Creighton Case: Petition in Opposition to Accounting filed by Creighton Sloan

**Ray Gordon**

Sam Sloan wrote:

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) IN THE PROBATE COURT
)
COUNTY OF AIKEN )
)
IN THE MATTER OF )
HELEN MARJORIE SLOAN ) CASE NUMBER: 2002ES02-489
(AIKEN COUNTY)

Estate of Helen Marjorie
Sloan, 02-ES-02-489

Samuel H. Sloan, being duly sworn, deposes and says:

1. I have been notified by opposing counsel that a hearing has been
set for this matter in the Laurens County Probate Court for 10:00 AM
on September 7, 2006 (which incidentally happens to be my birthday) on
the closing of my mother's estate.

2. I strenuously object. My brother Creighton Sloan stole $1.5 million
dollars from his mother during the 12 years that he had her locked up
prior to her death. At the time of her death, there were five lawsuits
pending in the Lynchburg and Charlottesville Virginia Circuit Courts,
where he had either sued her or she had sued him. He has made no
effort to defend her from the lawsuits which he has filed. As her
personal representative, he has a legal obligation to defend any suits
brought against her. Thus, he must wear two hats: His own hat in which
he is suing her and her hat as his personal representative in which he
must defend against the suits that he has brought against her.

3. I have checked with the Clerk of the Lynchburg Circuit Court and
nothing recently has been filed in any of those cases since at least
1994. Thus, those cases are still pending.

4. Regarding the Charlottesville Case, in 1987 Helen Marjorie Sloan
filed suit against Creighton Sloan alleging that he was stealing her
checks and misappropriating her funds. She was represented by attorney
David C. Dickey of Stanardsville, Virginia. This suit was opposed by
attorneys representing Creighton Sloan and Sovran Bank (which has
since been taken over by Bank of America). Leighton Houck of the
Lynchburg Law Firm of Caskie and Frost represented Sovran Bank. At a
hearing before Judge Vance Frey of the Charlottesville Circuit Court,
the case was ordered to be transferred to the Lynchburg Circuit Court.

5. I have been to both the Charlottesville Circuit Court and the
Lynchburg Circuit Court searching for the file in this case. The
Charlottesville Circuit Court only has the order transferring the case
to Lynchburg. The Lynchburg Circuit Court has no record of ever
receiving the case file. In short, the file has disappeared and I
suspect foul play or chicanery by the attorneys involved. The judge is
deceased. I suspect that Leighton Houck glommed the file and knows
where it is. After all, I know him well. Leighton Houck was my Boy
Scout Troop Leader and I know him from 50 years of experience.

6. The case entitled Creighton Sloan vs. Sovran Bank filed in December
1986 where Creighton got an ex-parte order freezing his mothers bank
account at Sovran Bank has had no activity since 1987. The last court
order is one freezing the account. There is no court order unfreezing
the account. Thus, the case was still pending. The last we knew there
was $200,000 in the frozen account. I have been to the Trust
Department of Sovran Bank, now Bank of America, in Lynchburg and they
have no idea what happened to the account or to the money. Massie
Ware, the bank officer handling the account, has left the bank.

7. In 1992, Creighton Sloan filed another lawsuit in Lynchburg Circuit
Court demanding the sale of his mother's house. I appeared in
opposition especially since my then wife and children were residing in
the house. That case is still listed as open. Nevertheless,
Creighton's lawyer sold the house to a relative for the unconscionably
low amount of $75,000, when the house was clearly worth $300,000.
Actually, it was sold to the Estate of the Relative, because the
relative had died before the sale had taken place. I believe that the
sale was illegal, null and void and I want the house back. Creighton
has taken no action on this matter.

8. The $75,000 from the sale of the house in 1994 was deposited in the
Cooperative Savings and Loan on Church Street in Lynchburg. That money
too has disappeared. Creighton is required to account for those funds,
and has not done so.

9. The limited accounting provided by Creighton is this case states
that funds are held in the SunTrust Bank in Lynchburg Virginia and in
the First Citizens Bank in Columbia, South Carolina. Neither of these
bank accounts were opened by my mother nor did they exist at the time
of the April 1990 court order appointing Bank of America as the
Conservator of the Estate. It is obvious that Creighton opened these
bank accounts and that is where he deposited the funds including the
social security checks and the Virginia Supplemental Retirement Checks
he was receiving in my mothers name. His taking those checks was a
crime. Undoubtedly Creighton was using a revoked and invalid power of
attorney to open and establish these accounts.

10. What is so especially disturbing about this case is not only that
Creighton for many years was stealing his mothers money, but that the
courts are turning a blind eye to it. Anybody can look at the court
record and see right away that Creighton had no right to touch his
mother's money especially after the April 1990 court order and to do
so was not only a violation of a court order but was criminal theft.
Nevertheless, the court ignores all this.

11. I strenuously object to the behavior of the judge in this case and
demand that he be disqualified or disqualify himself and that all his
orders be vacated. The judge has on several occasions violated the
Code of Judicial Conduct. For example, under South Carolina law, the
judge in rendering his decision is required to describe the evidence
adduced in the proceedings before him. The judge did not do that and
instead rendered a brief summary order. There were 65 exhibits
admitted into the evidence of this case and several days of testimony,
including evidence pertaining to all the proceedings in various other
courts which took place prior to my mother's death. None of these
exhibits nor any of this evidence was mentioned in the decision of the
court.

12. During the proceedings before this court, I many times filed
motions and pleadings and wrote letters to the court. The court
refused to accept these documents and instead returned the envelopes
to me unopened. Thus, there is really no record of what went on in the
court. Then, later the judge stated that I had failed to file some
documents on time, this after he had returned everything I had
attempted to file unopened.

13. The court treated me as the respondent even though I am the
petitioner, thereby giving my opponent advantages. I filed my petition
approximately one month after my mother had died in May 2002. I
appeared by retained counsel, Patricia L. Harrison. Creighton did not
file until the end of January 2003 and did not serve me until August
15, 2003. The court later disqualified Patricia Harrison from
representing me without any valid reason, even though she had
represented me before another judge in Columbia. This gave Creighton a
big advantage, because he was now represented by counsel but my paid
counsel was no longer representing me.

14. After the court rendered decision against me, I filed a timely
notice of appeal which was accepted my both the Aiken County Probate
Court and the Aiken County Court of Common Pleas. The judge then
proceeded to go on a letter writing campaign to get my appeal
dismissed. He had his secretary wrote a letter to the Court of Common
Pleas stating that my appeal was untimely. I have never received a
copy of this letter, but it was read out loud in court. My appeal was
not untimely for the simple reason that is had never been entered.
When a court order is entered, the clerk of the court puts a time
stamp on the order showing the exact time and date that the order was
entered. No such time stamp was put on this order. The reason is
obvious. The judge was sitting in the Laurens County Probate Court,
but the case was pending in the Aiken County Probate Court, which is
82 miles away. The judge never sent the court order to Aiken County
for entry there, even though that was the court in which the case was
pending. Thus, the appeal is still, in my opinion, pending. In order
to cover this up, the judge failed to transmit the record of this case
to the appellate court for review. For this reason, the appellate
court was not able to see that my appeal was obviously timely.

15. Again, the judge has recently committed misconduct because when I
filed or attempted to file objections to the accounting, the judge
again simply mailed it back to me, refusing to accept it for filing.
This is outrageous misconduct. Accordingly, I am enclosing again the
same filing which is dated April 6, 2006.

16. Creighton's lawyer is demanding payment or has already been paid
$37,562.55. This is obviously excessive. At her standard rate of $150
per hour, she would have had to have spent 250 hours, 25 minutes and 2
seconds working on this case. I am demanding a detailed accounting
from her, rounded off to the nearest 15 minutes. Creighton has paid
himself $13,555 as a personal representative fee. He is not entitled
to this money and has done nothing to earn it. I would like to point
out that I was and still am the personal representative of our late
father, Leroy B. Sloan, and I have taken no fee at all for my
services.

17. Creighton testified on October 29, 2003 that he had filed and paid
all the taxes on the Estate of Helen Marjorie Sloan. However, his
attorney subsequently admitted to me that Creighton had neither filed
nor paid the taxes. This is the reason now given for the three year
delay after the decision of this court in November 2003 in his favor.

WHEREFORE, for all of the reasons set forth above, I demand:

1. A full accounting of all funds, including all financial statements,
itemized legal bills and accountants work sheets and

2. That Creighton W. Sloan be removed as personal representative and

3. That I, Samuel H. Sloan, be appointed in his place and

4. A full plenary hearing on all these matters and

5. A trial by jury.

______________________________
Samuel H. Sloan
1664 Davidson Avenue,
Apt. 1B
Bronx NY 10453

Tel. 917-507-7226

Sworn to Before me this 5th
Day of September, 2006

________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC

Affidavit of Service

Samuel H. Sloan, being duly sworn, deposes and says that on September
5, 2006 he mailed the within petition in opposition to the accounting
to the following addresses:

Catherine H. Kennedy
Attorney for Creighton Sloan
Nelson, Mullins, Riley & Scarborough, LLP
1320 Main Street, 17th floor
PO Box 11070
Columbia, South Carolina 29201

Creighton W. Sloan
102 Indian Creek Trail
Aiken, South Carolina 29803

Patricia L. Harrison
611 Holly Street
Columbia, South Carolina 29205

__________________________
Samuel H. Sloan

Sworn to before me this 5th
Day of September 2006

______________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC

Why are you fighting this case? Your mother hated you and left you
nothing. Deal with it.

Ray Gordon

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Paul Truong is the Fake Sam Sloan	mikeNOSPAM@theopenfile.com	rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General)	13	August 3rd 06 04:50 AM
Paul Truong is the Fake Sam Sloan	mikeNOSPAM@theopenfile.com	alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group)	12	August 3rd 06 04:50 AM
Paul Truong is the Fake Sam Sloan	BarbaraVilliers	rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics)	0	August 1st 06 12:33 PM
Paul Truong is the Fake Sam Sloan	BarbaraVilliers	rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General)	0	August 1st 06 12:33 PM
Creighton Case: Petition in Opposition to Accounting filed by Creighton Sloan	marcus@stkittsnevischess.org	rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics)	0	April 11th 06 01:42 AM