Argument Nanci Responds To Elizabeth’s Numbered Arguments In The Order

1

II.

ARGUMENT Nanci responds to Elizabeth’s numbered arguments in the order

those arguments are presented in her Response to our Amended Petition. 1) The California Amendment The statements made by Elizabeth Meek that the 1st Amendment signed in Hawaii is a valid instrument are baseless and false. Recent forensics inspections performed by Reed Hayes, a qualified forensics expert, have concluded the 1st Amendment signed n California is a fraudulent and forged document. By Elizabeth Meek’s own admission (Exhibit “A”) she was never in California on the date the document was allegedly signed, as presented in Attorney Robert Grigger Jones’ affidavit (see Exhibit “B”) filed with the court of Hawaii on November 16, 2005.

Upon learning of the existence of the 1st Amendment

signed in California numerous attempts were made (through various phone calls, e mails, postal letters sent return receipt requested) to Mr. Jones requesting a copy of the 1st Amendment signed in California with no response. It wasn’t until we made a phone call to Rhonda Griswold’s secretary Arlene on March 18, 2009 and requested a copy of the 1st Amendment signed in California that such was provided to us in March of 2009. Upon inspection of the document it was apparent the signatures were not our father’s or Elizabeth Meek’s. These overwhelming facts as submitted are sufficient to have both 1st Amendments 2

declared invalid. The court is already aware of our allegations that the 2nd Amendment and the pour over Will signed by my father, Elvin Meek were administered under questionable conditions as set forth in our Petition for Instructions filed with the court on August 30. 2007. Admittedly both documents were prepared by Robert Grigger Jones and faxed to Elizabeth Meek. On the day our father was scheduled to be placed in hospice care as a result of his terminal condition, Elizabeth Meek instead escorted him to the Bank of Hawaii in a weakened, heavily medicated and factually determined by medical forensics expert Dr. Suzanne Gelb, Phd. to be in an incoherent state. The standard for establishing testamentary capacity set out in In re: Estate of Herbert 90 Haw. 443, 979 P2d.39 (1999) is a rule of longstanding which is well established by the great weight of judicial authority in numerous jurisdictions: Testamentary capacity has been defined as the ability to know (1) the nature and extent of the testator or testatrix’s estate. (2) the identify of the beneficiaries and their relationship, whether by blood or other circumstances, to the testator or testatrix (i.e., the objects of his or her bounty); (3) the disposition of the testator or testatrix is making; and (4) how these elements relate so as to form a rational and orderly plan for the disposition of the testator or testatrix’s estate. [90 Haw. At 455]

Elizabeth Meek witnessed our father sign the 2nd Amendment in question. The 2nd Amendment bears the words “as amended September ____, 1999”. (See Exhibit “M” While the Respondent’s attorney has stated previously this is a “scriveners error” it would appear that in their haste to expedite the executing of this document that such a crucial date could be entered in error. This lends to our 3

assertion that the attorney Robert Grigger Jones was exploiting our father’s weakened and terminal condition. Therefore we can only conclude Attorney Robert Grigger Jones acted with impunity and disregard with which the Trustee and her attorneys have protracted what has proved to be a costly and unnecessary litigation. We stand by our allegations that the 1st Amendent signed in Hawaii as presented by Robert Grigger Jones was altered after our father’s death for reasons known only to Robert Jones. 2. The Original Petition for Declaratory Relief Argument As to the arguments made by Elizabeth Meek we are of the opinion they are baseless and without merit. 3. The Hawaii Amendment Elizabeth Meek’s argument that our pursuing the validity of the 1st Amendment signed in Hawaii is “wishful thinking” is crude and a half hearted attempt to disqualify and diminish my relationship with my father. The admission by Elizabeth Meek through her attorney Rhonda Griswold that the same 1st Amendment, with out numerated pages, was mailed only days before, subsequently executed in Honolulu at the Bank of Hawaii with the words Atascadero, California, crossed out (See Exhibit “I”) and the words Honolulu, Hawaii transposed as well as the conflicting statements made by Robert Grigger Jones in his affidavit clearly stating the document was executed 3 days later on September 19, 1997 in his office in Atascadero, California is enough to have both 1st Amendments declared invalid. Robert Jones’ own admission to Rhonda Griswold as exhibited in her recent E mail to me (Exhibit “A”) 4

admits he made an “erroneous assumption” when he saw the 1st Amendment signed in California in his files and prepared the aforementioned affidavit. Based on these actions and many other recorded events, it is our opinion that Attorney Robert Grigger Jones is deceitful and well versed in the shameful art of fraud. Robert Grigger Jones has a public record of acting with malice and impunity as is exhibited by several litigations including a lawsuit filed on June 23, 2009 in the United States Bankruptcy Court (See Exhibit “K”) wherein Robert Grigger Jones in his capacity as an attorney and as a result of an ongoing FBI investigation with reference to his longtime business partner Kelly Gearhart (also accused of running a PONZI scheme and indicted for stealing over 45 million dollars from investors).Rhonda Griswold by her own admission (see Exhibit “A”) has stated that Elizabeth Meek intends to allow the California authorities to pursue the matter and to the best of my knowledge the only police report that has been filed regarding the fraud on the 1st Amendment has been filed by myself with the Atascadero Police Department who informed me the investigation is open. I have also been instructed by Agent Deiter Wilkomm that the FBI cannot confirm or deny they are continuing to investigate Attorney Robert Grigger Jones, I can state however they asked for several documentations and records related to this litigation including copies of all documents related to the Elvin R Meek 1996 Trust case as well as records reflecting properties sold with the assist of Attorney Robert M. Jones in Arkansas as well as Hawaii.

5

4. ELVIN MEEK’S 1996 Declaration of Trust Represented His True Intent At The Time He Signed the Declaration The arguments made by Elizabeth Meek are baseless and without merit. 5. The Certification of Trust The arguments made by Elizabeth Meek are baseless and without merit. We stand by our original argument that the Certification of Trust prepared by Robert Grigger Jones in February of 2004 which refers to only the 1992 Elvin R Meek and Elizabeth Meek trust of which Elizabeth Meek was a trustee, however she was removed by execution of the Elvin R Meek 1996 trust. The Certification of Trust signed by Elizabeth Meek in 2004 was nothing more than a vehicle to assist Mrs. Meek in cashing our father’s Unionbancal stocks in the amount of $646,000 as well as valid any future and pending real estate transactions Attorney Robert Jones appeared to be constructing with great haste as demonstrated by his letter to our father’s property manager Ed Blottenberger on November 24, 2003. (See Exhibit “J”) 6. Strained Communications Between Elizabeth and Nanci As mentioned in several Petitions and Motions presented to the court Elizabeth has chosen to not speak with either myself or my brother, Melvin Meek for as stated in Robert Jones’ letter dated September 8, 2004, Elizabeth Meek “ for a variety of reasons” apparently known only to her has chosen to not communicate with us. (see Exhibit “L”) Myself, my brother Melvin and daughter Nicole have over the last several years made numerous attempts through e mails, phone calls, 6

Postal letters, second party communications through relatives, to contact Elizabeth’s daughter Lola Meek (who has lived out of the country in Palau since 1999 and utilizes her biological father’s name of Reklai) without results and have been informed that Lola has chosen not to communicate with us as well. We have made requests of Elizabeth for pictures from our childhood, trinkets and other items Elizabeth may consider useless but mean a great deal to us, with no response. We also question Elizabeth Meek’s opinions as to the validity of the 1st Amendment because she had demonstrated through all resources available (telephone, fax, mail, e mail) her reluctance to notify my brother, myself, my daughter and other family members during our father’s brief terminal condition and impending death. Based on her aforementioned inactions it would appear that Elizabeth intentionally did not contact family members or long time friends of our father’s as any reasonable person might have under similar circumstances and her actions would indicate her having self-serving motivations. It should be noted however that her daughter Lola Meek (Reklai) was present during this crucial time and cellular phone records provided by Respondent indicate Elizabeth regularly contacted her family members and friends both in the United States and Palau. I have attached a Declaration prepared and signed by my daughter Nicole Kusley, Elvin’s only granddaughter as per her request. (see Exhibit “S”) Also I have attached a document prepared by my brother Melvin Meek entitled Petition to Remove Trustee. (see Exhibit “R”) Melvin took the time to have it prepared. It is sincere and heartfelt and 7

expresses his feelings with respect to the 1st Amendment and Elizabeth Meek as Trustee. 7.

California Probate

Elvin Meek had been a resident of Hawaii since 1996 and died in Hawaii. We stand by our allegations that Attorney Robert Jones, who is only licensed to practice law in California, opened the probate in California to expedite the sale of property in Hesperia, California and Rialto, California which was sold without our knowledge. He also opened a probate in June of 2004 enabling the selling of the Arkansas property, again without contacting myself or my brother. Robert Jones also contacted several residence in Arizona in an effort to sell property there without opening a probate in Arizona. 7. Robert Jones’ October 2, 2007 Affidavit Elizabeth Meek’s arguments are baseless and without merit. Robert Jones insisted he prepared the QDOT to relieve the estate of tax burdens because Elizabeth Meek was not an American citizen, knowing she was already in the process of applying for her US citizenship in 2004. Asking the courts in California to recognize his accountant Michael Gould as an instrument to help assist Elizabeth in selling properties, when he could have easily asked myself or my brother who already are US citizens is suspect. Also suspect is Robert Jones not asking Lola Meek (Reklai) to assist since she was also an American Citizen. However she has been and continues to live out of the country in Palau. 9.

Nanci’s April 2002 Meeting with Elvin Meek 8

Elizabeth Meek’s arguments are baseless and without merit. The fact remains Elizabeth was present during this meeting and aware of the marital difficulties she and my father were experiencing. My father stated to myself and to his friend of over 30 years, Wes Stewart, that my father wanted to divorce Elizabeth and had recently discovered she was placing monies from his accounts into accounts maintained by the recently opened Bank of Hawaii in Palau (opened in 2002) which is where Lola Meek (Reklai) was and still is residing. It is for this reason we believe the Bank of Hawaii was chosen by Robert Jones when he fabricated the 1st Amendments in question after our father passed away. A copy of Wes Stewart’s letter to Elizabeth Meek dated June 28, 2005 is attached (Exhibit “N”) and Wes Stewart’s e mail to myself is attached (Exhibit “O”). Wes Stewart and his wife Nina lived across the street from the Waipuna where my father resided and yet Elizabeth did not contact either of them to bear witness to our father signing the pour over Will. Instead she took my father downstairs and had two disinterested parties who merely worked at the Waipuna apartments to witness the documents being signed. It should be noted that Ann Taylor one of the Waipuna employees who witnessed the document being signed only days before our father lapsed into a coma and entered the hospital, told me a year later when I contacted her by telephone that she was “under strict orders by Mrs. Meek” to not speak with me. 10. Nanci’s August 13, 2008 Affidavit

9

Elizabeth Meek’s arguments are baseless and without merit. We only learned of the fraudulent 1st Amendment on March 13, 2009 when a copy was finally provided to us by Rhonda Griswold’s office. We had for several years requested a copy of the document from Attorney Robert Jones with no results (See Exhibit “C” – “H”). 8. Elizabeth’s January 12, 2009 Objection to Initial Petiion for Declatory Relief As to Elizabeth Meek’s response, it is inconclusive and without merit. The facts of the case prior to our having the 1st Amendment scrutinized have evolved with the most recent forensics report prepared by expert Reed Hayes conclusively stating the 1st Amendment is a forged document as outlined in our Amended Petiton for Declatory Relief Declaring First Amendment invalid filed August 14, 2009. III.

CONCLUSION

As to Elizabeth Meek’s conclusion her allegations are baseless and without merit. The judgment against the Elvin Meek estate for the wrongful sale of the Arkansas property initiated by Attorney Robert Jones and Elizabeth Meek as well as other sales of property made in haste have already demonstrated to the court the impunity with which Attorney Robert Jones and Elizabeth Meek have conducted themselves. Furthermore, the signature page on the 1st Amendment signed in California which by Elizabeth Meek’s own admission a fraud and forgery (Exhibit “P”) and the signature page on the 1st Amendment signed in Honolulu with the words Atascadero, California crossed out and the words Honolulu, Hawaii handwritten (Exhibit “Q”) upon 10

scrutiny were determined to be out of alignment with each other and without further costly inspection of the paper chemistry we suspect is also a cut and paste fraud. Therefore we pray that: 1.

The court declare both 1st Amendments prepared by Attorney Robert Jones, the questionable Amendment executed on September 16, 1997 and the questionable 1st Amendment executed on September 19, 1997 to be invalid;

2.

The court recognize the Elvin R Meek 1996 Trust as the operative document at the time of Elvin Meek’s death.

3.

The court re-appoint Nanci Meek, original trustee of the Elvin R Meek 1996 Trust as the operative trustee.

4.

The estate be ordered dissolved and distributions made as set forth in the original trust of 1/3 to Melvin Meek. 1/3 to Nanci Meek-Kusley, 1/6 to Lola Meek, and 1/6 to Elizabeth Meek.

5.

The judgment entered in Arkansas against the estate for the wrongful sale of property by Elizabeth Meek and Attorney Robert Grigger Jones owned by the Havens family be paid by Elizabeth Meek and Robert Grigger Jones respectively and independently of the trust.

6.

The court order all monies previously paid by Elizabeth Meek out of funds from the trust to attorneys for the Bank of Hawaii in Hawaii (Goodsill, Anderson, Quinn and 11

Stiffel) and attorneys for Bank of Hawaii in California (Jane Peebles during the IRS tax audit) be paid back into the trust. 7.

Reimburse Nanci Meek for all of her attorney fees, travel expenses, and costs of pursuing this litigation during the last 5 years in the amount of $58,783.27.

8.

The court appoint an independent banking securities institution, such as Wachovia which is recognized on the mainland and Hawaii to oversee the estate, sale and ultimate disbursement of funds in accordance with the original Elvin R Meek 1996 trust.

Respectfully submitted:

DATED:

November 12 , 2009, Honolulu Hawaii

Nanci Meek Petitioner Self Represented

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT STATE OF HAWAII 12

IN THE MATTER OF

) )

THE ELVIN R MEEK FAMILY TRUST

T. No. 05-1-0101 )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

) DATED JUNE 14, 1996, AS AMENDED ) _______________________________ ) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the NANCI L. MEEK’S RESPONSE TO ELIZABETH A MEEK’S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR DECLATORY RELIEF DECLARING FIRST AMENDMENT INVALID (FILED ON AUGUST 14, 2009) EXHIBITS A-S; and attachments was duly served upon the following individuals by hand delivery, United States Postal service or E mail:

LOLA DEE MEEK (REKLAI) P.O. Box 7042 Koror, Palau 96940 [email protected]

BY MAIL and E mail

MELVIN RAY MEEK 1633 E Chaparral Drive Casa Grande AZ 85222 [email protected]

BY MAIL and E mail

Robert M Jones Esq 8655 Morro Road Suite C Atascadero CA 93422 Attorney for ELIZABETH A MEEK [email protected]

BY MAIL and E mail

DATED: Las Vegas, Nevada November 16, 2009

Nanci L Meek, in pro se

13