All persons should know the meaning of the words conservatorship, conservator, and conservatee. It is vital to the protection of one's life, assets, and freedoms.
In California, a conservator of the person may be appointed for a person who is unable to provide properly for his or her personal needs for physical health, food, clothing or shelter. A conservator of the estate may be appointed for a person who is substantially unable to manage his or her own financial resources or resist fraud or undue influence. The person conserved is a conservatee. "Substantial inability may not be proved solely by isolated incidents of negligence or improvidence." CA Probate Code Sec. 1801.

Sometimes a conservatorship is necessary and beneficial; in that case, family members are favored by the law to act as conservator. Sometimes a conservatorship is imposed upon a person against his or her will by a complete stranger, a professional conservator.

If the court appoints a temporary or permanent conservator for you against your will, you will not have access to your own funds to fight the conservatorship. The conservator and his or her attorney(s) will use your own money to oppose you.

That is what happened to 37-year old Mill Valley resident, Steven Charles Laughton, on December 22, 2000. While this case is over six years old, its lessons and tragic results should not be forgotten.

Steve Laughton and his wife Kim were getting divorced. They had three young children. In October of 2000, Steve and Kim executed a transmutation agreement that divided community property assets into separate property; Steve's half was $1.6 million. No one asserted that Steve was not legally capable of executing that agreement or managing those funds.

Steve Laughton was about to be blindsided.

On December 22, 2000, San Rafael attorney Woodford G. "Woody" Rowland of the Law Offices of Rowland & Franceschini, filed an ex parte application for appointment of temporary conservator of Steve's estate on behalf of Steve Laughton's father, James R. Laughton, Sr. of Reno. The petition, filed in Marin County Superior Court, sought control over all of Steve Laughton's assets. With no notice to Steve whatsoever, that same day Commissioner Mary T. Grove appointed a complete stranger, Margaret D. Boyden of Fiduciary Resources, Inc., San Rafael, to take control of all of Steve's assets.

Woody Rowland asked the Court to dispense with notice of the temporary conservatorship hearing to Steve Laughton because "He has access to a gun and Petitioner (Steve's father) fears that if the proposed conservatee is given notice of this proceeding, he might attempt to harm himself."

On January 2, 2001, Steve's divorce attorney, Sandra J. Bushmaker, filed a motion to vacate the temporary conservatorship. Commissioner Grove denied the motion.

Meanwhile, Margaret Boyden and her team were busy marshaling Steve's assets; his accrued vacation pay of over $10,000; over $30,000. in cash from the sale of a growth fund; all his benefits from his last employer, Dresdner RCM Global Investors, including his deferred compensation package worth an estimated $1,500,000, his profit sharing plan. Boyden and her daughter Caron Schmierer of Fiduciary Resources, Inc. attempted to cancel the real estate transactions Steve had made to diversify his investment portfolio. Boyden arranged for a market analysis of Steve and Kim's Mill Valley home.

[In her "Conservator Information" registered with the Office of the Attorney General, Ms. Schmierer states her professional experience includes "Court-appointed Conservator for husband/wife in contested dissolution of marriage proceedings"; however, Schmierer declined to be interviewed for this article to explain under what circumstances a conservatorship of a husband or wife in a contested divorce would be justified.]

At great expense to Steve's estate, Boyden hired: her own attorney, Richard S. Riede; Fiduciary Resources, Inc. (in which Boyden held majority ownership); attorney J. Mark Montobbio to "assist her with respect to all plans and benefits at Dresdner"; and her own bonding service.

Boyden was appointed permanent conservator of Steve's estate on March 15, 2001 "largely on the fact that Steven was unable to account for the $1.6 million that he received in the division of the community property" (Woody Rowland, 06/11/01).

Shortly after the temporary conservator was appointed, Steve's attorney Sandra Bushmaker, wrote an urgent letter to Commissioner Grove and Judge Randolph Heubach (divorce case Judge): "Dr. Conrad advised me that what is going on with this family is a "tragedy in the making." She stated that my client's (Steve's) "persona has been completely trashed" by the events of the legal proceeding, the separation and the loss of his job and family; he is utterly humiliated, hurt and angry about the constant attack...Mr. Rowland obtained a temporary conservatorship of Mr. Laughton's estate on 12/22/00 without notice to me or my client or without a doctor's declaration supporting any mental infirmity, just like in the family law proceeding." We lawyers need to back off and let this family stabilize...if the legal system continues on the destructive path heretofore, I fear that this family will be further irreparably harmed."

Rowland, Steve's father, Boyden, and the Court, however, refused to back off in their quest to find out where Steve's money was.



Between 01/03/01 and 02/07/01, Woody Rowland wrote eight letters to Sandra Bushmaker demanding to know the whereabouts of Steve's $1.6 million.

On behalf of Steve's father, Rowland petitioned the court to order Steve to attend a deposition and produce documents; to order a psychological evaluation; to appoint an attorney for Steve at his own expense; for sanctions against Steve for not appearing at a deposition ("Conservatee has no legitimate basis for refusing to answer questions and produce documents...relating to the whereabouts of the $1.6 million"); and to prevent Steve from advising others in financial matters (his profession) until he disclosed where the money was.

In a 03/06/01 ex parte application for order to appoint counsel, Woody Rowland stated "the conservatorship stems from Petitioner's fear that the Conservatee had developed a mental disorder that is rendering him unable to manage his own finances."

The diagnosis of a mental disorder is insufficient evidence for the court to impose a conservatorship. Probate Code sec. 1801(e): "The standard of proof for the appointment of a conservator pursuant to this section shall be clear and convincing evidence." For determining legal mental capacity, sec. 811 (d): "The mere diagnosis of a mental or physical disorder shall not be sufficient in and of itself to support a determination that a person is of unsound mind or lacks the capacity to do a certain act."

Steve Laughton's own physician, Dr. Alan Dubin, objected to the conservatorship in his 03/16/01 declaration, saying that Steven "appeared able to manage his finances without difficulty" and "is subject to several potent stressors: separation from his children, the current process of a divorce proceeding, loss of control over his finances by this action."

Was Steve Laughton unqualified to manage his own money? He received a Bachelors Degree in accounting from the University of Southern California and a Masters Degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's School of Management. He was a Certified Public Accountant, a Registered Investor Advisor, a Chartered Financial Analyst, and had a successful career as a global portfolio manager employed by Dresdner RCM Global Investors and Deutsche Bank AG.

Steve's 01/03/01 declaration, states: "I am not incompetent...I can and do adequately manage my own financial affairs. The allegation that I spent $1.5 million in 5 months is absolutely a lie...since I separated from my wife in late July 2000, I have managed my own affairs without consultation with my family, something that obviously bothers them. The fact that the stock market has dropped the past quarter is not secret. In my analysis, the market dropped about 40% since this fall. When I saw this trend earlier this autumn, I began adjusting the composition of my portfolio to reduce the potential losses...I converted a number of stock investments into cash and real estate investments locally and out of state...instead of sustaining a loss of about 40%, my losses were reduced to about 15%...It is my belief that my wife and family do not understand my activities and I have not shared all the details with them...I do not think my parents and my wife share the same values and they want to continue to control me."

Steve said in his 3/16/01 email to Woody Rowland: "Woody, I really understand you are a hired gun...I don't think my Dad understood the full implications of an asset freeze...You really win the home wrecker of the year award."

This writer witnessed Steve Laughton argue on his own behalf that he should not be conserved. His reasoning fell on the Court's deaf ears.

Boyden's team spent the summer continuing to marshal Steve's assets.

On September 24, 2001, Steve called Boyden's attorney, Rick Riede, and asked to have a meeting with him the following day.

On September 25, 2001, Steven Charles Laughton committed suicide by hanging himself from a tree in the back yard of the family home in Mill Valley.

Steve Laughton's father told me he was trying to help his son's wife and children by initiating the conservatorship. On February 19, 2002, James R. Laughton, Sr. petitioned the court to reimburse him out of Steve Laughton's estate for $70,228.31 in attorneys' fees and costs and $7,195.25 "in out-of-pocket expenses in pursuing the conservatorship." Commissioner Grove so ordered.

Margaret Boyden billed Steve's estate $21.25 to accept the call from Rick Riede advising her of Steve's death. Riede also billed Steve's estate for the call.

Steve Laughton's estate was charged for all conservatorship expenses, including all attorneys' fees on both sides and other costs, totaling well over $100,000.

The major problem of conservatorship abuse in California was detailed in the 4-part Los Angeles Times series, Guardians for Profit. Conservator and Guardian abuse is rampant nationwide. Last year, Governor Schwarzenegger signed into law the Omnibus Conservatorship and Guardianship Reform Act of 2006, designed to curb the abuse.

The problem, however, is not with the law; it is with the unsupervised legal machine consisting of lawyers, professional conservators, and the judges who rubberstamp the motions of attorneys in the group. Then estates are churned for fees until there is nothing left. Favorite subjects are older persons with equity rich homes.

The abusive use of ex parte motions for appointment of temporary conservator is a favorite tool of the machine. The target is hit off guard, often not knowing what a conservatorship is. Then it's too late; the conservator has control of your assets. Once a temporary conservator is appointed, the process is set in motion to divest the estate of investments, home equity, and personal property.

It is a false statement that professional conservators are appointed because family members are unwilling to serve. This writer has personal knowledge of several family members serving at no charge to the conservatee's estate that were ousted by the legal machine and replaced by professional fiduciaries. Then the court appoints an attorney for the conservatee and for the fiduciary and the estate billing begins.

At a Senate Committee hearing last year, the former president of the professional fiduciaries' association was asked by Senator Figueroa how they got their cases-did they advertise? The response was: "We get our cases from the attorneys."

Conservatorships are cash cows for attorneys. The public must educate itself and be prepared to defend its freedom and property from court-sanctioned plunder.

Disclosure: The writer has a connection to Margaret D. Boyden of Fiduciary Resources, Inc.: Boyden, a complete stranger to the family, tried to conserve Alvillar's father, Thomas F. FitzGerald, against his wishes in October 1999.