June 23, 2009

Good questions...a few answers.

In reading some of the comments I think I'll try to clarify a few things and hopefully provide a few answers as well.

First, while it sure seemed that the whole group, i.e., the judge, Mr.Meyer, Sturtz and the plaintiff seemed to be in cahoots.. I don't think they were. Certainly the judge and Mr. Meyer were buddies and who knows what went down there. (We raised the issue of conflict of interest and it didn't go anywhere). Secondly, once it was handed over to Mr. Meyer, it was in his hands. He really had no interest except an eventual pay check. The work he did was pretty minimal. Could you tell? As much as we tried to argue all the wrong turns or bad turns, it just is what it is. We thought there was an agreement as to how the sale would be handled. Turned out the agreement was whatever Mr. Meyer wanted it to be. He did the least amount of work possible including never finishing any of the bidding instructions.

Yes the cottage sold for $575k. That was the offer David made per the "bidding" terms. The outline as proposed by Mr. Meyer allowed for outside bids (outside the family) for a period of a few weeks. Then, another set of instructions were to follow. They did not. Could we have submitted a bid? Sure. We did not. We were still hoping for an opportunity to obtain a fair market price.

What was Stu DeGeus's role in all of this? Nothing. In the very beginning, before the partition suit was even filed he e-mailed mother and David and indicated he would like to sell his share. He did not state a price. He expected his phone to start ringing. We expected to have some conversation with David, decide how to "buy out" Stu and move on. Quickly on the heels of Stu's statement, David filed his lawsuit. Stu defaulted. He chose not to have an attorney and did not show up for any of the legal actions until later in the whole mess. All he wanted was to keep everything private. I think he was embarrassed and stated he would never go back. He also said he'd "taken" what he wanted from the cottage so, he had no interest in anything else. (until later). At one point, Katy had decided to use Stu's time during the second summer and he took that to court. (Supposedly using Phil's son as his attorney since using Phil would have been a conflict of interest). Funny.. the son never showed. Stu was represented by Phil and the judge ruled that Stu's "time" could not be used by Katy. Was it a surpise that David and family used this time?? No.

Someone asked if we appealed.. would we get a different judge. The way it works is once a final order is made, we would appeal to the Michigan Court of Appeals. It takes this out of Saginaw, into a different court. Can we still appeal? Once a final order is entered.

Keep the questions coming. This is all pretty typical for a partition case. If you or someone in your family wants to either get out, or get you out.. this is how it works. It's ugly for sure. Don't go there. All it takes is one person.

22 comments:

Joey said...

I forgot the encroachment issue. Many cottages have this problem. The agreement allowed that as long as the cottage remained intact, i.e. not torn down it was fine. Even if transfer of ownership occured. If major renovations were to be made, then and only then would the piece of cottage need to be moved back. I will address our reasoning for not bidding in the next post.

Anonymous said...

So what your saying is stu was in davids hands after stu wanted to sell his share. Slymons knew what he was going to do and having stu want to get out was merely the right timing. I just don't understand why in the world couldn't slymons just sit down with josephine and work it out.? That would have been so much easier and less costly. I hope this works in your favor. You really you need to have some good come out of this whole ordeal.

Joey said...

The good that will come out of this is if everyone up there does something with the "tenancy in common" status. I can't express this stronly enough. It takes just one person. Besides the issue of partition, tenancy in common has numerous pitfalls. Read the book!!

As for David sitting down and holding a conversation? Impossible.

Anonymous said...

I cannot believe David purloined your property for a mere 575K. That is poaching, pure, plain and simple.

Anonymous said...

"funny.. the son never showed. Stu was represented by Phil and the judge ruled that Stu's "time" could not be used by Katy. Was it a surpise that David and family used this time?? No."

Who is Phil again? Refresh my memory. Clearly, Stu was in bed with Uncle Slymey.

Pray you unleash an aggressive appeal with MI circuit court.

Anonymous said...

"Pray you unleash an aggressive appeal with MI circuit court."

Buckle up, Slymey. It could be a real bumpy road.

Katy said...

Oh yes, a lot of good things came of this. I found out who loved me and who didn't give a damn.I am proud to say that most of you fell in the first catagory and were horrified to hear yet another brother suing his sister. Stu never even bothered to call me and have an adult discussion after I e-mailed him that I was going to use his/our time since he was "never going back". I had no idea what I STARTED with that little e-mail.Was I surprised that Stu "gave his/our time to the Symons." YES AND SPEECHLESS for one of the few times in my life. Most of you know me as easy going with maybe a gift of gab but you are all so great and there's much to talk about up there and I love hearing about everyones time over the winter. I am the sap that will willingly watch your home movies with plesaure. I get a moment in time to share YOUR life and it is a privelege to see this side of you.
Was I foolish...probably but given
the same set of circumstances I would act in the same way. I am who I am and if you want to hurt me....you can...I'm wide open with my Lakeside family and stuff happens.Will it ever be the same?NEVER. Have i forgiven my brother Stu? Yes. It took a couple of years but I have come to the conclusion that he didn't do this out of malice but instead with regard to his immediate family ONLY and clearly I was no longer part of that.That was REALLY HARD
to swallow. My brother doesn't want me and my parents are dead.
Orphaned for the 2nd time. But with the love and strength I have received from each one of you I have not only survived but thrived.
Life is too short to waste time on the negative things so please just LEARN from this and what NOT to do.Please just pick up the phone
and be honest and open with your siblings.I moved 2500 miles to be back here with you "my Lakeside Family"(hey it's all I got!) and it's where I belong. So I guess it took this to make me realize that THIS is home. That was an excellent thing to have happen so NO it has not been all bad.....

Katy said...

Phil is Mr Sturtz....David Symons attorney thru this all

Anonymous said...

"Stu defaulted... All he wanted was to keep everything private. I think he was embarrassed and stated he would never go back."

To keep matters private, Uncle Slymey and his sympathizers "Stu", would have needed to agree to sit down as a family, and amicably work things out. (As Josephine suggested) Slymons was incapable of such reason and logic.

If Stu wanted privacy- maybe he should have tried to talk some sense into Uncle Slymey.

How come Katy was denied use of Stu's time, but it was OK with the Court for Uncle Slymey to use it? I mean, wouldn't you think it would be a more natural hand-off to grant unused time to ones own sister, versus a known trouble maker Uncle?

Also, given his Jackio O penchant for privacy- what does Stu think of the now infamous Red Door Journal?

Anonymous said...

Katy,

Brilliant post as usual. Wow. I'm kinda chocked up.

Hopefully you and the Lees will find another cottage in Lakeside to buy eventually.

And with even more luck, God forgive me, but the Slymons family will have sold and move on before that happens.

God Bless you! God Bless the Lees also.

Anonymous said...

I can't beleve stu sued his own sister. What has slymons and stu been drinking or smoking. Nothing like getting kicked while your down.
Nice to have you back Katy
and the man

Anonymous said...

"If half the Hollywood celebrities knew about Lakeside, it would become the Hamptons of the midwest"

Which is exactly why we try to remain hidden. Why we don't even really want the town of Roscommon to know we're here. Why we wouldn't ever call a city official or a sheriff into camp. Oooops.

Anonymous said...

"I forgot the encroachment issue. Many cottages have this problem. The agreement allowed that as long as the cottage remained intact, i.e. not torn down it was fine. Even if transfer of ownership occured."

Joey-this is still a major red flag for a prospective buyer. There is no guarantee that Rob Morley would be cool about this with a new owner. If it were me, I'd move it ASAP.

If I were Rob, I'm make Slymons move it ASAP- so the karma would not infest his land.

Anonymous said...

"There is no guarantee that Rob Morley would be cool about this with a new owner."

And if Rob sold his cottage, the new owner could demand removal of the old gal as well.

Joey said...

The agreement is ok. Yes, it is a potential problem but it isn't as messy as you'd think. It's pretty clear on the terms.

Anonymous said...

Phil's son never shows up for court. I knew someone that hired little phil and he didn't show in court. What kind of an attorney is that? Probably cried and got his old man to step up to the plate.
With all the money the old man has, I'm surprised he took a case where a turd sues his sister. Get a life Phil and phillip

Anonymous said...

"With all the money the old man has, I'm surprised he took a case where a turd sues his sister."

So Stu sued Katy merely for the right to let Uncle Slymey have his unused vacation time in the cottage instead of his sister?

Pathetic.

Anonymous said...

At least Stu has the sensitivity and good judgment to stay far away from this hornet's nest.

But the Slymons family are absolutely shameless! No remorse whatsoever.

Don't get it.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

there must be something in the water. Stupey degeus and slymons must be drinking out of the same ditch

Katy said...

Statements like this are totally uncalled for here.

Anonymous said...

whatever the truth be told here