Trending...
- New Free Science Bingo Cards Help Grade 1 Students Learn Through Play
- The Brands + Bands Strategy Group Founder Nadia Vanderhall Selected For Intuit IDEAS Program
- Veterans Day 2025: Virginia Veterans Can Claim Free Words of Veterans Book Vouchers
Will Nevada's Highest Court Confront Corruption—Or Allow It to Continue?
LAS VEGAS - ncarol.com -- 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 ncarol.com
"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 ncarol.com
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 ncarol.com
- Surf Air Mobility (N Y S E: SRFM) Accelerates Regional Air Mobility Revolution with Electra Aero Partnership, Palantir Alliance, and Record Revenue
- Cybersecurity is Fast Becoming a Vital Issue for Protecting Personal Information and Portfolio Wealth
- 10 Essential Tips for Maximizing Value When Choosing Your Orlando Wedding Venue
- Americans Are Trading Offices for Beaches: How Business Ownership Enables the Ultimate Location Freedom
- Learn "The Art of Giving" at the Hillsborough Gallery of Arts
"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 ncarol.com
- Boston Industrial Solutions' Natron® DC Series Ink Has Had an Upgrade!
- Colony Ridge Proudly Supports the All Ears! 2025 Sporting Clays Tournament
- Make Your Own Perfume Party Kit
- Jacob Emrani Nominated for LA Executive Award
- Advanced Roofing and Exteriors Named Builders Mutual 2025 WorkSafe Champion
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 ncarol.com
- POWER SOLUTIONS N.V. Partners with ENERGY33 LLC to Deliver a 40.5 MW Temporary Power Project for ECUACORRIENTE S.A. in Ecuador
- Pioneering the Future of Human-Computer Interaction Through AI-Powered Neural Input Technology: Wearable Devices Ltd. (N A S D A Q: WLDS)
- Epic Pictures Group Sets North American Release Date for the Action Thriller LOST HORIZON
- HR Soul Consulting Recognized as a 2025 Inc. Power Partner Award Winner for the Fourth Consecutive Year
- Brazil 021 Chicago Launches New Website and Expands with No-Gi Classes for All Levels
- American Star Guard Unveils a Powerful Rebrand and Expanded Security Services Throughout Nevada
- PlaceBased Media Expands Point-of-Care Advertising Inventory Across U.S. Clinic Network
- Flexible Plan Investments launches FlexDirex, a first-to-market suite of single-stock ETF strategies in the U.S
- A Dream Set Sail: How Grant a Dream™ Helped Lance Cruise Toward Joy
- The Brands + Bands Strategy Group Founder Nadia Vanderhall Selected For Intuit IDEAS Program
- Revenue Optics Ignites AI Revolution in Industrial Distribution
- Arnica Unveils "Arnie AI" to Secure the Future of AI-Driven Software Development
- Axiros North America Announces New CEO: Gabriel Davidov
- CCHR Exposes Harms Behind Today's Mental Health Awareness Campaigns
- Now Is the Right Time: Kaltra Highlights Its Proven Replacement Microchannel Coils
- How to Optimize Your Website for AI Search with DeepRank AI
- New Free Science Bingo Cards Help Grade 1 Students Learn Through Play
- DeployHub Joins Catalyst Campus SDA TAP Lab
- Veterans Day 2025: Virginia Veterans Can Claim Free Words of Veterans Book Vouchers
- Rainy Day Readings" Brings Cozy Storytime to Families — Anytime, Anywhere
