Trending...
- UK Financial Ltd Announces CoinMarketCap Supply Verification And Market Positioning Review For Regulated Security Tokens SMPRA And SMCAT
- L-Tron to Exhibit at PACK EXPO East Packaging and Processing Conference in Philadelphia, PA
- Sharpe Automotive Redefines Local Car Care with "Transparency-First" Service Model in Santee
Will Nevada's Highest Court Confront Corruption—Or Allow It to Continue?
LAS VEGAS - PennZone -- 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 The PennZone
"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 The PennZone
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 The PennZone
- Why 'Instant-Liquidity' Gaming is Dominating the Nordic Tech Demographic
- STATEMENT: Shincheonji on Religious Freedom Controversy
- Cyntexa Outlines a Principles-first Approach to Modern Enterprise Transformation
- Kickstarter And Creator Camp Partner To Support A New Era Of Creator-led Independent Film
- Top 66 People-Centric Leaders of 2025 Prove Taking Care of People Is Taking Care of Business
"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 The PennZone
- Kliemann Brothers Announces 2025 Furnace Giveaway Winners
- Mark Schork Selected As 'Board Observer' By Philadelphia Bar Foundation
- Collective Meditation for Peace - Free Global Event
- Daniel Kaufman Launches a Vertically Integrated Real Estate and Investment Platform
- Long Long Tales: Bilingual Cartoon Series on Youtube Celebrating Chinese New Year
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 The PennZone
- Perry County Real Estate Agency Partners with Internet Marketing Company
- Philadelphia HVAC Companies Were Not Created Equal
- Home Prices Just Hit 5X Median Income — So Americans Are Buying Businesses Instead of Houses
- Briggs Auction's Jan. 30 online Fine Estates Auction features artworks by Hans Hoffman, Hans Coper, Lucie Rie, Loet Vanderveen
- Peak Exteriors LLC to Open First Office in East Berlin in 2026
- CCHR White Paper Urges Government Crackdown on Troubled Teen and For-Profit Psychiatric Facilities
- MoMojo Records signs Billy Thompson
- Still Searching for the Perfect Valentine's Gift? Lick Personal Oils Offers Romantic, Experience-Driven Alternatives to Traditional Presents
- Jaeigh Gallagher Records: Redefining Independent Music and Global Pop Culture
- Boston Industrial Solutions' BPA Certified BX Series Raises the Bar for Pad Printing Inks
- Boston Corporate Coach™ Sets Global Standard for Executive Chauffeur Services Across 680 Cities
- UK Financial Ltd Announces CoinMarketCap Supply Verification And Market Positioning Review For Regulated Security Tokens SMPRA And SMCAT
- Sharpe Automotive Redefines Local Car Care with "Transparency-First" Service Model in Santee
- L-Tron to Exhibit at PACK EXPO East Packaging and Processing Conference in Philadelphia, PA
- Reputation Management Services Expanded
- Secondesk Launches Powerful AI Tutor That Speaks 20+ Languages
- Automation, innovation in healthcare processes featured at international conference in Atlanta
- A High-Velocity Growth Story Emerges in Marine and Luxury Markets
- $26 Billion Global Market by 2035 for Digital Assets Opens Major Potential for Currency Tech Company with ATM Expansion and Deployment Plans Underway
- Peernovation 365 is Now Available
