File a False Lien - Go To Jail (Ronald Hoodenpyle)

[Pottapaug1938]

I also wonder how well that "holographic", unwitnessed "will" held up in court.

[William Dunlap]

CASE: 01CR1616

And here is the Order that you and the judge violated see all the proof on your website and call
yourself mis-informed caser:

here is the order that came before all the bullshit everyone put me though:

http://interfacesone.net/Upload/upload/ ... cr1616.JPG

Oh, This would mean double jeopardy?

Sincerely,

Wiliiam Dunlap

[Burnaby49]

CASE: 01CR1616

And here is the Order that you and the judge violated see all the proof on your website and call
yourself mis-informed caser:

here is the order that came before all the bullshit everyone put me though:

http://interfacesone.net/Upload/upload/ ... cr1616.JPG

Sincerely,

Wiliiam Dunlap

Was that supposed to tell me something?

[wserra]

here is the order that came before all the bullshit everyone put me though:

That's an order releasing your bond. That can happen for many reasons before the case ends. There is no way to tell whether it was contemporaneous with the end of your case or not. In any event, it is decidedly not an order ending the case itself.

Oh, This would mean double jeopardy?

Not in the least. Hell, jeopardy doesn't attach to a dismissal unless it's on the merits.

[fortinbras]

For the normal (i.e. non-lawyer) people on this website:

The holographic will is linked in Dunlap's August 29th entry ....
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wwdunlap2009/9622958014

A holographic will, despite the high tech name, is a will entirely in the decedent's handwriting, with no other writing - especially without any witness signatures. This might seem easy but it is almost invariably an entirely amateur effort and therefore painfully easy to somehow contain an invalidity or a problem that guarantees prolonged litigation if there are any greedy or jealous relatives. I recall a story about a lawsuit (which evidently did not go to a published decision) over a holographic will written by someone using hotel stationery - and the argument was that the hotel's name and address embossed in the paper violated the holographic nature of the will (I honestly can't remember how the case ended). There was a really cute lawsuit over a holographic will written by a blind lady who was unaware that her pen had no ink in it; experts had to be called in to analyze the paper fibers to figure out what she had been trying to write. The savings by not hiring a lawyer to help write the holographic will are almost always completely undone and worse by the legal expenses in making the holographic will effective.

Subsequent research has shown some ways that holographic wills have run into problems: In Estate of Billings (1884) 64 Cal 427, 1 P 701, the requirement is that the holographic will have a date, also written in the handwriting of the testator; in this case the decedent used some sort of prepared paper that had the year, 1880, already printed at the top, and he added in his own hand the month and day; it was held that since he hadn't written the year himself, he hadn't adequately dated the will, and the printed year might not have been the actual year when he was writing the will. (On the other hand, although the date must be handwritten, it has been held that it need not be the correct date on which the rest of the will was written!) Another case, in which the paper had the preprinted century "19_ _", and the decedent wrote in the month and day and the last two digits of the year was considered a satisfactory date.

The case of the hotel stationery with the name and address of the hotel printed at the top actually occurred several times. In Estate of Bernard (1925) 197 Cal 36, 239 P 404, the decedent wrote the date at the top of the page next to the preprinted hotel address - the court invalidated the will, holding that somehow the preprinted address was "incorporated in and doubtless were intended to be made a material part" of the will (Not 'doubtless' -- I certainly doubt it and i don't see how the hotel's address had any effect on the rest of the will!). However, three years later the same California court held the opposite way on at least two cases involving hotel stationery.

So, I'm not kidding, trying to do a homebrew will and save on a lawyer can turn into a very false economy if relatives are going to litigate about the will after the decedent is no longer available to offer explanations.

[LaVidaRoja]

Holographic wills are subject to State law. My grandmother died in California, leaving a totally valid (under California law) holographic will. The problem was that she also owned land in Kansas. Kansas did NOT recognize holographic wills (especially when subject to a different jurisdiction.) Her 5 children had to hire a Kansas attorney to handle the intestate succession for her Kansas property. IIRC, my Aunt said that the first 5 years of crops of the land went to pay the attorney.

[fortinbras]

Ronald Hoodenpyle is evidently appealing his conviction.

He tried suing the federal prosecutors and the judge and a Treasury official who participated in his original trial, in a civil suit, in which he also demanded, beside lots of money, that they be criminally prosecuted and that he be released from the slammer. He lost to an empty chair. Without requiring an answer from any of the people he was suing, the District Ct for Colorado held that his case (for which he did not pay a filing fee) was completely hopeless and dismissed it. Hoodenpyle v. Frankel (D.Colo., Feb. 28, 2013) docket 13-mc-00042-BNB, 2013 u.s.dist. LEXIS 27643, 2013 WL 773053.

Following that, he evidently filed an appeal, and apparently was temporarily released pending the appeal. It appears that the authorities required that Hoodenpyle have one of those electronic anklets so they could keep track of him. He brought an action (along with another person who apparently was also on an electronic leash, Paul Ernest Sellors) asking "for removal of GPS tracking device". The court noted that Hoodenpyle had not shown up for a May 1, 2013 court date and had to be apprehended by the police and "the Court finds that such [electronic] monitoring is necessary to reasonably assure Defendant's future appearance". Among Hoodenpyle's arguments was that "the Court lacks jurisdiction over him because he is a subject of the Foreign State of God." Somehow this argument failed to sway the judge. US v. Hoodenpyle [& Sellors] (D.Colo., July 17, 2013) docket 13-cr-00140-CMA-2, 2013 u.s.dist. LEXIS 99830, not in WL.

[Cpt Banjo]

Among Hoodenpyle's arguments was that "the Court lacks jurisdiction over him because he is a subject of the Foreign State of God." Somehow this argument failed to sway the judge. US v. Hoodenpyle [& Sellors] (D.Colo., July 17, 2013) docket 13-cr-00140-CMA-2, 2013 u.s.dist. LEXIS 99830, not in WL.

He also made this brilliant argument, which the Court called "incomprehensible": "that this matter be dismissed due to Federal District 8 not ceding jurisdiction and the injured claimant not ceding jurisdiction."

Is Federal District 8 just down the road from Motel 6? Or are both of them in Area 51? Inquiring minds want to know...

[notorial dissent]

Which means he filed another big Hoodenpyle. The ironic thing is that under other circumstances he could have appealed and probably won based on ineffective counsel, except that his counsel isn't really counsel, and so of course he can't. What he can do is dig himself in further, and he does seem to be doing a fine job of that.

[triumphguy2]

Holographic wills are subject to State law. My grandmother died in California, leaving a totally valid (under California law) holographic will. The problem was that she also owned land in Kansas. Kansas did NOT recognize holographic wills (especially when subject to a different jurisdiction.) Her 5 children had to hire a Kansas attorney to handle the intestate succession for her Kansas property. IIRC, my Aunt said that the first 5 years of crops of the land went to pay the attorney.

My favorite holographic will story:

"I leave everything to Marilyn if she **cks and sucks me one million times before I die."

The technical requirements for a holographic will in California were met; the question was whether it could be admitted to probate.

http://www.taylormccord.com/newsletters/Will-Case/

(In case you don't want to read the whole story at the link, the short answer is no, it couldn't be admitted to probate even though it was an otherwise valid holographic will. The exchange of sex for money is prohibited in California. One of the justices referred to it as 'prostitution on the installment plan.')

[fortinbras]

As this will was conditional on an event taking place before decease - an event involving a specific number of repetitions which were probably beyond the realm of possibility - I really doubt that this will was given effect. There is also an issue of whether the condition involved acts which were either criminal or that their requirement was contrary to public policy.

[grixit]

Didn't JFK's will have the same provision?

[LPC]

My favorite holographic will story:

"I leave everything to Marilyn if she **cks and sucks me one million times before I die."

The technical requirements for a holographic will in California were met; the question was whether it could be admitted to probate.

http://www.taylormccord.com/newsletters/Will-Case/

I don't know California law, but the law firm's description of the case makes me think that the judges (and lawyers) confused two different issues: (1) whether the will should be probated; and (2) whether the estate should be distributed according to the will.

Those might look like the same question, but they're really very different. The first is a mechanical question of whether the purported will complies with the formal requirements of a will. I.e., was it properly signed, witnessed, dated, or whatever is required for something to be a will, and is it free from forgery, undue influence, or other problems that would invalidate a will.

The second question is how the will should be applied to the estate under the circumstances that existed at the death of the decedent, and whether there are any provisions in the will which are invalid or ineffective for any reason.

So it's possible for a will to be probated and then completely ignored in the distribution of the estate. For example: A newly married man writes a will that leaves his entire estate to his wife or, if his wife predeceases, to his brother, George. He later has two children, divorces his wife, and then dies without ever changing is will. The will is entitled to probate, but the will has been "changed by circumstances" (as the Pennsylvania statute puts it; there are similar provisions in the [urlhttp://www.uniformlaws.org/shared/docs/probate ... 202010.pdf]Uniform Probate Code[/url] using different terminology). The divorce of the wife causes her to be disinherited, and the after-born children are entitled to intestate shares. So the children get everything and George gets nothing.

In short, I've never before heard of a case where the probate of a will was refused because provisions of the will violated public policy. I've read cases on violations of public policy (usually gifts that are conditioned on a child divorcing a disliked spouse, or on converting or adhering to a particular faith, which conditions would violate the freedom to marry or the freedom of religion), but in all of those cases, the will was probated and then the court refused to enforce the condition.

[LPC]

So, I'm not kidding, trying to do a homebrew will and save on a lawyer can turn into a very false economy if relatives are going to litigate about the will after the decedent is no longer available to offer explanations.

Lawyers like to think that "homemade" wills are a big problem, but I've never seen one cause any major headaches.

The biggest, most expensive screw-ups I've seen came from wills written by lawyers, and the problems caused by bad tax clauses or other technicalities.

And if relatives are going to fight, they are probably going to find something to fight about regardless of what the will says or who wrote it. The most expensive estate litigation I've ever seen (more than $250,000 in legal fees out of a $1.2 million estate) was between a brother and sister over an estate that was mostly cash and a simple (and clearly valid) will that divided everything between them equally. What were they fighting about? The only clearly identifiable issue I can remember was whether the son (brother) was entitled to an additional $3,500 as a "family exemption." By the time I got involved, the litigation was over the legal fees.

[triumphguy2]

I don't know California law, but the law firm's description of the case makes me think that the judges (and lawyers) confused two different issues: (1) whether the will should be probated; and (2) whether the estate should be distributed according to the will.

The description in the website is both truncated and simplified because it is intended for consumers, not attorneys. When the will was produced, the judge said he wanted to hear argument whether the will, if admitted to probate, could be given effect. Since no other will was produced, if this one was not valid, the entire estate would go to the son by intestate succession. In his view if it was not a valid will there was no reason to admit it to probate, and he wanted to short-circuit the process. So he decided to answer the second question (whether the estate could be distributed in accordance with the will) first.

[LPC]

I don't know California law, but the law firm's description of the case makes me think that the judges (and lawyers) confused two different issues: (1) whether the will should be probated; and (2) whether the estate should be distributed according to the will.

The description in the website is both truncated and simplified because it is intended for consumers, not attorneys. When the will was produced, the judge said he wanted to hear argument whether the will, if admitted to probate, could be given effect. Since no other will was produced, if this one was not valid, the entire estate would go to the son by intestate succession. In his view if it was not a valid will there was no reason to admit it to probate, and he wanted to short-circuit the process. So he decided to answer the second question (whether the estate could be distributed in accordance with the will) first.

Now that I think about it some more, the disposition of the estate could affect who had the right to letters (meaning who had the right to administer the estate).

If the "will" did not specifically name an executor, then (under both Ca. and Pa. law) letters would be granted to the person(s) entitled to the residuary estate or, if there is no will (or no valid residuary clause under the will) then letters would be granted to the intestate heirs. So Marilyn would be entitled to administer the estate if she were the residuary beneficiary. But if the residuary clause were invalid, and the estate passes by intestacy, then the intestate heirs are entitled to administer the estate.

So it's possible that the validity of the residuary clause needed to be decided in order to decide who should administer the estate.

[triumphguy2]

So it's possible that the validity of the residuary clause needed to be decided in order to decide who should administer the estate.

That was another reason the judge wanted to reverse the process -- he did not want to have to face that issue if the will was invalid anyway. Marilyn actually did argue that she, rather than the son, should be appointed administrator.