Sunday, 22 October 2017

"Post’s guardianship coverage wins honor from Florida Bar". Palm Beach County Florida Predatory Guardianship Issues

"The Palm Beach Post’s 2016 series “Guardianships: A Broken Trust” took second place this month in the print division of the Florida Bar’s 62nd Annual Media Awards.

The stories, written and reported by Post staff writer John Pacenti, with research by Melanie Mena and editing by Holly Baltz, exposed the conflicts facing now-retired Palm Beach County Circuit Judge Martin Colin after his wife, Elizabeth Savitt, became a guardian.

The stories showed Colin’s wife took tens of thousands of dollars in fees from her senior ward’saccounts prior to approval by the court, which Savitt’s attorney, and only her attorney, claimed was allowed by statute. In one case, a judge ordered Savitt and her attorney to return nearly


After publication in January 2016, the circuit’s chief judge, Jeffrey Col-bath, transferred Colin out of the probate division. He also transferred all of Savitt’s cases to a distant courthouse to eliminate the potential for conflict with friendly judges.

In October, Colbath handed down sweeping guardianship reforms, addressing specifically complaints against Savitt. He instituted a random appointment basis for professional guardians and an arduous registration system.

The stories received startling response from readers, leading to a number of families reaching out to the newspaper about abusive guardianships.

Thejudging panelconsisted of two out-of-state journalists, two Florida lawyers with substantial experience in journalism and/or media law and one Florida educator of journalism or law.

First place went to the Sarasota Herald-Tribune’s “Bias on the Bench” series, which found judges throughout Florida sentence black defendants to harsher punishments than whites charged with the same crimes under similar circumstances.

The Post’s stories tied for second place with the Sun-Sentinel’s “Forsaken: Florida’s Broken Mental Health System.” The awards were given out Monday in a Tallahassee ceremony that included a receptionwith Florida Supreme Court justices."


Also Check Out

Chief judge shakes up guardianship system after Post series

Palm Beach Post, Guardianship a Broken Trust

Wednesday, 11 October 2017

Pro Se - Debra Darnice Brown f/k/a Debra Darnice Andrews Motion


Appellant/Petitioner CASE NO. 4D16- 2324

Debra D. Andrews


John Henry Andrews, Jr.
John Hare Powel Andrews Jr.


COMES NOW, Appellant Debra D. Andrews who files this Appellant’s Motion to
Set Aside Dismissal, Remedy Default and Reinstate Writ of Prohibition (dismissed
October 27, 2016); and/or Motion for Leave to File Documents Out of Time and
Remedy Default; and/or Motion to Consolidate. Appellant is not altogether sure the
proper titling for this Motion, therefore Appellant, in an abundance of caution,
attempts to cover all possibilities and scenarios applicable.

The Appellant is disabled with limited resources. Due to Appellant’s limited experience in Appeals,
and the fact there are numerous Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and Appellate
Rules of Procedure are quite difficult to understand; coupled together with Appellant’s concern of mental and medical health issues that she would not be able to properly represent herself and her cause before this Honorable Court. Due to the complexity of the case, the marital assets accumulated during the marriage which Former Husband commandeered and defrauded Former Wife, and his “connections with higher ups in SDPBC”, I have been unable to find an attorney who was willing
to vigorously represent me in the Court. After one reviews the documents filed in these cases which docket counts are 400 plus, containing intentionally false, inaccurate and fraudulent information or evidence (or lack thereof) created to support an unequitable distribution of marital assets and liabilities in this Court.


1. Petitioner, Debra Andrews a Pro Se litigant, respectfully petitions this Court for
the issuance of a writ of prohibition seeking review of the order entered by Palm
Beach County Circuit Judge Howard K. Coates Jr. on June 29, 2016, Granting
Husband’s Motion To Compel Wife To Comply With Order Of May 26, 2016, and
Motion For Contempt For Wife’s Failure To Comply With The May 2016 Order and
June 24, 2016, Denying Petitioner's Motion to Disqualify Judge Coates as the trial
Judge in Case N0: 50-2014-DR-010753 Petition For Dissolution of Marriage and
Other Relief With No Minor Children. On November 11, 2016 Petitioner contacted
Respondent’s Counsel asking their position on a motion to reinstate the Writ of
Prohibition and consolidate the cases. However, on November 14, 2016 Respondent
and his attorney stated they objected to both; a request to reinstate and consolidate.

I respectfully request the Case No. 4DF16-2312 be consolidated with the above Case
No. 4D16-2324. The grounds for this Petition are as follows:


2. This Court has original jurisdiction to issue a writ of prohibition directed
to the circuit court. Fla. Const., Art. V, § 4(b)(3); Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(b)(3);
Livingston v. State, 858 So. 2d 353, 354 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). Prohibition is clearly
recognized as the proper avenue for immediate review of whether a motion
to disqualify a trial judge has been correctly denied. Sutton v. State, 975 So. 2d 1073,
1076-77 (Fla. 2008). See also Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Carter, 768 So. 2d 21 (Fla.
1st DCA 2000) ("The traditional remedy for interlocutory review of an order denying
judicial disqualification is prohibition.").


3. On May 25, 2015, Petitioner filed a Pro Se Motion for Contempt (App. at
Exhibit A). On May 26, 2016, Petitioner filed a Pro Se Motion for Dismissal of
Coldwell Banker Realtor and Removal of Residence from Listed for Sale (App. at
Exhibit B). On June 7, 2016 and June 20, 2016, Trial Court issued an Order Denying
Petitioner’s Motion to hold Respondent for Contempt alleging Petitioner had counsel
on record and respectively and as “improper format”, “legally insufficient”; also
Denial of Petitioner’s Motion for Dismissal of Coldwell Banker (App. at Exhibit

4. The Trial Court issued on June 30, 2016 Order Granting Husband’s Motion
to Compel Wife to Comply with Order of May 26, 2016 and Motion for Contempt
for Wife’s Failure to Comply with the May 26, 2016 Order. Also note email
correspondence between opposing counsel and staff and the Court’s Judicial
Assistant (App. at Exhibit D).

5. On June 22, 2016, Petitioner filed a pro se sworn Verified 2.160 Motion
for Recusal and Disqualification of the Honorable Judge Howard K. Coates, Jr.
(App. at Exhibit E). On June 23, 2016 counsel filed, Husband’s Objection to
Wife’s Verified 2.160 Motion for Recusal and Disqualification of Honorable Judge
Howard K. Coates, Jr. (App. at Exhibit F). On June 24, 2016, The Trial Court
issued Order Denying Petitioner/Wife’s Verified 2.16 Motion for Recusal and
Disqualification of Honorable Judge Howard K. Coates, Jr. as “legally insufficient”
(App. at Exhibit G). On June 29, 2016, Petitioner appeared pro se at the scheduled
Hearing and filed a pro se Motion Requesting a Stay of Further Proceedings at this
juncture in the Trial Court pursuant to F. R. A. P. 9.100(h) (App. at Exhibit H). On
June 30, 2016, the Trial Court issued the Order Denying Petitioner/Former Wife’s
Stay Requested (App. at Exhibit I).

6. The June 29, 2016 email sent from Paralegal at to the attention of the Judicial Assistant at

noting “Today Judge Coates requested Attorney Fisher
send him the Order, per his oral ruling, within 24 hours” with “her version of the
rulings and facts”. (App. at Exhibit J).

7. At the June 29, 2016 Hearing the Petitioner appeared pro se with the intent
of submitting the Request to Stay further proceedings (App. at Exhibit H).
Respondent’s counsel issued subpoenas to Coldwell Banker Realtors Laura Vitanza
and John Sinkovich to testify. Respondent’s counsel also prepared and submitted
(3) three detailed Summaries for the hearing (Showings, Price Reduction and Offer)
(App. at Exhibit K). As noted in the documents so carefully prepared, the
Respondent’s counsel was adamant; purposefully, willingly and intent fully
providing misleading information and providing realtors with information deemed
“confidential” by the Court’s Order. The Judge having no consideration for the
testimony of the Petitioner, Petitioner’s witnesses, deeming the realtor’s testimony
credible, ordered Petitioner to vacate the marital home within (10) days; removing
only personal items limited to clothing, shoes, toiletries, and jewelry. (App. at
Exhibit L).

8. On July 7, 2016 Petitioner filed a Pro Se Notice of Appeal to the 4th District
Court of Appeals (App. at Exhibit M). Petitioner was not able to get assistance in
packing and moving personal items before July 11, 2016. On the morning of July
11, 2016, Respondent along with the Palm Beach Sheriff Deputies and the Coldwell
Banker Realtor John Sinkovich to eject me from the marital home approximately 10
ten days before the Dissolution of Marriage trail date of July 27, 2016 (App. at
Exhibit N). Petitioner sought the protection, assistance and relief through additional
Court filings on July 15, 2016 Motion to Stay Writ of Possession while the Court
Denied Petitioner’s Motion to Stay Writ of Possession (App. at Exhibit N)


9. The Petitioner seeks the issuance of this court's writ of prohibition
requiring the removal of Judge Coates Jr. from presiding over my cases including
Petition For Dissolution of Marriage and Other Relief With No Minor Children.
Petitioner is also seeking a dismissal of the Motion Finding Wife in Contempt of
May 26, 2016 Order.


10. Petitioner would request a stay of further proceedings at this juncture in
the Trial Court pursuant to F. R. A. P. 9.100(h).


11. The Trial Court ruled that the Verified 2.160 Motion for Recusal/
Disqualification of the Honorable Judge Howard K. Coates, Jr. was "legally
insufficient." The Petitioner is entitled to a writ of prohibition because Judge Coates 
erred in denying its motion for disqualification. Judge Coates erred in concluding
the motion to disqualify was legally insufficient.

The Petitioner's sworn Motion for Recusal/Disqualification was legally sufficient to
merit disqualification. Whether a motion for disqualification is legally sufficient is
subject to a de novo standard of review. Chamberlain v. State, 881 So. 2d 1087, 1097
(Fla. 2004).

12. The test to determine the legal sufficiency of a motion to disqualify a trial
judge is whether the motion demonstrates a well-founded fear on the part of the party
that she will not receive a fair trial. Rivera v. State, 717 So. 2d 477 (Fla. 1998);
Correll v. State, 698 So. 2d 522, 524 (Fla. 1997); Levine v. State, 650 So. 2d 666,
667 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). Moreover, the facts set forth in the motion must show a
personal bias or prejudice. State v. Shaw, 643 So. 2d 1163, 1164 (Fla. 4th DCA
1994). Therefore, the legal sufficiency of a motion for disqualification is based on
whether the facts alleged would place a reasonably prudent person in fear of not
receiving a fair and impartial trial. Levine v. State, 650 So. 2d 666, 667 (Fla. 4th
DCA 1995).

13. The legal sufficiency test is not even close: for some reason, unknown to
Petitioner, but whether the motion to disqualify was "legally sufficient," and/or
whether a reasonably prudent person would, given the same and/or similar facts
outlined in the motion to disqualify would fear that they too would be unable to
receive a fair trial in the Trial Court. All the facts, taken separately, pass the
reasonably prudent person test.

14. However, even if the facts outlined in Petitioner motion for
recusal/disqualification did not separately meet the legally sufficient requirement,
taken together, a reasonably prudent person test is clearly satisfied. See Zimmerman
v State, Case No. 5D12-3198 (Fla. 5th DCA August 29, 2012) (Although many of
the allegations in Zimmerman's motion, standing alone, do not meet the legal
sufficiency test, and while this is admittedly a close call, upon careful review we
find that the allegations, taken together, meet the threshold test of legal sufficiency.)
The Trial Court’s June 20, 2016, delayed response to the Petitioner’s May 25, 2016,
and May 26, 2016 motions required Petitioner to wait for the Court’s response,
which the Court’s later used to find Petitioner in Contempt.


15. Order Striking Petitioner’s Motion for Contempt on or about May 26,
2016, the Trial Court issued an Order Striking Petitioner’s Motion for Contempt,
that was filed on May 25, 2016, (App. at Exhibit C).

The said order included:

1. The Petitioner's Motion for Contempt and Motion to Dismiss are
hereby STRICKEN.

2. Petitioner shall not file any more pro se Motions while there is
counsel on record.

3. Failure to comply shall be punishable by way of contempt.
Jurisdiction of this cause and of the parties is hereby retained for the
purpose of entering such further orders as this Court may deem

16. On or about May 20, 2016, former Attorney of record Maria Calla
Quartell filed a Notice of Limited Appearance. The Trial Court records and email
correspondence communication reflects the Trial Court was notified on or about
June 8, 2016, that Petitioner was considered a pro se litigant (App. at Exhibit 8).

17. As of today, the Trial Court has not signed-off on the Notice of
Conclusion of Representation that was filed on June 13, 2016 (App. at Exhibit O).
The Trial Court’s refusal to sign-off on the Conclusion of Representation tied
Petitioner’s hands behind her back promoting an unfair fight in favor of the
Respondent. This action strikes at the heart of what the fourteenth amendment points
to in the sixth amendment’s right to confrontation applicable to state court “Right to
due process, right to counsel and the confrontation clause.”

18. The requisite fraud on the court occurs where “it can be demonstrated,
clearly and convincingly, that a party has sentiently set in motion some
unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability
impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the Trier of fact or
unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.”
Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir. 1989).

19. Fraudulent Acts:

A. Respondent failed to disclose the real properties that he owned, purchased and
sold during the life and marriage to Petitioner in his court ordered financial
affidavit (App. at Exhibit 1).

B. Respondent failed to disclose the vehicles that he owned, purchased and sold
during the life and marriage to Petitioner in his court ordered financial
affidavit (App. at Exhibit 2).

C. Respondent failed to disclose the false financial information he filed for a
Home Equity Line of Credit in his court ordered financial affidavit (App. at
Exhibit 3).

D. Respondent perjured himself indicating he had premarital property. The Final
Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage to Jacquelyn Andrews dated January 4,
2000, indicates that Respondent had a net worth of ten thousand dollars (App.
at Exhibit 4).

E. Respondent forged Petitioner’s signature on the Hilton Grand Vacation
agreement (App. at Exhibit 5).

F. Respondent failed to disclose that he has several personal businesses on his
court ordered financial affidavit (App. at Exhibit 6).

G. Respondent failed to disclose all of the aliases he has and is using in his court
ordered financial affidavit (App. at Exhibit 7).

H. Respondent failed to disclose the different social security numbers has and is
using along with his aliases in his court ordered financial affidavit (App. at
Exhibit 7).

I. Respondent failed to disclose his personal accounts to include but not limited
to savings, checking, credit cards, annuities and 403 accounts in his court
ordered financial affidavits (App. at Exhibit 8).

J. Respondent failed to disclose our joint PNC checking account that he later
closed and opened a new PNC account using his daughter’s name in his court
ordered financial affidavit (App. at Exhibit 9).

K. Respondent failed to disclose the joint lease vehicle “2013 Honda 4 door
Accord”, in his court ordered financial affidavit. Respondent also
misrepresented that the joint lease vehicle was solely the Petitioner’s vehicle
(App. at Exhibit 10).

L. Respondent perjured himself during the January 16, 2016 court proceedings.
He testified that he did know a Sharon Barton and that she was not his
girlfriend. Respondent also denied the purchase of out-of-state property
located in Corbett Rd. Monkton, MD. with Ms. Barton; Former Wife #2 who
is a/k/a Sharon L. Barton, Sharon Linda Barton, Sharon Andrews, Sharon
Linda Andrews, Sharon L. Andrews, Sharon Andrews, Sharon Thompson
Andrews, Sharon A. Andrews, Sharon T. Andrews, (deceased October 14,

2007), Sharon Amy Hayes, Shari L Mattos, Shari L Mattos Alcorn, etc. (App.
at Exhibit 11).

M. Petitioner’s Fourth Request To Produce outlined the aforementioned
fraudulent acts and was sent to the Respondent’s Attorney Mr. Charles D.
Jamieson by Petitioner’s former Attorney Mr. John L. Chalif (App. at Exhibit

20. Pursuant to Fla. Stat. 914.13, “When a court of record has reason to believe
that a party making an affidavit in a proceeding has committed perjury, the court
may immediately commit the person or take a recognizance with the sureties for the
person’s appearance to answer the charge of perjury.” Petitioner believes that
Respondent is complicit in this perjury, which he has failed to disclose in his court
ordered financial affidavit.

21. The aforementioned exhibits-evidence is CLEAR AND
CONVINCING; Respondent comes to court with “unclean hands” and should
be sanctioned accordingly. To seek equity is one of the general and
fundamental principles in a court of chancery. This Court stated in Epstein v.
Epstein, 915 So.2d 1272, 1275 (Fla. 4DCA, 2005):

“This maxim is one of the general and fundamental principles of equity
jurisprudence. Equity is a court of conscience; it demands fair dealing
in all who seek relief, and requires decency, good faith, fairness, and
justice. Equity cannot be invoked for selfish or ulterior purposes. . .
Where a litigant fails to meet such a standard equity will deny all relief,
and if both parties are at fault, relief will be withheld from both.

Schetter v. Schetter, 279 So.2d 58, 61 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973 ) (Walden
J., dissenting) (quoting 12 FLA. JUR. Equity § 54, at 211-212).
22. The clean hands doctrine “applies not only to fraudulent and illegal
transactions, but to any unrighteous, unconscientiously, or oppressive conduct
by one seeking equitable interference in his own behalf.” Dale v. Jennings,
107 So. 175, 180 (Fla. 1925) (quoting EATON, EQUITY, p. 74, and
Weegham v. Killefer, 215 F. 168, 172 (D. Ct. Mich. 1914)). This Court
observed in Weegham:

“Equity imperatively demands of suitors in its courts fair dealing and
righteous conduct with reference to the matters concerning which they
seek relief. He who has acted in bad faith, resorted to trickery and
deception, or been guilty of fraud, injustice, or unfairness will appeal
in vain to a court of conscience, even though in his wrongdoing he may
have kept himself strictly ‘within the law.’ 215 F. at 171.”


For all the reasons stated above, Petitioner prays this Court issues a Writ of
Prohibition to the lower court and require the assignment of a successor judge to
preside over petition For Dissolution of Marriage and Other Relief With No Minor
Children, assigned to Judge Coates Jr.

Petitioner also prays this court does not dismiss this proceeding due to failure to
timely file a petition and appendix. The pertinent factors in the delay of filing the
petition are due to:

• Countless unsuccessful attempts in retaining legal counsel; affordable, pro
bono or willing, in Palm Beach County to take on the legal challenges and
actions which appear to be in contradiction of the Court.

• Petitioner fearing retaliation prior to filing the pro se motions of contempt
and dismissal, out of safety concerns precautionary measures were taken by
Petitioner on May 24, 2016 the Petitioner filed a report with the Palm Beach
Sheriff Office (PBSO).

• Respondent filed a motion against Petitioner on contempt while conspiring
with Coldwell Banker Realtors creating an atmosphere filled with cronyism,
cynicism, character and financial assassination; highly disrespectful,
unethical, hostile and abusive relationship, while through Judge Coates, the
Respondent and his team of lawyers, were allowed to legally defraud me out
of my home.

• Orders by Judge Coates created an immediate crisis for Petitioner causing her
into the current state of homelessness since July 11, 2016.

• Being ordered from the marital home with a 10-day notice, approximately 16
days prior to the trial date of July 27, 2016 without consideration of my
financial, medical and mental health disabilities.

• Being unable to secure a permanent residence. My personal property
including clothing, shoes, electronics, computer, printer, scanner, and legal
documents are scattered among several of my temporary living arrangements
including storage:

o 500 North Congress Ave. West Palm Beach, FL. 33401
o 2045 Pinehurst Drive, West Palm Beach, FL. 33407
o 121 Norwich F, West Palm Beach, FL. 33417
o 4431 PGA Blvd., Palm Beach Gardens, FL. 33410
o Ocala, FL.
o Orlando, FL.

• Numerous efforts to utilize the 4DCA’s e-file on-line system brought about
another set of challenges. Issues from not being able to access the system
utilizing Appellant’s correct log in and password information. 4th DCA staff
has indicated due to the system issues, they have had to delete my account
several times.

I hereby certify that this petition has been typed in 14 point New Times
Roman Font.

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing petition has
been served via electronic mail this 15th day of November, 2016, to the following
parties: John Henry Andrews, Jr.,, 8709 Via Grande
East, Wellington, FL. 33411, Nicole A. Fisher, Esquire, and Charles D. Jamieson,
Esquire, Attorneys for Former Husband, The Law Firm of Charles D. Jamieson,
P.A., and, 1615 Forum
Place, Suite 500, West Palm Beach, FL33401

Pro Se - Debra Darnice Brown f/k/a Debra Darnice Andrews  "

Debra D. Andrews  / Debra D. Brown

Source and Full Document

"My name is Debra Darnice Brown fka Debra Andrews. I am a victim of Howard K Coates, the judicial and school systems. "

"I have information on corruption which would connect the Board of School District of PBC directly with the courts.  I was made homeless by Orders given in retaliation of my reporting criminal activity to Managers, Directors, Board Members, IG, FBI, DOJ, etc.

All legal cases from domestic violence to appeal of final judgement have been handled by one attorney's office Charles Jamieson and the judges were Amy Smith, Debra Moses Stephens, and the infamous HOWARD K COATES.  All working in concert with realtors as well.

My ex-husband assaulted me on 11/10/2014 and Coates was announced as a new judge on 12/24/2014.  Found out later of Mr. Andrews' murder plot against me was to be carried out on a 5-day cruise he planned for us leaving 10/27/2014 and 11/03/2014.  He had not planned for me to return...but by the grace of GOD, DIVINE INTERVENTION stopped me from attending the ill-fated cruise. 

My ex worked as director of project controls of school district construction and he did a lot of people a lot of favors.  His signature was required on all payment documents.  Since I also worked for the School District as an accounting analyst I identified the FRAUD, WASTE, AND ABUSE in the PURCHASING AND CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENTS.

My ex is also a career criminal committing personal financial fraud of mortgages, HELOCs, identity theft and insurance fraud as the "husband (John Heir Powel Andrews) who reports his "wife" (Sharon Thompson Andrews) going overboard on their small watercraft in the middle of the Sassafras River 10/07/2007.

I believe I need someone like you to tell my story and put my documents out there as well.  None of the mainstream news reporters (Niels Heimlrick, Andrew Marra, Jan Strathman) would touch the School District Corruption nor the HOWARD K COATES issue back on (05/15/2016) and on 5/25/2016 when I went to the PBSO and the FBI.

I've made a lot of dot connections and know just how relevant these events of criminal behavior and acts against the families being thrown into the judicial system while trying to get away from abusive men only to be legally abused by the judge who is suppose to protect you!

I didn't just start going through the retaliations and harassment because "they" did so at the District as well.  Another reason why ex-husband needed to dispose of me.

I found your information on Coates by searching for corruption and I ran across Julia Gonzalez' documents, it's like a mirror of what the Judge Coates did to me as well.  I even have evidence Judge colluding with the attorney while they made certain not to provide me any financial support (after being disabled by the violent battery) for basic living needs let alone monies to retain competent representation against these bullies."

The Above was sent to me at a tip. It is written upon the belief and knowledge of Debra Darnice Brown fka Debra Andrews.  If you have a tip on this story eMail me at

Sunday, 8 October 2017

Predatory Guardian Elizabeth Savitt, Judge Martin Colin's wife "asked that her guardianships be in front of Judge Howard Coates, who recently ruled in her favor. Coates blocked efforts to remove her"

"A year ago, the chief judge booted the cases of controversial guardian Elizabeth “Betsy” Savitt out of the South County Courthouse over apparent concerns about favoritism and conflict of interest involving her husband, a judge, after an investigation by The Palm Beach Post.
This month, out of the public’s view, Savitt lobbied the chief judge to allow her to move her cases back to Delray Beach, saying her wards would save money if she and her lawyer didn’t have to drive to Palm Beach Gardens, where the cases are now.
She asked that her guardianships be in front of Judge Howard Coates, who recently ruled in her favor. 
Coates blocked efforts to remove her as a guardian in a case where her ward’s former lawyers have alleged that $400,000 of the ward’s assets are missing.
Coates, a former Wellington councilman, recently was transferred to the South County Courthouse.
She made the request to Chief Judge Jeffrey Colbath in a Jan. 18 letter from her attorney, Ellen Morris, that was obtained by The Post.
After inquiries by the newspaper, Colbath on Tuesday wrote to Savitt’s attorney to say her current six guardianship cases will remain in the North County Courthouse in Palm Beach Gardens. However, he said Savitt would be allowed to have new cases, appointed at random, in the south courthouse.
Colbath transferred Savitt’s cases in February 2016 after The Post’s investigation, Guardianships: A Broken Trust.
The Post reported that thanks to Savitt’s job as a professional guardian, the life savings of incapacitated seniors flowed into the household of her husband, former Circuit Judge Martin Colin, who sat in the Probate & Guardianship Division in south county.
Savitt took thousands of dollars in fees prior to a judge’s approval and families complained she manufactured legal work to increase her fees, among other criticisms.
They said the judge’s wife appeared to be bulletproof.
Savitt worked most of her cases in the same courthouse where Colin was a powerful judge. Though she didn’t appear in front of her husband, most of her cases were in front of a family friend: Circuit Judge David French. It was French who routinely dismissed concerns about her work from families of her wards.
Savitt’s guardianship attorneys appeared in front of Colin in other cases and he approved their fees.
After The Post’s investigation, the chief judge acted quickly. He transferred Colin out of south county and out of the Probate & Guardianship Division.
Colbath required the judges in south county to recuse themselves from Savitt’s cases and he moved her cases north. Colin announced his retirement and did not seek reelection in November.
Then in October, Colbath announced sweeping changes to the county’s guardianship system, addressing many of the complaints that families had about Savitt — including taking so-called “retainer” fees.
This month, after French was transferred to the Civil Division in West Palm Beach, Savitt’s attorney sent her letter to Colbath asking that the six guardianship cases be sent back to south county and be consolidated in front of Judge Coates.
Coates had presided over Savitt’s cases in north county before replacing French in Delray Beach.
In December, Coates said he would dismiss a motion with prejudice to remove Savitt as guardian for Frances Berkowitz.
The senior’s former attorneys wanted to know what happened to the estimated $400,000 that was in the senior’s savings account at the time Savitt became her guardian. Savitt has said no such amount was in the account.
The former attorneys said they wanted Coates to allow the case to go forward so they could get bank statements and other evidence in discovery.
Donna Solomon Greenspan, one of Berkowitz’ former attorneys, asked Coates point-blank why there appeared to be many roadblocks.
“We wanted to protect our client and we put our client in the hands of the court, saying please give her a guardian who would protect her,” she said. “But this client — who we had been working with for years — was put in the hands of Betsy Savitt.”
Solomon told The Post that the chief judge did the right thing by denying the request to transfer the six cases back to south county.
“Cases are not transferred based on an ex parte letter from an attorney,” she said. “Transfers should be requested by proper motion, under the rules, with notice and the opportunity to be heard.”
Berkowitz died on Dec. 31. Her probate case initially was assigned early this month to south county, but the Palm Beach County Clerk and Comptroller’s Office transferred it to Palm Beach Gardens last week.
Attorneys representing two men who have fought Savitt in guardianships said they, too, are concerned that the professional guardian attempted to go outside a courtroom to get the cases moved back to Delray Beach in front of Coates.
This is called ex parte communication, they say.
West Palm Beach attorney Valentin Rodriguez is not involved in any cases involving Savitt, but as a criminal and civil litigator, he says there are only a few situations where ex parte communications are appropriate. He said if the issue is general rather than case-specific, it is often more acceptable — especially if the other attorneys in the case were notified.
“Generally speaking, the one rule of thumb is that lawyers from either side never discuss ongoing litigation with the judge assigned to the case without it being done in the presence of the other lawyer,” Rodriguez said. “Justice is blind, and sees only the truth, but when one side gets the ear of the judge in the case, then that notion of justice withers away.”
Morris said in her letter that she already had spoken on the phone with the offices of Colbath and Circuit Judge Rosemarie Scher, who is currently assigned the six cases. Morris’ letter said that the chief judge’s office told her to put her request in a letter and also said that Coates had agreed to take back the cases.
“Fundamental and basic rights for litigants in the American legal system consists of notice and the opportunity to be heard,” attorney William J. Maguire wrote Colbath on Jan. 20. He represents a Boca Raton man who has steadfastly opposed Savitt in a guardianship for a stroke victim.
Attorney Thomas Dougherty said his client, who opposes Savitt’s actions in the guardianship of Albert Vassallo Sr., doesn’t feel the issues in south county are resolved in regard to the professional guardian.
“Savitt created the circumstances that required the cases to go to north county,” Dougherty said. “The move back to south county could be considered judge shopping.”
Morris said there was no ex parte communication or judge-shopping because all of the lawyers were copied on her letter to the chief judge.
“Just trying to reduce fees for going to north county by returning to original courthouse I was assigned to,” she wrote in an email response.
Neither Judge Colbath nor Coates responded to requests for comment for this story.
Savitt hasn’t received an appointment to a new guardianship since The Post’s investigation was published in January 2016. But she may get new cases as one of about 30 professionals who are now part of a new assignment wheel, a random method of assigning cases, established by Colbath to eliminate any appearance of favoritism. Judges who appoint a professional guardian must now rely on the wheel to make their choice.
Morris, representing Savitt, argued to Colbath that the cases should move to Coates because of additional time it takes for her and Savitt to travel to the North County Courthouse — time that translates into fees charged to the senior.
Maguire rejected this notion in his own letter to Colbath on Jan. 20. He represents Daniel Schmidt, who litigated for months to force the resignation of Savitt as guardian for stroke victim Carla Simmonds. Schmidt is now Simmonds’ guardian and is fighting Savitt’s fee requests in court.
His lawyer told Colbath that Savitt and Morris could have saved Simmonds thousands of dollars in fees by resigning but instead chose to vigorously litigate with Schmidt for months.
“Now Ms. Savitt and her counsel request ex parte relief to transfer the guardianship to a single judge, ignoring the court’s administrative orders regarding judicial assignments and rotations,” Maguire said.
“All of which ostensibly are in place to avoid the appearance of favoritism, forum shopping, etc.”Source

Friday, 18 August 2017

A Local Attorney claims he could not properly represent his client, out of fear,

"A Local Attorney claims he could not properly represent his client, out of fear,
that Judge Howard Coates, would retaliate against his future clients, if he exposed corruption.

Its a systematic problem. And Judge Howard Coates, leads the Culture of Silence, through by intimidating, attorney's, who are cut our of the Due Process portions of Hearings.

Courts in the in Palm Beach County. have sentenced thousands of children to live with a parent who abused them. The family court judges who reach this decision — and restrict or end the relationship of the parent who reported concerns of abuse — usually do so based on the opinion of a court-appointed expert.

A quick look at how the family courts' multimillion-dollar expert industry operates reveals a system that is built to invite corruption.

The experts are paid thousands of dollars by one or both parents, facts on how their opinions were formed are forbidden to be reviewed by the public and state laws help shield these decision makers from potential lawsuits.

Judges appoint court experts, such as custody evaluators or guardians ad litem, to investigate and make recommendations about what is in the best interest of the child.

"The court follows the recommendations in the evaluation in over 90 percent of custody cases," according to .

As an investigative reporter, I have been collecting cases for years where an expert has determined that the alleged abuse of a child is not happening and, instead, the child or parent who fears abuse is the danger. The child is placed in the sole custody of the accused abuser, the protective parent is put on supervised visitation — or forbidden from seeing the child at all — and restrictions are placed barring other child welfare professionals from even talking to the child."


Sunday, 6 August 2017


"CASE NO.: 4D16-2319

L.T. No.: 2010DR003810XXXXSB



Appellant / Petitioner(s) Appellee / Respondent(s)

Click To Read

Wednesday, 19 July 2017

Letter to FBI Special Agent In Charge George Piro Miami Field Office from Julia Gonzalez

" From: julia gonzalez [] 

Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 1:19 PM

To: CAD-Division FY; Charles Wender; Anthony Joseph Aragona; Shaun H Malvin; Dana Pechersky; Craig Rory Dearr; ANTHONY.ARAGONA@ATT.COM;;;;;;;;;;;

Cc: David Ryder; Ralph L. Foreman; Julia Gonzalez;; Kelli-Renee Williams; Sam Sugar MD; Guardian Probate Family Court Victim Alert; Eliot Ivan Bernstein; Robert Pagano; Guardianship Court Robert Sarhan; Skender Hoti;;; John CMG-WestPalm Pacenti

Subject: Attn: FBI Special Agent in Charge George Piro - Civil Rights Violations Judge Howard Coates 15th Judicial Palm Beach County Re: SERVICE OF COURT DOCUMENT CASE No.: 502010DR003810XXXXSB

FBI Special Agent In Charge George Piro
Miami Field Office 

I am writing to open a specific complaint for Violations under "Color of Law" and other public corruption in the Palm Beach County Courts of the 15th Judicial Circuit and directly against Judge Howard Coates, (561) 274-1452 Room: 2E-115 Courtroom Number:
2 at the South County Courthouse, 200 W Atlantic Ave Delray Beach, Fl 33444 who recently signed the Order attached falsely denying a mandatory Disqualification motion under Florida law. 

I have also attached copies of my Motion filed today and prior Motion which shows Judge Howard Coates is directly involved in Falsifying and Fabricating evidence under color of law including Official Court Orders and Court Docket Records acting together or in common with Attorney Anthony Aragona, Atttorney Shaun Malvin, Reciever David Ryder and others committing both a series of Criminal Offenses and Due Process offenses against my rights in order to take my Florida Homestead protected by the Florida Constitution

I am also a victim protected by the Florida ACP ( Adress Confidentiality Program ) and have been wrongfully rendered Homeless as a 65 year old woman who has worked hard all her life and been a law abiding citizen her life. 

Judge Coates is attempting to proceed to illegally Distribute funds from the illegal sale of my home today at a hearing at the Delray Courthouse Room 2 today at 2:45 pm after fraudulently Selling my homestead in the recent weeks despite written statements by Attorney Aragona to the 4th District Court of Appeals in a filing on May 18, 2017 by attorney Aragona that the Title Company had a clause that all appeals had to be over for 30 days and dismissed for 30 days in order to close.  In fact, I have several appeals open at the 4th DCA including a Rehearing on the Appointment of the Receiver under Case No. 4d16-2319 where your Office will see the history of Fraud in the Courts and Fabricating of Evidence and Exhibits by Anthony Aragona and his client Lloyd Wickboldt. 

You may wish to check with Special Agent Michelle Pickels of the New Jersey FBI Office where an open investigation into one attorney Robert Spallina of Palm Beach county is apparently still going on as I have provided information to her office in relation to one Judge David French who was on my case before Judge Coates where direct fraud was going on in a Dissolution Judgment and other civil rights abuses. Other information has been sent to US DOJ Civil Rights Section head Tom Wheeler in the past. 

The direct criminal falsification of Court Orders and Court Dockets is established in my Motion and even today's Order from Judge Coates is a false and fraudulent Court Order citing a case to Deny me on "timeliness" grounds when my Motion alleged facts from July 14, 2017 and to the present where Judge Coates has not corrected the fraud he is directly involved with. 

These frauds have not only rendered me Homeless but also losing my Homestead and cost over a hundred of thousand of dollars and has impacted cases in Broward County as well. I can provide further information later. 

I am also a Court whistleblower who has been involved with many groups copied herein and believe I have been wrongfully retaliated against for First Amendment rights of expression.  John Pacenti of the Palm Beach Post who has been doing an Investigative series on Abusive Court Guardianships that implicateds Judge French is also copied too. 

The systematic abuse of rights in the 15th Judicial and criminal and civil rights violations in the Florida Courts should become a priority for the Miami Field Office. 

I can be reached at .... and ask that you Dispatch a Field Agent today to start to address systematic crimes and public corruption in the 15th Judicial. 

I have other exhibits that were filed with my Disqualification motion to submit as well. 

Thank you.  

Julia Gonzalez "