By Robert Cannon, Esq.
Consider this scenario: a 75-year-old woman, Jane, began to exhibit signs of cognitive decline last year. She is widowed and has one child. Moreover, her financial advisor contacted a relative to advise that Jane was making unusual withdrawals and that there is a concern that she may be the subject of financial exploitation. The relative no longer believes she can take care of her financial affairs and is concerned that she is not looking after her personal needs.
As a first step, the family tried to talk to her last year about meeting with an estate planning attorney, but she refused to do so. There are no known advance directives in place and her condition has deteriorated significantly. In addition, Jane has a 40-year-old son with Down syndrome who is entirely reliant upon her. What can be done?
First step is to determine if Jane has the capacity to sign advance directives including a health care proxy and power of attorney. If this is not possible because she has deteriorated to the extent of being unable to handle her affairs or appoint someone to do so, the family may need to explore the commencement of a Mental Hygiene Law Article 81 proceeding seeking the appointment of a guardian of the person and property of Jane.
The commencement of the proceeding involves filing a verified petition with the Supreme Court of the county in which she resides outlining the reasons why it is believed that she does not understand or appreciate the extent of her limitations and that she is likely to suffer harm if a guardian is not appointed for her. The appointment of a guardian in MHL Article 81 proceedings is based on functional limitations and not on medical diagnoses.
In light of the financial advisors concerns regarding potential financial exploitation, at the outset of the proceeding, it may be prudent to request that the Court appoint a Temporary Guardian to immediately take steps to secure Jane’s finances and prevent any further abuse.
The Court will set a hearing date and all interested persons will have to be notified, including Jane’s son and her living siblings. The Court will appoint a Court Evaluator to conduct an investigation, which will include meeting Jane in person, speaking with other friends and family members, and investigating her finances. In limited circumstances it may be appropriate for the Court Evaluator to request the permission of the Court to review medical records. The Court may appoint an attorney to represent Jane. The Petitioner would be required to testify at the hearing along with any other witnesses that will help demonstrate to the Court Jane’s need for a guardian. The Court Evaluator will also testify as to their findings and recommendations.
If appointed, the permanent guardian will step into your Jane’s shoes. The petitioner can request to serve as guardian or it can be a third party. The Court can tailor the powers granted to the guardian to meet Jane’s individual needs and can appoint a guardian of the person, a guardian of the property, or both. There are various safeguards in place to ensure that once a guardian is appointed, Jane will be protected, including the requirement that the guardian obtain a bond and file annual reports with the Court.
Once Jane is squared away, the family members will need to turn their attention to Jane’s son. The first inquiry should be if Jane or anyone else was ever appointed as her son’s guardian. If not, we must consider the possibility of commencing a SCPA 17-A guardianship proceeding in the Surrogate’s Court of the County in which he resides. Unlike MHL Article 81, the appointment of a guardian in a SCPA 17-A proceeding is driven by medical diagnoses.
As part of the application, a licensed physician and licensed psychologist with a PhD are required to submit Affirmations certifying that Jane’s son is intellectually or developmentally disabled. A guardian appointed in this manner is granted broad decision- making authority over financial and medical matters.
As you can see, seeking guardianship for an adult in New York can be quite nuanced. Whether it be through the Mental Hygiene Law Article 81 or SCPA Article 17-A, it is possible to provide for the needs of these vulnerable adults.
Robert Cannon, Esq. is a senior associate attorney at Burner Prudenti Law, P.C focusing his practice areas on Elder Law and Guardianships. Burner Prudenti Law, P.C. serves clients from Manhattan to the east end of Long Island with offices located in East Setauket, Westhampton Beach, Manhattan and East Hampton.
