IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
IN AND FOR PIERCE COUNTY
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
|
COMPLAINT
PLAINTIFF Heather Mickelson, daughter of Leeanna Ruth Mickelson (Decedent), complains that James Mickelson(Defendant) has denied her right to inspect an original instrument which would transfer all separate and community property to the Defendant. Petitioner hereby contests the validity of the community property agreement filed in the Pierce County’s Auditor’s office by Luce & Associates in April, 2016, nearly four years after Decedent death in May, 2012.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
In late October 2011, Decedent was diagnosed with terminal cancer and entered hospice shortly thereafter. Her oncologist instructed her to get her final affairs in order, including the writing of a last will and testament. She notified her children through e-mail that she intended to write a will and asked each child what each wanted so she could include them in her will. On November 3, 2011, she and the Defendant visited the Luce & Associates law firm with the intent to write a will.
Defendant was negligent in his care to his spouse allowing her to get so dehydrated she was sent to the emergency room. While defendant never stayed overnight with the Decedent, he often would get intoxicated and joke about the Decedent’s purple bracelet which said “DNR”, Do Not Resuscitate. Bringing her home from the hospital, he compared carrying her upstairs as to carrying a sack of potatoes, showing little regard and honor to her life and rushed her death along.
On May 1, 2012 Defendant was intoxicated from the night prior and believed the Decedent was now dead. With no confirmation from a medical doctor, he called his friend Terry Davies of Hill Funeral Home to remove her from her hospice bed and stored inside a temperature controlled refrigerator at Hill Funeral Home in Puyallup, Washington. Defendant instructed his son, Erik Mickelson, to remove her wedding ring. Three days later, a medical doctor examined her inside the funeral home refrigerator and finally pronounced her dead.
Defendant denied Plaintiff her access to the hospice chaplain for grief counseling and no type of memorial service was carried out. Plaintiff sought her own self-help through the writings of her late-mother’s grandmother, Elsie Lincoln Benedict, and further learned of the estate she inherited before the marriage to the Defendant. Decedent’s grandmother was considered the highest paid women’s suffrage leader and the most self-made women in American history, largely forgotten today. In effort to remember her mother’s family’s legacy, Plaintiff asked the Defendant to sign the rights of Elsie Lincoln Benedict to her so she may republish books. Defendant advised her to contact the attorney Zachary Luce with Luce and Luce & Associates to obtain the legal documentation which would transfer these rights to her two daughters. It was unclear whether or not Defendant actually owned this separate property or not because no will had been brought forth upon the passing of her late-mother.
Plaintiff contacted Zachary Luce who provided her with a transfer the Decedent’s Intellectual Property Rights of Elsie Lincoln Benedict to her solely and omitted her twin sister, Gale McArthur. The document Zachary Luce prepared was unfair and would create unnecessary conflict with Plaintiff’s sister, and so Plaintiff began questioning whether the Defendant actually owned these rights, since they were acquired before marriage and would be considered separate property.
In April 2016, Plaintiff learned the Defendant was listing the Decedent’s home in Cabo San Lucas, Mexico, for sale which went against the Decedent’s intent that it be passed onto her children. Since no probate had been open yet, in neither the United States nor Mexico, Defendant was listing the property for sale, as if the Decedent was still alive and in agreement to it being sold. Mexico intestate succession laws are in favor of the children over the spouse.
Plaintiff asked for the Luce & Associates law firm file thecommunity property agreement and intellectual property rightspublicly. With much hesitation from attorney Zachary Luce, ablack and white copy was filed with the Pierce County Auditor in April 2016. Pursuant to RCW 65.04.047, auditors do notverify the authenticity of documents before filing:
“The Auditor or Recording Officer will rely on the information provided on this form. The staff will not read the document to verify the accuracy of or the completeness of the indexing information provided herein.”
In early May of 2016, both attorneys Zachary and Kenyon Luce admitted, in addition to the community property agreement, they also had the Decedent’s will. When Plaintiff visited the Luce & Associates law firm for a copy of the will, Kenyon Luce, cited Plaintiff for trespassing and promised to mail her a copy. Kenyon Luce called 911 and the Fife Police Department’s sergeant and five other officers cited the Petitioner with a permanent trespassing notice. Since, Petitioner has never been back and no will was sent to her in the mail.
Later this same day, Zachary Luce sent an e-mail to thePlaintiff apologizing for the confusion that the Decedent did not write a will. On social media, the Luce & Associates law firm confirmed the Decedent was indeed their client and apologized for the confusion, stating that in their 40 years in practice, this has never happened before.
On May 16, 2016, Plaintiff petitioned the Pierce County Superior Court for a ruling of intestacy and provided an amended declaration from Luce & Associates stating they do not have the Decedent’s will. This intestate order was granted yet never filed with the clerk’s office. Attorney billing records from the Luce & Associates law firm indicates a facsimile communication with the clerk’s office as early as May 17, 2016, before the Defendant was given notice that probate for the Decedent had been opened. In attempt to restore the missing Order of Intestacy, Plaintiff was court ordered to take the legal advice from the clerk who demanded a hearing be noted and was barred from using the law library. On June 7, 2016 the Order of Intestacy was denied due to a conflict with a community property agreement superseding over an intestate ruling.
On June 7, 2016, discovery was open and subpoenas were to allow the inspection of the original community property agreement, notary log book, and billing records from Luce & Associates. June 17, 2016, Luce & Associates failed to comply with the subpoena and argued in favor of the Defendant, whichdismissed the entire probate without prejudice; now under appeal.
Plaintiff questions the validity of the instrument used to transfer both separate and community property to the Defendant based on findings of fact and the dismissal of probate.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
This Court has jurisdiction of the present action under the Washington State statutes and this
Venue is proper in this forum.
FACTS
1. Black ink was used for Decedent’s signature, only Defendant’s signature was in blue ink. If both Decedent and Defendant signed at the same time, both would have used a blue ink pen. Further, the black ink on an originalsignature violates the Luce & Associates law firm’s own office policy is to use different ink colors on an original signature.
2. Proximity to signing Community Property Agreement to death was less than six months.
3. Lack of testamentary capacity and presumption of undue influence. There is a dominant and controlling influence by the beneficiary over the testator; and there is undue activity in procuring the execution of a community property agreement.
4. Defendant was negligent in care and rushed her death along by delivery by sending the Decedent to the funeral home refrigerator where she struggled to survive for three days before being pronounced dead by a medical professional.
5. Defendant instructed his son, Erik Mickelson, to remove the wedding ring off of the Decedent’s ring finger before she was pronounced dead.
6. In 2011, the primary domicile for Decedent was in Cabo San Lucas, Baja California, Mexico, not Pierce County. This is evidenced in a letter by Defendant to the IRS. The community property agreement revokes itself if main domicile is out of state.
7. Failure to execute the community property agreement within 90 days after death.
8. Agreement lists only one real property, omitting four others including the Mexico home.
9. There is no evidence that Decedent was consulted by Luce & Associates that she had the right to obtain independent counsel.
10. Conflicts of interest with Luce & Associates being the Attorney of Record for Northwest Embroidery, Inc., formerly owned by Decedent and now owned by James, Erik, and Scott Mickelson which excludes her two daughters of ownership.
11. No evidence as to the location on where agreement was signed and whether any counsel was involved at all.
12. Failure from witnessing notary, Sharon Rheinschield, to come forth with her notary log book and own declaration as evidence where and when the agreement was signed.
13. Unlike a will going through probate, this agreement lackstwo independent witness signatures.
14. Heirs were denied the ability to inspect and obtain a color copy of the original agreement.
15. Decedent’s intent was to write a will to pass on her personal items to her four children.
16. Contradictory statements from attorneys Kenyon and Zachary Luce that the Decedent did write a will, retracting it just hours later after citing Petitioner with trespassing.
17. No estate attorney in Washington State (with the exception of Luce & Associates) would recommend that their client write only a community property agreement with no will, when more than one heir is involved.
18. No Personal Representative has been appointed due to this agreement superseding the right to appoint a Personal Representative, causing unnecessary chaos in the courts.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE Plaintiff prays for Judgement against Decedent as follows:
Determine the community property agreement is invalid, void, and/or improperly executed without effect.
Dated this 5th of January, 2017 in Seattle, Washington.
