Russell Buchan (Floral Shirt) visits with classmates
at 40th High School Reunion.
I do not believe Russell told his classmates how he acheived his wealth.
This section provides insight about Probate Proceedings and why Family members faced with Probate need to excercise caution following the death of a Loved One.
Our mother, died on Thursday evening, February 1, 2001. Funeral services were conducted on Sunday, February 4th and interment was held at Memorial Park on Monday morning, February 5th
Later that week, my brother Doug and I discovered hat Russell had filed for Probate and to be appointed personal representative on the morning of our mother’s interment.
We contacted our attorney and asked why the rush? He replied, “It looks like someone is trying to steal your mother’s estate.” We asked what will happen if we object. He explained, “In this Court Circuit, it is difficult to change an original probate court ruling. If you contest the appointment you will be spending a lot of money and most likely lose. Judges do not like to admit errors.”
When the matter was investigated, our attorney discovered that the Probate filing was done with a copy of an alleged Will and Russell’s attorney arranged for another attorney, Carlton Reichert, to sign an affidavit verifying the Will.
Further investigation showed that Russell’s attorney called Carlton Reichert on Friday, February 2nd, the day after our mother died. Carlton Reichert was residing in Orlando, Florida and Russell's attorney stated he would be filing probate Monday morning and needed the affiant signed as soon as possible. Attorney Reichert came to St. Petersburg and signed the affiant at the Clearwater Court House on Wednesday, February 7th.
Russell Buchan did not spend much time grieving over the death of his mother.
The story continues..........
It was during 2004 that I discovered that attorney Carlton Reichert was permanently disbarred from the practice of law by the Florida State Supreme Court, not once but twice. (See Exhibits Four & Five). Since he was no longer an attorney and could not be representing my brother, Russell, I wrote to Mr. Reichert to query him about his involvement in our mother’s estate probate.
I mentioned my knowledge of my mother’s legal activities between the periods 1971 until 1992 when she was placed in guardianship. During this twenty one year span several different attorneys represented my mother and to my knowledge all of them shared correspondence with me. For a period of time in this time frame I held power of attorney for my mother and in 1986 I was appointed conservator of all of my parents’ real assets.
I spoke of the attorneys I had communication with during this twenty-one year time frame on behalf of my mother’s interests. They included Elizabeth Kovachevich who later was appointed to a Federal Judgeship in 1982. I had knowledge that Ms. Kovachevich represented my mother for several years including 1978 when the alleged will for my mother was written. After Ms. Kovachevich was appointed to the federal court, Mr. Robert Nunez represented my mother until his death in 1992. Prior to her representation by Ms. Kovachevich, my mother has legal advice from attorney Richard Eagle and also was a partner of real estate holdings with Mr. Eagle. There were other attorneys who performed legal services for my mother on specific actions and my mother would share all these matters with me. I told Mr. Reichert that nowhere in many boxes of letters, documents, leases, including correspondence and court papers involving my parent’s legal activities was his name mentioned.
In my letter to Mr. Reichert I wrote I was aware that in 1982, the Federal Government enacted legislation that made dramatic changes to the Estate Tax. Attorneys and accountants were advised to review client wills that were pre-dated before 1982, and new wills should be drafted to incorporate the new legislation.
My mother and I discussed drafting a new will and trust and she visited with her attorney and Probate attorneys. When my brother, Russell heard about this activity he showed jealously about my involvement in our Mother's estate planning. Russell wanted Mom to consult with his personal friend and attorney, Charles Robinson in Clearwater. I accompanied our mother to Charles Robinson’s office for her appointment and waited for her outside in her car. On the ride home Mom said he had received the same advice from Mr. Robinson she received from her own attorney. This was in 1986.
In early 1987, my father, Charles Buchan said he wanted to make a new will and trust like the one our mother had done. He had a copy and made an appointment with an attorney of his own choosing at Pasadena, Florida. I accompanied my father to his appointment with the attorney and after introductions I sat in the reception area while my father stayed in conference with the attorney. My father’s will is published in the exhibits on the website, www.fairnessforfamilies.com and Yes it is a mirror image of the copy of my mother’s will I had in my possession.
In 1988, during a visit to the office of my mother’s attorney, Robert Nunez, we were discussing my parent’s business affairs and issues pertaining to my duties as Conservator. At the time Mr. Nunez related that he had reviewed my mother’s will and trust and found them to be in order and effectively drawn. Mr. Nunez was an Estate and Probate attorney and he specially mentioned “will and trust”. I knew in 1988, again in 2001 and today, Robert Nunez was not referring to the will my brother Russell had entered in Probate.
In my letter to Mr. Carlton Reichert which was written on June 16, 2004, I told him I questioned his actions on why he acted so hastily to sign an oath of witness. I asked him when he received the call from Russell's attorney did he ask if there were other children. Did he ask if there were any other attorneys who may have represented Mrs. Amelia Buchan in the years between 1978 and 2001? Did he ask if anyone knows about the existence of another will? Did he ask who was Mrs. Buchan attorney at the time of her death and had that attorney been contacted about the existence of a will? Did he ask why Mrs. Buchan did not have a trust as advised by the 1982 legislation? Did he ask, why the rush? Did he ask what he would receive for being so accommodating, since he prepared the alleged will and could be the probate attorney? Did he ask about Exhibit A that was mentioned in the will and where was it? Did he ask why Exhibit A was not filed in Probate? Did he ask if the original will existed, who had the copy and how did they obtain it? Did he ask how and when Russell's attorney obtained a copy of the alleged will?
Mr. Carlton Reichert never responded to my letter but a lot of the questions were answered when I received copies of the Carlton Reichert disbarment proceedings and gained insight into the absence of ethical standards he practiced in his personal law practice.
The Court's Opinion
On April 18, 2002, approximately one year after our mother, Amelia Buchan death there was a Probate Court hearing for the purpose of considering a motion to dismiss Russell Buchan as Personal Representative in the estate of Amelia Buchan.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the presiding judge entered his decision into the record,
“The will was drawn by an Attorney Carlton Reichert, in whom this Court has great professional respect…….. Mr. (Gerard) Buchan has no standing before this Court and his petition is dismissed with prejudice….Mr. (Gerard) Buchan, the words ‘with prejudice’ means you are not going to see me anymore.”
After the hearing, I thought back to a year ago when our attorney told us, the Courts make mistakes but are reluctant to change them.
I wonder what the Courts think of former attorney Carlton Reichert today?
