Reasons were released this week in a Committeeship case called Simons v. Simons.
The patient, an elderly gentleman, was being cared for by a number of persons, including a son and a new wife. The son sought an Order that he be permitted to act as Committee over his father’s assets and his person, but the patient’s wife and a nephew opposed.
The Court quickly concluded that the patient could not manage either himself or his ﬁnances. The Court held, however, that the new wife was abusive (in one part of the reasons, she justiﬁed her verbal abuse as coming from her Italian heritage!), and the Court was concerned about her ability to look after her husband on a day to day basis.
Meanwhile the patient, when he had capacity, had given his son Power of Attorney and authority under a Representation Agreement. The Public Guardian and Trustee did not oppose the son’s acting, and he demonstrated that he was the most appropriate person to act for his father.
So despite the patient having a wife with whom he lived, the Court appointed the son as Committee over the person and the ﬁnancial affairs of his father, the patient.
It is a good judgement on the Court’s part, in a complex family situation.
This ad appeared in the Richmond News on April 19, 2013.