• Report: #896411
Complaint Review:

Erika Dine

  • Submitted: Tue, June 12, 2012
  • Updated: Fri, June 15, 2012

  • Reported By: Anonymous — Bradenton Florida United States of America
Erika Dine
5391 Lakewood Ranch Blvd. Sarasota, Florida United States of America

Erika Dine named in petition to US Supreme Court. Really? This is really going on folks! Rise up! Sarasota, Florida

*Author of original report: Erika Dine Attorney

*General Comment: Ummm...What??? 14th Amendment Due Process???

REBUTTAL BOX™ | Respond to this Report! | Consumer Comment

What's this?
Corporate Advocacy Program

Show customers why they should trust your business over your competitors...

What's this?
What's this?
Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™

Set the record straight:
Arbitration Program

SEO Reputation Management at its best!

Lawsuit Challenging Florida Guardianship System Goes to U.S. Supreme Court Court5947 reads 1 comments By Dr. Richard Swier (Scribe) on October 26th, 2011

A petition for Writ of Certiorari was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court on October 7, 2011, by Edward McGlynn Gaffney, Jr., Professor of International Law and Genocide Studies at Valparaiso University School of Law, on behalf of Beverly R. Newman and Lawrence T. Newman.  Professor Gaffney is also the producer, director, and writer of the documentary film, Empty Boxcars, depicting the mass rescue of 50,000 Bulgarian Jews in the Holocaust.Named in the petition are: Paul E. Logan and Jannette Dunnigan, judges for the Circuit Court of Manatee County, Florida; the Public Guardian for Manatee County doing business as Aging Safely, Inc., its CEO Jo Eisch, director Ashley Butler, and attorneys James Knowles and Erika Dine; professional guardian Herbert Schimmel and his lawyer Edwin Boyer; and Gerald OBrien, former counsel for the petitioner.

Why is this petition important? Because it questions the legality of the Florida guardianship program under the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause.According to the petition:One question presented: Whether State guardianship and civil commitment proceedings that significantly diminish protected liberty and property interests of an incapacitated person violate the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause, (1) where a State Judge and Public Guardian fail to provide adequate notice of the guardianship and civil commitment proceedings to family members who are willing and responsible caregivers of the incapacitated person, and (2) where the proceedings violate procedural safeguards for full and fair hearing by failure of court-appointed council to provide meaningful legal representation of the ward of the State throughout these proceedings, and by judicial exclusion of competent family members from meaningful participation in guardianship and civil  commitment proceeding. . .What this all boils down to is who should be protected when an incapacitated person becomes a ward of the State, in this case Al Katz, an elderly part-time resident of Florida and Holocaust survivor, - the State or the family? I believe it should be the family that must be given priority and protection in the name of the family member.

Al Katz is the poster child for the failures of the Florida guardianship system. The experiences of Beverly Newman, daughter of Al Katz, with the Florida guardianship program were a nightmare of the worst kind. She is the willing and responsible caregiver for her father. At every turn, Beverly and her husband Larry were thwarted by a State system designed to destroy rather than help those in public guardianship. It is a closed system of judges, lawyers, and professional guardians working in collusion to deny Al Katz of his due process rights. What is now being questioned, and rightly so, is this legal under our U.S. Constitution?

The Petition for Writ of Certiorari importantly clarifies the unconstitutional treatment of Al Katz while in public guardianship:In the administration of the guardianship itself, Judge Logan kept postponing critical decisions for months until it seemed that Katz was on deaths door . The judges refusal to read and decide timely and sometimes urgent motions submitted by [Katzs family] constitutes a denial of fairness at the core of due process.The lower court repeatedly ordered Katz into a nursing home, a decision completely contrary to both Katzs express advance directives and the desires of [his family].

As a simple person of common sense and having studied and written about the case of Al Katz, I believe his rights were denied by a self-serving State guardianship system. It is big government gone wild and in Als case the proximate cause of his death and the theft of his estate.

I look forward to the day that the U.S. Supreme Court accepts this petition and hears what really happens in Florida and across the United States to those placed under the jack boots of the State.Tags : Supreme Court , Al Katz , Florida , public guardian , Paul E. Logan , Edward McGlynn Gaffney, Jr. , Janette Dunnigan , Manatee Circuit CourtsMORE >>ShareinShare2CommentsState guardianship of adultsSubmitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 2011-10-30 12:15.-2+-The state is again making lucrative targets of the elderly. Even though they are not mentally incapcitated but physically limited, the state allows an attorney and guardian (appointed by the court!) to drain their assets, to sell off their assets and to make all decisions for the person regardless of their own will and the will of their family. This is beyond reality to believe it occurred once and yet it is happening to tens of thousands. Finally perhaps a higher court will injuction the process. More than once recently judges have gone to jail because they declared youths incorigible and sent them to private facilities for money. Perhaps this too is happening with our elderly and Attorney General Bondi needs to investigate.

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 06/12/2012 11:45 AM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/erika-dine/sarasota-florida-34240/erika-dine-named-in-petition-to-us-supreme-court-really-this-is-really-going-on-folks-r-896411. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.

Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content

Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on Erika Dine

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Search Tips
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
1Author 1Consumer 0Employee/Owner
Updates & Rebuttals

#1 Author of original report

Erika Dine Attorney

AUTHOR: Equitymaster - (United States of America)

This is not the first time Erika Dine has been accused or wrong doing.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 General Comment

Ummm...What??? 14th Amendment Due Process???

AUTHOR: Striderq - (U.S.A.)


Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its

jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2.

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,* and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4.

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5.

The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

*Changed by section 1 of the 26th amendment.

This amendment has nothing to do with due process. By chance did you mean the 4th Amendment???

Respond to this report!
What's this?
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?