In this proceeding pursuant to Article 17-A of the Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act, the petitioner, one of the respondent’s sisters who was appointed standby guardian of the person of the respondent by decree dated February 3, 2000, seeks an order revoking the letters of guardianship that issued to the respondent’s mother and appointing the petitioner as successor guardian of the respondent’s person. She also seeks the appointment of the respondent’s caretaker as successor standby guardian in her stead. The 2000 decree also determined the respondent to be intellectually disabled and appointed the respondent’s father as first alternate standby guardian, another sister as second alternate standby guardian and a brother as third alternate standby guardian. After jurisdiction was obtained over the respondent, the parents, the nominated second and third alternate standby guardians, and the two other siblings, without opposition, the court appointed separate guardians ad litem for the respondent and the mother.In support of the application, the petitioner alleges that she has been acting as de facto guardian of the person of the respondent, as the mother, who is 86 years old, has suffered from severe dementia for at least five years resulting in significant memory loss, is not able to leave the home with whom she resides with the respondent and the respondent’s father, cannot take care of herself or the respondent, yet she will not willingly relinquish guardianship of the respondent. In support, she annexes a copy of an evaluation of the mother by a psychologist dated October 21, 2014 corroborating memory impairment and compromised executive functioning with the recommendation that an alternate guardian be appointed for the respondent.The guardian ad litem appointed for the mother reports a home visit with the mother and the caretaker during which the mother stated that she “wasn’t dead yet” and could take care of her son, yet she could not recall the name of the caretaker, date of day of the week nor that she lived with the respondent and the father.The guardian ad litem appointed for the respondent reports a home visit with the respondent, mother, caretaker and petitioner during which he learned that the father had recently died, and that it was apparent that the respondent could not communicate or attend to any of his needs, the mother is incapacitated and taken care of by home attendants, and the petitioner exclusively manages the respondent’s care as well as the family finances. The mother initially stated that the petitioner has been “both arms and legs” and indicated she would step down as guardian. Several minutes later, the mother opined that she could not think about the respondent’s future care yet wanted to continue as guardian. A short while afterwards, the mother did not remember who the daughter and guardian ad litem were nor the name of the current president. The guardian ad litem continues that the caretaker appears to be committed to the ward’s well being, responsibly coordinates her personal and vacation schedules with a part-time second home attendant for the mother, two other siblings confirmed the mother’s deteriorated status and that they do not wish to be “involved”, and he was unable to contact the two other siblings who were appointed second and third alternate standby guardians.On this state of the record, including the uncontroverted allegations that the mother’s suffers from significant memory loss and can no longer take care of the respondent or make any medical or living decisions for him, that it appears to be in the best interests of the respondent, and the court is satisfied that the petitioner and the nominated successor standby guardian are each qualified to assume the responsibility of serving as the respondent’s guardians, the application is granted.Accordingly, the respondent’s sister, Debbie S., is appointed successor guardian of the respondent’s person and the respondent’s caretaker, Carmine D. is appointed successor standby guardian to serve when the successor guardian is unable to do so. The successor standby guardian shall assume the duties of her office subject to qualification and confirmation pursuant to SCPA 1757. The decree shall be further amended to vacate the appointments of the mother as guardian, the petitioner as standby guardian and the father as alternate standby guardian.The court commends the two guardians ad litem, Joseph A. Rosenberg, Esq., Main Street Legal Service, Inc., Elder Law Clinic, and Stephen Donaldson, Esq., who graciously waived compensation for their services herein.The Chief Clerk shall mail a copy of this decision and the order amending the February 3, 2000 decree to the pro se petitioner, the former guardian and the two guardians ad litem.Order signed.Dated: February 21, 2019
