A professional guardian of a Medicaid recipient breached her duty to her ward and jeopardized his eligibility by failing to respect the estate planning that he and his wife had done prior to his institutionalization. Estate of Sullivan v. Brashear (Wash. Ct. App., Div. I, No. 49266-7-I, March 31, 2003) (unpublished opinion).
In 1980, John and Else Sullivan wrote separate wills devising everything to each other, or to two nieces upon the death of the survivor. When Mr. Sullivan required long-term care, Mrs. Sullivan sought out an elder law attorney, who advised her to take several planning steps, including transferring title to the couple's mobile home into her name alone, which she did. Mrs. Sullivan died shortly thereafter and Sheila Brashear, a professional guardian, was appointed Mr. Sullivan's guardian.
On February 24, 1998, one of the nieces, as personal representative of her aunt's estate, petitioned the court for distribution of the mobile home. Ms. Brashear opposed the motion and instead petitioned for an award in lieu of homestead on behalf her ward. Around this time Ms. Brashear came upon Mr. Sullivan's will while taking an inventory of the mobile home's contents but did not advise the court or the nieces of its existence and did not ascertain Mr. Sullivan's testamentary intent.
The nieces claimed that an award in lieu of homestead might disqualify Mr. Sullivan from Medicaid and suggested a special needs trust instead. The nieces requested that Ms. Brashear honor the estate planning done by the Sullivans. Following Mr. Sullivan's death, the will was found and Ms. Brashear withdrew the petition for the award in lieu of homestead. However, in the interim the Department of Social and Health Services filed a substantial Medicaid lien against Mr. Sullivan's estate.
The nieces sued Ms. Brashear, alleging that as a result of her actions the estates of Else and John Sullivan were substantially damaged. The trial court dismissed the complaint, holding that she had acted within the scope of her duties as guardian.
The State of Washington Court of Appeals reverses, finding that Ms. Brashear breached her duties to Mr. Sullivan and to his estate. The court finds that Ms. Brashear should have ascertained Mr. Sullivan's intent after finding his will and was derelict in not seeking court approval before insisting that Mrs. Sullivan's estate be invaded to provide an award in lieu of homestead to Mr. Sullivan. In addition, she failed to recognize that any monies provided by an award in lieu of homestead resulted in no benefit to her ward due to his status as a Medicaid recipient. "There were clear allegations that any additional financial interest received by John Sullivan's guardianship estate would only serve to benefit Brashear or the Department of Social and Health Services in direct contravention of the intent of either John or Else," the court writes.
For the full text of this decision, go to:
Did you know that the ElderLawAnswers database now contains summaries of more than 2,000 fully searchable elder law decisions dating back to 1993? To search the database, click here.
Subscribe to the Knowledge Bank.
