For more than fifteen weeks the Las Vegas Tribune has been running the Clark Feeley story and every week more people are getting more interested in the story.It is not a normal way for this newspaper to conduct business, to spend so many weeks and so much space on a story that is very clear in showing judicial misconduct.
The story started with Alexandra Cohen, who was introduced to Clark Feeley by an attorney friend, and due to other commitments she passed the story on to Natasha Minsky, who in a private conversation with this writer pointed out the several violations of the courts and some of the law enforcement authorities, which included the lack of interest in enforcing the law and punishing the guilty.
It is the Las Vegas Tribune’s understanding that this miscarriage of justice has been brought to the attention of the Governor of New Hampshire as well as the attorney general of both New Hampshire and Nevada, to the Federal Bureau of Investigation in both states where the crimes have been committed and no one seems interested in justice.
It seems like they all are covering for each other despite the fact that the law is clear on this subject.
Clark Feeley is determined to take his case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and gain the justice that he believes he deserves. “I don’t want to lose trust in our justice system before we cover all the bases,” stated an obviously frustrated Feeley during one of the many meetings he had with the Las Vegas Tribune.
Alexandra Cohen became interested in the events surrounding what should have been a simple court case to obtain access to a Nevada bank account, and because the newspaper trusts her capability and sense of honesty, it gave her a green light to run the story that has become of interest to almost everyone in the office.
The allegation in the Complaint filed in Nevada District Court alleged that the Defendant had used undue influence, and took advantage of an elderly mother who had suffered from dementia and Alzheimer’s for over three years.
The Plaintiff presented events that were damaging to him personally. His sister had become sole Trustee of the family Trusts just prior to the death of the Settlor.
These changes resulted in the plaintiff being removed as Co-Trustee and it was ordered that three-fourths of his anticipated interest in the Trust be given to his children.
These results due to his sister’s unfounded actions were very detrimental and demanded mitigation through a lawsuit. The sister never informed her brother, Clark Feeley, of any changes until after their mother had passed.
Prior to the near death changes both Clark Feeley and his sister were to equally share all estate assets.
Clark Feeley explained to this newspaper that if his sister felt that 1/8 interest in the family estate was good enough for him, then it should be good enough for her. He sued the sister individually as a tort and misappropriation for damages, the sister could return his interest from her share. The action as filed did not seek return of interest from his children.
A lawyer was engaged by the sister to defend her in the above Complaint. The contract was made out between the Defendant and attorney only. The parties entered this agreement without a retainer.
This action was filed as a tort and not a Trust case. The sister would have to defend her actions personally and could not use Trust assets.
That fact should have been addressed up front by her attorney before he agreed to take the case.
As facts of the Complaint unfolded, the defendant’s attorney became concerned about being paid. Because his client had no assets from which to pay him a retainer or anything else, he began maneuvering to include the Trusts in the lawsuit.
The Trusts were created in and governed by New Hampshire law and Nevada Courts would lack subject matter jurisdiction; Adding the Trusts to the litigation would prove to be malpractice and unethical because his focus became getting paid.
Any eventual attack of the Trust’s assets to get paid would not be in the best interest of any beneficiary, and would violate the law of the land.
What is there not to understand? Everything looks very clear to us with no law degree; how is it that lawyers, judges, the Governor of New Hampshire as well as the attorney general of both New Hampshire and Nevada, up to the Federal Bureau of Investigation in both states where the crimes had been committed and no one seems to understand the crimes or is interested in justice.
All these people — if they are not legal experts they have the facility to engage people that can bring an end to this injustice; maybe what we need is to direct our questions to everyone of those entities, if they don’t block our calls or hide under their desk. It is up to them but we are going to get the answer we deserve.