Trending...
- Fairfield Inn by Marriott Scottsdale Old Town Opens
- Winners of the 26th Baltimore 'Uplifting Minds II' International Talent Competition Announced
- Baltimore Author Crafts Space Opera Where Human Questions Outshine Galactic Scale
Will Nevada's Highest Court Confront Corruption—Or Allow It to Continue?
LAS VEGAS - Marylandian -- Source: The Verity Project
Karina Singer, a pro se appellant and daughter of the late Steven J. Singer, is awaiting a critical ruling from the Nevada Supreme Court after filing extensive, unrebutted evidence of fiduciary misconduct, elder financial abuse, and judicial irregularities in her father's trust and estate case.
The appeal—Case No. 89171—was originally retained by the Supreme Court for over eight months before being suddenly transferred to the Nevada Court of Appeals just days after Singer formally requested summary disposition, citing NRAP 31(d), and presenting direct evidence of court record tampering, elder exploitation, and constitutional due process violations.
Despite following every procedural rule available to self-represented litigants—including the Court's own Informal Brief Form, which lacks a section for a routing statement—the transfer was carried out without addressing any of the pending dispositive motions or the substantial evidence submitted into the record, some of which includes:
Singer has since filed an Emergency Motion to Recall Transfer and Retain Jurisdiction, along with a Supplement and Renewed Request for Summary Disposition or Evidentiary Hearing, refuting every baseless argument in the Respondents' opposition. All motions are currently before a panel of three Supreme Court Justices, Patricia Lee, Linda Bell, and Douglas Herndon.
More on Marylandian
"The law is not in question. The facts are not in dispute," said Singer. "If the Nevada Supreme Court fails to apply the law and address the uncontested evidence already in the record, it exposes both the Court and the State of Nevada to federal intervention, civil rights litigation, and a potential RICO action for coordinated misconduct involving trustees, attorneys, and judicial officers. This is no longer just about my father; it's about a systemic breakdown that cannot be ignored."
The Court has everything it needs to act. The real question is: Will the Nevada Supreme Court stand for truth and justice under controlling law and binding precedent; or sacrifice its legitimacy, trigger federal scrutiny, and lose the trust of the people it was created to protect?
Singer's filings argue that the transfer violated the Nevada Rules of Appellate Procedure and, if not reversed, would leave constitutional violations unaddressed and incentivize further abuse within Nevada's probate and guardianship courts. She asserts that the Supreme Court has a mandatory, non-waivable obligation under NRAP 17(a)(9)–(11) to retain jurisdiction over appeals involving judicial misconduct, systemic due process failures, issues of first impression, and matters of statewide public concern. Singer requests that the Court recall the transfer, retain jurisdiction, and summarily rule in her favor under NRAP 31(d), citing the complete absence of an answering brief and any disputed facts in the record. She further urges the Court to grant en banc review, hold responsible parties accountable, and issue a published decision that restores public trust by acknowledging and correcting the serious legal errors committed in the lower court.
More on Marylandian
As Nevada watches, the decision in The Matter of Steven J. Singer Trust & Estate - Singer v. Boekankamp could set a precedent for how the state's highest court handles self-represented litigants, judicial accountability, and the integrity of trust and estate proceedings.
Karina Singer, a pro se appellant and daughter of the late Steven J. Singer, is awaiting a critical ruling from the Nevada Supreme Court after filing extensive, unrebutted evidence of fiduciary misconduct, elder financial abuse, and judicial irregularities in her father's trust and estate case.
The appeal—Case No. 89171—was originally retained by the Supreme Court for over eight months before being suddenly transferred to the Nevada Court of Appeals just days after Singer formally requested summary disposition, citing NRAP 31(d), and presenting direct evidence of court record tampering, elder exploitation, and constitutional due process violations.
Despite following every procedural rule available to self-represented litigants—including the Court's own Informal Brief Form, which lacks a section for a routing statement—the transfer was carried out without addressing any of the pending dispositive motions or the substantial evidence submitted into the record, some of which includes:
- Forged financial account documents and unopposed motions for trustee removal, accounting, criminal fraud, and elder abuse.
- Allegations of perjury and false police reports by opposing parties,
- Tampering with electronic court service systems and docket manipulation,
- Improper distribution of over $1 million in trust assets in direct violation of the trust's provisions.
Singer has since filed an Emergency Motion to Recall Transfer and Retain Jurisdiction, along with a Supplement and Renewed Request for Summary Disposition or Evidentiary Hearing, refuting every baseless argument in the Respondents' opposition. All motions are currently before a panel of three Supreme Court Justices, Patricia Lee, Linda Bell, and Douglas Herndon.
More on Marylandian
- Anern Launches New Generation of Lithium Solar Batteries, Empowering a Smarter, Greener Future
- K2 Integrity and the Institute for Financial Integrity Launch AML/CFT Course for Investment Advisers
- Buttcoin - The Next Bitcoin Foundation Explores First Spot Buttcoin ($BUTTCOIN) ETP Listing on Switzerland's SIX Exchange
- Start Dogecoin cloud mining with XY Miners and maximize your passive income
- LeoApe™ AI STEM Adventure: Code Explorers
"The law is not in question. The facts are not in dispute," said Singer. "If the Nevada Supreme Court fails to apply the law and address the uncontested evidence already in the record, it exposes both the Court and the State of Nevada to federal intervention, civil rights litigation, and a potential RICO action for coordinated misconduct involving trustees, attorneys, and judicial officers. This is no longer just about my father; it's about a systemic breakdown that cannot be ignored."
The Court has everything it needs to act. The real question is: Will the Nevada Supreme Court stand for truth and justice under controlling law and binding precedent; or sacrifice its legitimacy, trigger federal scrutiny, and lose the trust of the people it was created to protect?
Singer's filings argue that the transfer violated the Nevada Rules of Appellate Procedure and, if not reversed, would leave constitutional violations unaddressed and incentivize further abuse within Nevada's probate and guardianship courts. She asserts that the Supreme Court has a mandatory, non-waivable obligation under NRAP 17(a)(9)–(11) to retain jurisdiction over appeals involving judicial misconduct, systemic due process failures, issues of first impression, and matters of statewide public concern. Singer requests that the Court recall the transfer, retain jurisdiction, and summarily rule in her favor under NRAP 31(d), citing the complete absence of an answering brief and any disputed facts in the record. She further urges the Court to grant en banc review, hold responsible parties accountable, and issue a published decision that restores public trust by acknowledging and correcting the serious legal errors committed in the lower court.
More on Marylandian
- New Report Highlights the Most Dangerous States for Transportation and Warehouse Workers
- Seecoin Expands Beyond Gaming: A Web3 (r)evolution for All Content Creators
- Barcelona-based Neurosurgical Specialist Awarded Designation of International Center of Excellence for Ehlers Danlos Syndrome
- Pregis Expands Multi-Layer Technology for High-Performance Barrier Films at Anderson Facility
- TMS Redefines Event Mobility for Major Events
As Nevada watches, the decision in The Matter of Steven J. Singer Trust & Estate - Singer v. Boekankamp could set a precedent for how the state's highest court handles self-represented litigants, judicial accountability, and the integrity of trust and estate proceedings.
Source: The Verity Project
0 Comments
Latest on Marylandian
- Costa Rica's Rainy Season Brings a Surge in Sportfishing Action and Travel Deals
- People & Stories/Gente y Cuentos Announces New Board Leadership & Corporate Partnership Initiative
- How to Fast-Track Your Way to the Top with The Code
- Lyricalmar Set To Release Powerful New Ep "MARCHIVES" May 16
- Charleston, SC - ACSEC offers Rain Barrels Through Annual Program
- Greek Government Issues Landmark Ministerial Order Addressing Citizenship of Greek-born adoptees
- Baltimore Author Crafts Space Opera Where Human Questions Outshine Galactic Scale
- Stout Surpasses 60,000 Acres and 3 Billion Plants Scanned
- OpsVeda Announces Launch of TariffSight, the World's First Comprehensive Platform to Address Tariff-Driven Challenges
- MAJOR New release of Krypto500 (ELF-HF) Sigint - COMINT software
- New Build-to-Suit VA Medical Office Facility Coming to Highland Heights, KY
- Winners of the 26th Baltimore 'Uplifting Minds II' International Talent Competition Announced
- Fairfield Inn by Marriott Scottsdale Old Town Opens
- Precision Antibody's Founder and CEO to Speak at the 2025 Drug Discovery Strategic Summit Boston
- Mountain Maryland Plein Air Event
- Pelican Reef Group Announces Grand Opening of New High Point Showroom – IHFC Building H-621 & Event April 27th, 2025
- NaturismRE Launches the 11 Levels of Naturism: A Groundbreaking Framework Guiding the Global Naturist Journey
- K2 Integrity and Sonata One Partner to Accelerate Capital Raising, Reduce Risk, and Deliver Scalable Advisory Services for Private Fund Managers
- The World's No.1 Superstar™ Walks Where Legends Rest: A Sacred Encounter in Rome Before the Pope's Passing
- Coming Up on "Financial Freedom with Tom Hegna" Financial Expert Parker Faulkner