justice2kb
       

 

Best guess


My best guess of what the issue is "In Re: Harold A. O'Connell"is that it is related to the following instructions given to our Mother Jean O'Connell about the same time she was given the false lost account and the false final account in January of 1985. I found her memos of these instructions in her papers after her death in 1991:

"Bond fee- Lawyer fix so
bond pd when sold.
nominal amt now."

"Clerk 691-2224
691-4193- give
fiduciary no. 21840
(Procedure
Come in - surety bond-)
(Va resident with)
Patty Moat ot"

Whatever the accountants had the testator do remains unknown. Best guess is that the accountants instructed her to come in to the Court and sign a document under the guise that it was a customary and usual document concerning non-resident fiduciaries (The trustee lived in Missouri and needed a Virginia resident co-trustee to qualify with him) and that it would save money on the cost of a bond. But what this document actually did, was to justify the accountants shutting the trustee out and making it appear that they were protecting the family. This is a best guess. What do the Court records show for these instructions? What do the Court records show for "In Re: Harold A. O'Connell"? Are they the same issue? This is the quickest way to get to the core of things.