louis j. russo - notice of grievances to the probate court and case background

8/9/2019 Louis J. Russo - Notice of Grievances to the Probate Court and Case Background

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/louis-j-russo-notice-of-grievances-to-the-probate-court-and-case-background 1/10

(13-00304) District No. PD4 :JAN 22, 2015

LOUIS J. RUSSO NOTICE TO COURT

In consideration of the elements of this case, The conserved person and estate, Louis J.Russo hereby request the courts consideration and action in the above named case

specific to the background and allegations set forth below in this notice of agrievement to

the Housatonic Valley Probate Court, Judge Martin Langrebe.

I, Louis J. Russo have been advised by the States Attorney Generals Office that redress of

grievances shall first be brought forth in this manner prior to being elevated to the States

Attorney General or for Civil Litigation through the State Superior and Supreme Courts.

Background

1. Mr. Louis J. Russo, Born 8/1/1918, is a US Army WWII Combat Veteran that served

in the Battle of New Guinea, and Papua between the dates of April 1942 – July 1945.

2. Mr. Russo, was honorably discharged from the US Army at the rank of SSgt

3. Mr. Louis J. Russo is the current property owner of the property located at 11

Hammond Rd, New Fairfield CT 06812.

4. Mr. Russo is of sound mind and in outstanding mental and physical health

considering his age of 96.

5. Mr. Russo was removed from his home following an application through the Town

Of New Fairfield Social Services for an involuntary conservatorship approximately

May, 2013 following a fall

6. Mr. Russo had been forced to reside in multiple hospitals and/or care facilities

(Danbury Hospital, Pope John Paul Nursing Home, Wallingford Masonacare)

7. Since the establishment of the involuntary conservator he had not been allowed to

return to reside in his home until Nov, 2014 following the efforts and coordination of

volunteer veterans advocate, Daniel R. Gaita of Operation Vet Fit, an IRS, IRC,

501(C)(3) and a CT registered Public Charity.

8. From approximately May 2013 thru August 2014, Mark Broadmeyer, was Mr.

Russo’s Assigned Conservator and Attorney Candace Fay was assigned attorney

under the direction of Judge Martin Landgrebe of the Housatonic Probate Court

1



detailed in the Matter of Louis Russo (13-00304) District No. PD44.

9. Throughout those dates May 2013-Aug 2014, the probate court records detail Mark

Broadmeyer and Candace Fay, acting in the capacity of Louis Russ’s conservator of

both person and estate allegedly violated multiple CT Statutes, CT Probate Court

Rules, Mr. Russo’s civil rights and violated the Patients Bill of Rights. More

specifically detailed below:

a. Unlawful sale of Mr. Russo personal and estate assets as set forth in C.G.S.

sections 45a-164 through 45a-169, 45a-650, 45a-655(a), 45a-656b(a) and 45a-

660(a); Probate Court Rules:

i. 33.12(b) by failing to present evidence regarding the fair market value

of Mr. Russo’s assets prior to sale.

ii. 33.12(d) Louis Russo, the conserved person never grated consented to

the sale as required by C.G.S. section 45a-656b(a).

iii. 33.8 by failing to send copy of inventory to all parties as required by

C.G.S. section 45a-655(a).

iv. 33.9 by dissolving and closing Lous join bank accounts with other

persons as required by C.G.S. section 45a-98(a)(3) and 45a-655(a).

b. Rule 36 by failing to provide financial reports and accounting in line with

(C.G.S. sections 19a-301, 45a-98(a), 45a-143, 45a-175 through 45a-180, 45a-

242(b), 45a-317, 45a-489a(d), 45a-517, 45a-559d, 45-654(f), 45a-655(c) and

45a-660(b))& 45a-655(e)

c. Rule 37 failed to file applicable financial reports in line with C.G.S. sections45a-177(b) and 45a-597; Probate Court Rules, rule 36.

d. Rule 38 by failing to provide financial reports and accounting in line with

C.G.S. sections 45a-176, 45a-177(b) and 45a-597, 45a-176, 45a-177(b), 45a-

542 through 45a-542ff and 45a-597.

e. Rule 39 by charging fees outside of the rules established in C.G.S. sections

17b-95(c), 45a-151(b), 45a-234(6), 45a-594 and 45a-649a.

f. Rule 44.4 failed to provide notice to the court on Mr. Russo’s transfer to the

Wallingford Masonacare psychiatric ward where Mr. Russo alleges he wasabused prior to being released and transferred back to Pope John Paul II, in

violation of (C.G.S. sections 17a-77(a) and 17a-498(a); Probate Court Rules,

rule 8.

g. Rule 71.3; 71.5; 71.6 ; 71.7Acting in summary, nonsummary and civil

contempt of court by misbehaving or disobeying an order of a judge during

2



and/or after a hearing or conference. (Middlebrook v. The State, 43 Conn. 257

(1876); Probate Court Rules, section 16.11) & Connecticut Practice Book

section 1-18)

a. Rule 71 Failure of fiduciary to perform duties under C.G.S. section 51-84.

(C.G.S. sections 45a-242 and 51-84.

b. CGS 17a-542, Failure to provide humane and dignified treatment during

Lou’s unauthorized, and restrained transfer from Pope John Paul II nursing

home to the Wallingford Masonacare where Mr. Russo alleges he was abused,

locked up and deprived of his civil rights. Specifically that the entire

experience caused great pain, and humiliation”

• Evidence supporting the allegations above are provided by Mark

Broadmeyer in his answers to the court and advocates interrogatories of

approx. Nov 2014. As well as within all Probate court records of this case.

10. Additionally, Louis Russo alleges that Attorney Candace Fay also violated section

12.4 of the CT Probate Court Rules by failing to advocate for the client in accordance

with the Rules of Professional Conduct.

a. More specifically by conspiring, colluding, negotiating, implementing, and

executing, with Mark Broadmeyer in:

i. multiple versions of unauthorized lease agreement(s)

ii. with unauthorized tenants andiii. fraudulent signatures in Louis Russo’s home.

iv. As evidence of the above allegation, Probate Court records show that

Judge Langrebe, once he was notified, ordered the eviction of the

unauthorized tenants from the home of Louis Russo. (See case

DOCKET NO. DBD CV 14 4019074 S, Danbury Superior Court.)

b. Additionally, Candace Fay, without consent or conference with Louis Russo:

i. Negotiated and entered into a Pre Judgment remedy specific to the

debt that Mr. Russo forcibly and involuntarily accumulated at Pope

John Paul II Nursing home, Danbury CT. (DBDCV 14 4009231,

Danbury CT)

c. Additionally, Attorney Candace Fay allegedly engaged in Collusion and

Conspiracy when she:

i. On or about October 16th, 2014; Filed a false criminal complaint for

3



threatening and harassment against Lou’s advocate, Daniel Gaita with

the (Danbury Police Officer Galgano) – Police investigated the

complaint and informed Fay that nothing was done illegally on the part

of Mr. Gaita.

ii. Additionally, the complaint filed by Fay resulted from her using

multiple fake facebook accounts allegedly established by Candace or

David Fay in an attempt to entrap Gaita into making a threat. Their

attempts repeatedly failed.

iii. October 10th, 2014; Candace Fay also had her husband, David Fay, A

Federal Corrections Officer, submit a bizarre and allegedly threatening

and intimidating email to Gaita.

iv. October 16th, David Fay also filed a false complaint with the Danbury

Police Department Officer Nieves, claiming Gaita threatened him/her.

Police investigated the complaint and informed Fay that nothing was

done illegally on the part of Mr. Gaita.

v. Additionally, in Mr. and Mrs. Fays attempt to entrap, harass and

intimidate Mr. Gaita, she allegedly used other persons photos and

names to create fake facebook accounts thus engaging in stolen

identity.

vi. October 17th

, 2014; As a result, Gaita filed a criminal complaintagainst the Fays with the Bethel Police ordering Fay and her husband

to cease and desist all contact with Gaita.

vii. October 20th, 2014; Following the complaint filed by Gaita, Candace

Fay retained the Law Offices of Ferrara & Hayden, P.C. to further

attempt to harass and intimidate Gaita by demanding that Gaita retract

his allegations of wrong-doing by Fay and Broadmeyer.

viii. All of the above mentioned allegations created interruptions and

delays to the attempted advocacy efforts of Dan Gaita in direct

violation of her oath of office, Probate Court Rules, and Mr. Russo’s

rights as a patient.

d. Additionally, Candace Fay, just prior to her removal as Court Appointed

Attorney, attempted on two separate occasion in one day to coerce Mr. Russo

4



from filing the now active criminal complaint against her and Broadmeyer.

Specifically claiming that it would:

i. Ruin her chances of being elected (she was a candidate for State

Representative in the Nov 2014 election)

ii. Ruin her political careeriii. Ruin her professional career

iv. I did not sign any agreement with her and am still seeking adjudication

through the criminal process, which is being held up by repeated delay

tactics. Specifically, the withholding by Broadmeyer and now Dean

Lewis of the requested evidence needed for the investigating detective

to conduct a forensic audit of my accounts.

e. Additionally, despite both of their knowledge that he was eligible for free care

at any veterans facility, Attorney Candace Fay and Mark Broadmeyer failed to

place Mr. Russo into Veterans Housing or a Veterans hospital where he would

have had $0 in charges due to his WWII Combat Service. As a direct result of

this action, Mr. Russo accumulated a $108,000 debt that went through a Pre-

Judgment remedy without Louis Russo’s consent, which left him with a

$40,000+ debt and lien on his property.

11. Approximately August 2014, Mark Broadmeyer, acting as conservator and with

coordination from the court appointed attorney, Candace Fay and without

authorization of the probate judge or Mr. Russo, wrongfully and allegedly illegally

leased Mr. Russo’s Property to tenants that alleged to have had a 50/50 cash deal to

split the funds from scrapping Lou’s property for rent payment.

a. None of the funds for rent or scrapping of Mr. Russo’s assets where accounted

for in Broadmeyers periodic or final accounting.

b. Statements as evidence were provided by the tenant’s to investigating State

Police detective Michael Moricoli.

c. Additionally they (the tenants) claimed in the presence of Trooper Moricoli,

that the signatures on two of the leases were not their own, that they were

photocopied from the first of three leases on the record.

12. On August 26th, 2014 The Housatonic Probate Court found that “Mark Broadmeyer

did not receive prior Court approval to allow tenants to move into Louis Russo’s

residence at 11 Hammond Road, New Fairfield, CT during a recorded hearing.

5



13. Also On August 26th The probate court, Hon. Marin F. Landgrebe, having realized the

error on Mr. Boradmeyers behalf ORDERED that Mark Boradmeyer shall:

a. Remove the tenants at 11 Hammond Road, New Fairfield by October 1st,

2014;

b. Supply the court with a timeline as to when Louis Russo will return to his

home by the October 2, 2014 hearing. (See Probate Decree dated 8/26/2014)

c. File an interim Accounting covering June 28th, 2013 through Present by

September 15th, 2014

14. On September 5th, 2014 The probate court, Hon. Marin F. Landgrebe found: “The

conservator did not request Court permission to act with regard to the real property”

(See Probate Decree dated 9/5/2014)

15. On October 2nd during a scheduled hearing Mark Broadmeyer provided the court with

the judges ORDERED interim Accounting covering June 28th

, 2013 through

September 15th, 2014. Therein:

a. The report shows no rental agreement or rental income received by Mr.

Russo’s estate by the alleged tenants.

b. No rental agreement was ever presented or produced to the court neither at

that time nor since.

c. Nor could one have been legally consummated without the prior approval of

the probate court.

16. Until approx. Nov 24th, 2014, 18 months after being assigned an involuntary

conservator of both person and estate Mr. Russo sat in a nursing home with an unpaid

bill, accruing debt of utilities and taxes, his life savings depleted and then strangers

living in his home. He claims he was neglected and treated as a prisoner, and an

inmate. Mr. Russo further claims that his Civil Rights have been & are being

routinely violated and denied while he awaits the day that his personal belongings are

returned to him.

17. October 3rd, 2014, Following a request for help from Mr. Russo’s veterans advocate,

Daniel R. Gaita, State Senator Michael McLachlan and Judge Landgrebe quickly

worked to remedy the immediate situation by removing both conservator, Mark

Braodmeyer and Attorney Candace Fay, replacing them with new Conservator,

Attorney Dean Lewis, and New Attorney Richard P. Terbrush following an additional

6



request by Louis Russo himself.

18. Between the dates of October 3rd and November 11th, 2014 Attorney Dean Lewis was

effective at completing the eviction proceedings, removing the unauthorized tenants

from Mr. Russo home, and lining up services for Mr. Russo’s return home.

19. Also between the dates of approximately October 20th – November 11th, Volunteer

veterans advocate, Daniel R. Gaita coordinated over 20 volunteers and secured the

donation of approximately $20-$30,000 in donated labor and materials needed to

safely and properly renovate and repair Mr. Russo home for his return. The

volunteers completed their mission by November 10 th, 2014 and Mr. Russo’s home

was ready for his return.

20. In addition to preparing Mr. Russo’s home for his return, Gaita also provided, at no

cost, the loan of Phones, TV’s, Fall Alert System, Internet, WiFI, an 8 camera

surveillance system, Droid tablet, an email address, facebook account, Ipod, and most

of today’s modern electronics and technological amenities.

a. The cost of these services is currently being paid by Operation Vet Fit.

b. Since Mr. Russo continues to have no access to his income, finances, or any

of his identification needed to open his own bank account he is unable to

make any purchases on his own behalf. Including the purchase of food andbasis nessesities.

21. Between Nov 11th – Present (Jan 23nd, 2015) and despite repeated calls and emails,

from both Louis Russo and advocate, Daniel Gaita, Attorney Dean Lewis failed to

turn over Lou’s requested documents and personal effects.

22. Additionally, Attorney Lewis has failed to secure many of the benefits that Gaita

lined up for Mr. Russo but was unable to attain for Mr. Russo as a result of Dean

Lewis restricting and limiting Lou’s advocates (Gaita’s) efforts. Specifically

interfering with Gaita’s ability to obtain the following for Mr. Russo:

a. VA Veterans Pension

b. Food Stamp (SNAP) assistance

c. Cash Assistance

d. Utilities Assistance through CACD

7



e. Lou’s Personal Identifications and property deeds

f. Social Security Card and Income

g. Bank account and access to his personal funds to purchase food and basic

necessities

23. On January 9th 2015, Attorney Dean Lewis specifically, via email, insisted that our

lawmakers, agencies and advocates “not correspond with Mr. Gaita” following

Gaita’s attempt to investigate the status of Lou Russo’s VA Veterans Pension that he

applied for in October 2014. This appears to be in direct violation of appropriate

conduct as a conservator is never to interfere or delay the efforts of a conserved

persons chosen advocate.

a. Also on January 9th 2015, following Attorney Dean Lewis Email, outlined

above, Gaita replied to all agencies including the Probate Court and

Congressional Aides inquiring about the absurdity of Attorney Lewis’s

actions, comments and orders in his email. This email resulted in the

following email dated (1/9/2014 @ 12:45:32PM EST) from Attorney Dean

Lewis to Lou’s Advocate, Daniel R. Gaita:

i. “ Dan I copied you on my email. This is a Blatant violation of the

Privacy Act and I will deal with this sternly. I am requesting that you

cease and and all efforts as the “advocate” for Mr Russo. It is

becoming harmful rather than helpful when you act as a lone wolf.

Thank you for your past assistance Dean cc: Atty Terbrusch”

b. Upon that date, Advocate, Daniel R. Gaita ceased all communication and

coordination with Attorney Dean Lewis for fear that Attorney Lewis had now

shown clear violations of the Probate Court rules specific to interfering with

the efforts of an advocate, CGS(Sec 45-650(m), violating the patients bill of

rights and his civil rights by obstructing efforts to restore Mr. Russo’s

independence, freedom and dignity.

WHEREFORE, the Conserved person and estate, Louis J. Russo requests the COURTS

8



consideration and judgment against the above named, former court appointed

9



conservators and attorneys for any and all violations set forth herein.

Further, Louis J. Russo requests that Attorney Candace Fay and Mark Broadmeyer satisfyhis debt to Pope John Paul. That the lien be removed from his property, That he be made

whole, and that he be given back his life, his dignity, his money, his property, and his

independence from those within this system that have tortured him for nearly two years.

Respectfully Submitted,

DATED: 1/26/15 SIGNATURE

By: Louis J. Russo

10

louis j. russo - notice of grievances to the probate court and case background

Documents