Robert L. Solze v. Eric K. Shinseki

26 Vet. App. 421, 2013 WL 6727545, 2013 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 2057
CourtUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
DecidedDecember 20, 2013
Docket13-1519
StatusPublished

This text of 26 Vet. App. 421 (Robert L. Solze v. Eric K. Shinseki) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Robert L. Solze v. Eric K. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 421, 2013 WL 6727545, 2013 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 2057 (Cal. 2013).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

This appeal concerns matters relating to VA’s fiduciary activities in connection with managing a veteran’s VA benefits. On May 22, 2013, the appellant, veteran Robert L. Solze, through counsel, filed a Notice of Appeal from a January 24, 2013, decision of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals’ (Board) that, among other actions, appointed the veteran’s daughter, Lois M. Dimi-tre, as temporary VA fiduciary to manage the appellant’s benefits pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 13.63 (2012). 1 After the scheduling of a Court conference in this appeal, pursuant to Rule 33 of this Court’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (Rules), the appellant informed the Court that, in July 2013, the VA Office of Regional Counsel in Augusta, Maine, filed in a state probate court a petition for appointment of conservator for Mr. Solze relating to Mr. Solze’s VA benefits. At the request of the appellant, the Court stayed proceedings until December 6, 2013, based on a tentative agreement concerning the appointment of a conservator for Mr. Solze that was reached by the parties in the ongoing probate court proceeding.

On December 6, 2013, the appellant filed a motion to withdraw the appeal based on *422 a final agreement of the parties, in York County Probate Court in Maine, that he asserts has “resolved the controversies before the Court” in this appeal and attaches a copy of the agreement. Dec. 6, 2013, Motion to Withdraw Appeal, Exhibit B (“Assented to Motion for Conservatorship Order Limitations and Condition” filed in York County Probate Court). Attached to this order is a copy of the parties’ “Assented to Motion for Conservatorship Order Limitations and Condition” that was filed in York County Probate Court and approved by the Probate Court. The agreement itself specifies that the probate court appoints Ms. Dimitre as the conservator of Mr. Solze, provides that VA will certify Ms. Dimitre as the VA fiduciary for Mr. Solze’s VA benefits, and establishes other limitations and conditions, including a VA field examination and the securing of a bond. Id. The agreement also provides that “VA agrees to rely on the procedures and remedies available under Maine Probate Code to resolve any concerns or disputes that may arise about the accountings and/or the use of funds and will bring any such concerns or disputes to the attention of the [York County Probate] Court.” Id. at para 4. The agreement further provides for certain VA actions to be expedited. The appellant stated that the Secretary “takes no position” on the motion.

Pursuant to a Court order directing that the Secretary clarify his position, the Secretary filed a response noting that he agrees that withdrawal of the appeal is proper based on the agreement in York County Probate Court but does not agree with the “gratuitous statements” contained in the appellant’s motion concerning the Secretary. 2 Dec. 6, 2013, Secretary’s Response to Court’s Order at 1.

Accordingly, the Court will grant the appellant’s motion to dismiss his appeal and issue mandate as part of this order. See U.S. VET. APP. R. 41 (regarding issuance of mandate), 42 (regarding voluntary dismissal).

On consideration of the foregoing, it is

ORDERED that the appellant’s motion to dismiss the appeal is GRANTED and this appeal is DISMISSED. Under Rule 41(b), this order is the final judgment and mandate of the Court. See U.S. VET. APP. 41(b).

STATE OF MAINE

YORK COUNTY PROBATE COURT

Alfred, Maine

Docket No. 2013-0677

IN RE: CONSERVATORSHIP OF ROBERT L. SOLZE

ASSENTED TO MOTION FOR CON-SERVATORSHIP ORDER LIMITATIONS and CONDITIONS

In response to a recommendation by the court at its Trial Management Conference of September 18, 2013 and a subsequent hearing an October 9, 2013, the attorneys/parties jointly submit the following proposed conditions and limitations to be incorporated into the ORDER appointing Lois Dimitre CONSERVATOR of her father, Robert L. Solze:

1. The Court appoints Lois Dimitre as Conservator of Robert L. Seize.
2. This action is taken to allow the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to expedite a certi *423 fication of the court-appointed conservator as Federal Fiduciary.
3. The VA will recognize the Court’s appointment of Lois Dimitre as Conservator and will, upon receipt of the Court’s Order appointing Ms. Dimi-tre as Conservator, certify Ms. Dimitre as Federal Fiduciary in order that Mr. Solze’s VA benefits, including retroactive benefits in the amount of $71, 456.60, may be paid promptly to Mr. Solze in accordance with federal laws.
4. Whereby the VA agrees to accept copies of approved accountings provided at least annually to this Court and forwarded to the VA by the Conservator as satisfying its accounting requirements provided that the accountings accurately represent the payments by the VA to the Conservator and that these VA funds are used solely for the benefit of the Mr. Solze. The VA agrees to rely on the procedures and remedies available under Maine Probate Code to resolve any concerns or disputes that may arise about the accountings and/or the use of funds, and will bring any such concerns or disputes to the attention of the Court.
5. In an acknowledgment of the need to expedite this payment, the VA agrees to exercise its authority under 38 U.S.C. 5507 to waive the usual background and credit checks required of Lois Dimitre for Federal Fiduciary.
6. Further, the VA will not require that Lois Dimitre sign a fee agreement letter as a prerequisite to her certification. The balance of the field examination as it pertains to the nominated fiduciary, Lois Dimi-tre, will include a face-to-face interview with the VA Field Examiner to discuss her assessment of the needs of Mr. Solze. Ms. Dimitre will be asked if she has been convicted of a felony and will be asked to provide a copy of her bond. The request for copies to the VA of all accountings required by the court will be reviewed. The discussion will focus on the financial status of Mr. Solze. To that end Ms. Dimitre will be asked to provide information regarding Mr. Solze’s finances to include any assets, loans, other debts or liens, including federal tax liens, credit cards, and an itemization of the costs of Mr. Solze’s care, both actual and anticipated. This should include, but is not limited to, any rents paid and costs of any services to Mr. Solze or costs of care, including respite care incurred by the Guillerault family, in whose house Mr, Solze is currently living, and any tithing or incidental expenses.
7. Lois Dimitre has requested that her attorney be present for this face-to-face interview and the VA does not object to this request nor does the VA object to a meeting held at the office of Ms. Dimitre’s counsel.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Robert L. Solze and Lois M. Dimitre v. Eric K. Shinseki
26 Vet. App. 118 (Veterans Claims, 2013)
Robert L. Solze and Lois M. Dimitre v. Eric K. Shinseki
26 Vet. App. 299 (Veterans Claims, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
26 Vet. App. 421, 2013 WL 6727545, 2013 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 2057, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-l-solze-v-eric-k-shinseki-cavc-2013.