O'Connell.
Due to a personal vendetta with me, Mr. O'Connell, obviously without the sanction of his counsel, has decided to voice any conceivable complaint possible about the administration of his mother's estate by his sister and myself. All of his efforts have been rebuffed.
Mr. O'Connell long ago was offered and in-kind distribution and rejected it. When he changed his mind, he was told that an in-kind distribution would be made. He had been told that prior to his letter to you. The distribution is in progress in the form in which he desires (barring a further change of mind). The status of the brokerage accounts has been mailed to his counsel and were at all times available had he requested them. His letter is of course contradictory in that it asks first for 1/3 of each stock and then requests the privilege of picking and choosing stocks of his choice.
The Show Cause and Order of Distribution procedure is a pro forma matter for the benefits of creditors and Mr. O'Connell is not entitled to notice unless he is a creditor. 1 The form of the distribution is not his prerogative to dictate 2 (though here he knew it would be that which he desired). If Mr. O'Connell really wishes to delay the distribution for about seven weeks while I recover from surgery to be performed next week, I would agree. I do have the distinct feeling that the other heirs might not be happy with that action on his part. 3
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1 I don't understand why Edward White would tell Judge Bach, with copies to others such as innocent Jean Nader who would believe what Edward White is telling a Judge must be true, that I am not entitled to notice because I am not a creditor. The definition of a Show cause order from "Blacks Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, is:

"Show cause order. An order decree, execution, etc., to appear as directed, and present to the court such reasons and considerations as one has to offer why a particular order, decree, etc., should not be confirmed, take effect, be executed, or as the cause may be.
An order to a person or corporation to appear in court and explain why the court should not take a proposed action. If the person or cooperation fails to appear or to give sufficient reasons why the court should take no action, the court will take the action."
("Order of Distribution" was not in the dictionary)

Even if the only creditors comment were true; the accountants have made me, or made me appear, as a creditor. See "4debts2payments"

 

2 Please judge for yourself as to whether innocent Jean Nader used here:
1992.09.08 (Estimated)   (Jean Nader to Anthony O'Connell)
"Hi, Enclosed is most of the remaining cash in the estate.
Income tax copies are also on the way to you -
When the IRS appraisal comes, we will decide how to divide A. G. Edwards - any ideas?
Went to N York to see a few days of the tennis Open - great fun -
Good luck with your bull dozer engine - I enjoyed your letter! Love Jean"

3 I believe this refers to my being required to sign an I-approve-the-accounting type document(s) before I, and for some reason the other beneficiaries, could receive their distributions. but I don't remember what it was. Because of this:

"If Mr. O'Connell really wishes to delay the distribution for about seven weeks while I recover from surgery to be performed next week, I would agree. I do have the distinct feeling that the other heirs might not be happy with that action on his part."

I believed I signed what ever it was. I did not make copies. Withholding all the beneficiaries distributions unless you sign what the accountants want you to sign is strong leverage

 

 

1994.01.19   (Edward White to E. A. Prichard, copy to Jean Nader)
"Enclosed is a copy of the final accounting and a receipt for Mr. O'Connell's signature acknowledging the disbursement of the three funds and the Fairfax County bonds. Accompanying it is a letter to me from Mrs. May which established the value on the date of disbursement.
The final fiduciary tax return is being sent to the accountant to be prepared. This will be a 1994 tax event as I understand it.
Mrs. Nader will send the final disbursement check directly to Mr. O'Connell as soon as she signs it. She will also request that he sign a statement agreeing to the payment of her commission. It is my understanding that she will give Sheila and Mr. O'Connell 1/3 of that commission after the deduction of income taxes payable by her on it.
I am not asking that Mr. O'Connell approve the accounting since I do not want it delayed. If he wants to quarrel about it, he can do so with the commissioner. I am enclosing the letter which will be sent to the commissioner concerning the commission.
If you have any questions or comments please contact me.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1994.04.13   (Edward White to Jesse Wilson, copies to Jean Nader, Sheila O'Connell and "Edgar A. Prichard, Esq. Counsel for Anthony M. O'Connell")
Re: Estate of Jean M. O'Connell
Fiduciary #49160
"Enclosed is the Second and Final Accounting in this estate with vouchers, financial account statements, closing letters and the affidavit as to tax payments.
I hereby request that compensation to me as Co-Executor in the amount of $23,580.89 (2 1/2% of the adjusted gross receipts of the estate $943,235.84) be approved. A calculation sheet is attached.
Duties of the Co-Executor since' October 1991, have consisted of meeting with heirs, consulting with the broker handling certain of the estate assets as to investments and making decisions on asset management and sale, personally closing out the decedents bank accounts, resolving the matter of an unpaid bank loan to free the title to a vehicle, assisting in a successful appeal of the county assessment of real estate, managing the estate bank account, personal research as to asset value, preparation of all necessary administration documents, preparing decedent's federal and state income tax returns, preparing several years gift tax returns for decedent, preparing state and federal estate tax returns and amendments, personally contacting IRS to obtain closing letters, preparing financial data for the accountant to file three federal and state fiduciary income tax returns, responding to numerous letters of one of the heirs, closing and transferring a brokerage account and court appearance and pleadings for the Order of Distribution.
The time is estimated to be about 127 hours which is probably conservative. A time sheet is enclosed. Included is at least 4.75 hours which were spent in preparing an answer to a complaint filed with the Virginia State Bar by Anthony M. O'Connell which complaint was dismissed without a hearing. 
Any questions concerning Mrs. Nader's (the other Co-Executor) commission should be addressed the other heirs. Mrs. Nader conducted all liaison with the family members which was demanding and invaluable.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1995.01.30 (Anthony O'Connell to Judge Thomas Kenny)
"I'll try to make a very long story short. I am a beneficiary of the above estate, and my sister and Mr. Ed White, attorney, are co-executors.
I believe the enclosures show Mr. White intentionally kept the significance of your 9/27/93 order a secret from me until it was too late for me to appear before you, and now, from his letter of October 14, 1994, under the guise of wanting to help the estate, wants my sister to sign a statement blaming someone other than himself for leaving out another asset. Since Mr. White refused my request before, and will probably use your order to protect himself, would you please allow me the opportunity to appear before you now? The estate is open.
I look forward to your reply.
Sincerely, Anthony O'Connell "

1995.02.01   (Judge Kenny to Jesse Wilson)
Re: Estate of Jean O’Connell
Fiduciary No. 49160
Dear Mr. Wilson:
I have reviewed the enclosed correspondence from Mr. Anthony O’Connell regarding the estate of Jean O’Connell. Since it appears from his letter that the estate is still in administration, I am referring the matter to you as Commissioner of Accounts.
Will you please respond to Mr. O’Connell as you deem appropriate?
Thomas S. Kenny
TSK/wf
cc:
Anthony O'Connell
Edward J. White, Esq.

1995.02.13  (Jesse Wilson to Judge Kenny)
"RE: Estate of Jean M. OConnell
Fiduciary No. 49160
Dear Judge Kenny:
In response to your letter of February 1, 1995 concerning the above matter, a review of our records shows that a Final Account was approved in June, 1994 and we have closed our file.
In a letter to the Attorney General, copy enclosed, Mr. OConnell says (paragraph 2.) that "Exceptions to the Commissioner's Report" were filed. However, I have no other information about that. 1
If, in fact, no exceptions were timely filed or, if filed were overruled, then I believe, for most purposes, the estate would be considered closed in that the known responsibilities of the personal representatives are deemed to have been properly discharged, and they are entitled to be relieved of their obligation under their bond. See, S26-33. I say this primarily as information for Mr. OConnell who, as I understand it, is concerned about whether the estate is "open" or "closed" within the meaning of the Instructions promulgated by the Virginia Department of Taxation for applying for funds in settlement of tax refund claims by the estates of retired federal employees.
If this matter should be re-opened or re-committed to me for any reason, I, of course, will act accordingly.
Please let me know if there is anything else you wish me to do at this time.
Yours very truly,
Jesse B. Wilson, III
Commissioner of Accounts"

1 Can we find out what happened to the Exceptions to the Commissioner's Report I filed on June 16, 1994, and was referenced in the index of Wills and Fiduciaries report dated 12/01/94, at page 198 (I'm not sure of the last diget that I'm calling an "8"). Can we follow the document trail starting from this point?


1995.02.28   (Edward White to Judge Kenny)
"Normally I just let these things lie still, but Mr. Anthony O'Connell's latest in his letter to you needs some clarification.
I not only furnished Mr. O'Connell's attorney, Edgar A. Prichard, a copy of the entire financial history of the estate, noting that it would be from that document that the final accounting would be prepared (my ltr of 11/9/93), but a copy of the accounting itself (my ltr of 1/19/94). In addition, he received copies correspondence concerning every other event in the administration of this estate including all of my letters to the co-executor, his sister.
I have never received his "Exceptions" and have only heard from the Commissioner's office that they are 109 pages long.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"
(Note: Envelope to above not post marked. See pdf reference)

1995.07.25   (Judge Kenny to Anthony O’Connell)
Re: Estate of Jean M. O’Connell
Fid. No. 49160
Dear Mr. O’Connell:
I cannot offer you legal advice, nor can I consider any matter that is not before the court upon proper motion and notice to all other concerned parties.
Very truly yours,  
Thomas S. Kenny
cc:
Edward J. White, Esq.

2000.08.08   (Jesse Wilson to Anthony OConnell)
"RE: Estate of Jean M. OConnell
Fiduciary No. 49160
Dear Mr. OConnell
This will acknowledge receipt of a copy of your letter of July 24, 2000 to Judges of the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit Court of Virginia.
While I do not presume to speak for the Court or any of the Judges, I think that it is safe to say:
(1) the Court is not organized or constituted for the purpose of conducting the sort of investigation required to establish the facts that you allege in your letter. The Court can only decide cases based on evidence produced by others;
(2) the officials who are responsible for conducting investigations of alleged crimes in Virginia are the Commonwealth Attorneys (the prosecutors) in each jurisdiction and the police departments and their detectives. If the available facts are sufficient to convince the Commonwealth's Attorney that it can be proved that a crime has been committed, and that a prosecution is not barred by the statute of limitations, his/her job is to bring the matter before the Court.
I hope this will be helpful.
Very truly yours,
Jesse B. Wilson, III 1
Commissioner of Accounts"

1 Our family is innocent. The issue is; can we, or can we not, expose the accountant's accounting trails such as those behind Bk467p191 in the public record, untangle the accounting entanglements, and find out where the money went? Can we stay on the issue and look at the evidence for the issue?

Can we look at the evidence before judging? When an accounting is approved by a Commissioner of Accounts the public believes that the accounting trails were exposed, that any accounting entanglements were untangled, that it was found out where the money went, and that the money went where it was supposed to go. What is being approved if not this? Why would any rule or law be evoked to stop this from being done? If this can't be done, shouldn't the public know that it can't be done?

 

2000.08.08   (Jesse Wilson to Anthony OConnell)
"Enclosed please find a copy of my report approving your 1l th account as trustee in the above matter as your Final Account. As you will see from the report, it appears to me from the information you have provided that the $659.97 1 debt you report is not a trust asset. Even if the debt existed as you suggest, it's collectability would be so problematic and uncertain, and the effort so costly, as to render it worthless and make reasonable a decision for it to be abandoned as an asset. It certainly should not be the basis for keeping this trust estate open and requiring the filing of annual accounts indefinitely.
In the event that the trustee is successful in recovering $659.97 or any other funds which are proper trust assets to be accounted for, such may be reported to the Commissioner of Accounts by an Amended Inventory and, thereafter, accounted for by proper accounts.
If you disagree with this action by me, you may file exceptions with the
Court within fifteen (15) days of the filing of my report and take the matter up directly with the Court.
Very truly yours,
Jesse B. Wilson, III
Commissioner of Accounts"

1 I don't understand why Jesse Wilson does not recognize what he has approved:

The $1,475.97 item was approved by Jesse Wilson on October 4, 1993:
"Payable to the Estate of Jean M. O'Connell ... ... ... ... $ 1,475.97" (Book 480 page 1768)

The $816. 00 and the $659.97 items were approved by Jesse Wilson on March 20, 1993:
"Int fm Harold O'Connell Trust  ......................................... 816.00 "(Book 467 page 192)
"Debt fm Harold O’Connell Trust ...................................... 659.97 "(Book 467 page 192)

 

Turning point

Would those who the accountants have gotten to approve their accountings be embarrased by exposure? And I, rather than the accountants, be put into conflict with the IRS, the State, the Judges, the Commissioner of Accounts Office, and my own family? Or would one or more decide that a wrong has been done and now it is going to be corrected?