Ripoff Report > DENNIS PARR Review - Centennial, Colorado

Jefferson County

2010PR210 (also concerning 2013PR56)

In the Matter of the Estate of

Irene C. Coulter, Deceased,

And

Appellant:

PETER COULTER,

Appellees:

PAULA COULTER;

TED COULTER.;

JOHN BERMAN, ESQ.

FILED IN THE COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 7, 2013

COURT USE ONLY

PETER COULTER, interested party, heir, pro se

151 Summer Street #654 Morrison Colorado 80465

Phone Number: 303 720-1811

E-mail:AUDIONLY@GMAIL.COM

Court of Appeals

Case Number:

2013CA1453

AMENDED MOTION TO VOID PAULA COULTER’S POWER OF ATTORNEY AND ALL ORDERS AND FINDINGS OF THE DISTRICT COURT, FORENSIC AUDIT, RESTITUTION, ATTORNEY FEES, COSTS AND SANCTIONS OR ALTERNATIVELY FOR LEAVE AND REMAND TO THE DISTRICT COURT PURSUANT TO CRCP RULE 60

Court of Appeals, State of Appeals

2 East 14th Ave.

Denver, Colorado 80203

303 861-1111

___________________________________________________

Jefferson County

2010PR210 (also concerning 2013PR56)

In the Matter of the Estate of

Irene C. Coulter, Deceased,

And

Appellant:

PETER COULTER,

Appellees:

PAULA COULTER;

TED COULTER;

John Berman, Esquire.

COURT USE ONLY

PETER COULTER, interested party, heir, pro se

151 Summer Street #654 Morrison Colorado 80465

Phone Number: 303 720-1811

E-mail:AUDIONLY@GMAIL.COM

Court of Appeals

Case Number:

2013CA1453

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

I hereby certify that this brief complies with all requirements of C.A.R. 28 and C.A.R. 32, including all formatting requirements set forth in these rules. Specifically, the undersigned certifies that:

The brief complies with C.A.R. 28(g).

X It does not exceed 30 pages.

The brief complies with C.A.R. 28(k).

x For the party raising the issue:

It contains under a separate heading (1) a concise statement of the applicable standard of appellate review with citation to authority; and (2) a citation to the precise location in the record (R. , p. ), not to an entire document, where the issue was raised and ruled on.

XI acknowledge that my brief may be stricken if it fails to comply with any of the requirements of C.A.R. 28 and C.A.R. 32.

/s/ Peter Coulter_________ __

Signature of attorney or party

COMES NOW the Appellant Peter Coulter, pro se, for his Amended Motion to void Paula Coulter’s April 21, 2006 power of attorney as Fraud upon the Court and all orders and findings thereof; complete joint restitution of Mrs. Coulter’s assets from 2004 to the present by the Appellees; perjury, abuse of a person at risk; attorney fees, costs; sanctions and recommendation of criminal proceedings pursuant to C.R.C.P. Rule 60;Relief from Judgment or Order; C.R.S.§18-8-502, Perjury in the first degree; C.R.S. §18-8-610,Tampering with physical evidence; C.R.S. §26-3.1Financial exploitation of at-risk adults; C.R.S. §18-9-113,Desecration of a venerated object; and C.R.S. §15-12-723, Assets concealed or embezzled; and as good cause would state as follows:

I. CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO C.R.C.P. 121 § 1-15(8) No party has made an entry of appearance into this case other than the Appellant. In a September 24, 2013 Email regarding this Appeal, Mr. Berman stated to the Appellant when asked about this requirement: “I oppose these Motions as well as your entire proceeding.”
Because of the relevance and importance of this Motion, Movant will forward courtesy copies to all parties listed in ¶17 below, in addition to all parties of In Re: Irene Coulter (deceased); 2010PR204 and 2013PR56, Jefferson County District Court.
1. II. COMPLIANCE WITH C.A.R. 28(k)
2. This C.R.C.P. Rule 60(Relief from Judgment or Order)(See pg. 11 for recital of Rule.) Motion arises after the October 23rd, 2013 discovery of a subsequent Power of Attorney dated June 19,2006, naming Ted Coulter as sole agent for Irene Coulter; invalidated the April 21, 2006 Power of Attorney for Irene Coulter that Paula Coulter fraudulently produced to various persons, entities and the Court (with the assistance of John Berman, Esq., an officer of the Court) to persuade them that she/they were acting on behalf of their fiduciary, Mrs. Coulter, via said Power of Attorney. C.R.C.P. Rule 60(b)(2) gives the Court explicit authority and jurisdiction to relieve parties such as the Appellant from Judgments, Orders or Proceedings where adverse parties, such as Paula Coulter, her counsel, John Berman and brother Ted Coulter committed continued Fraud and/or Fraud on the Court. Specifically, (but not exclusively) obtaining the Conservatorship and Guardianship of Irene Coulter through a perjured sworn Petition where Paula Coulter affirms that the void and fraudulent Power of Attorney dated April 21, 2006 gave her fiduciary precedence in being Conservator and Guardian for Mrs. Irene Coulter.

III. CASE CITATION
In light of John Berman Esquire’s role in these proceedings; the Appellant requests the Court ORDER that his name be added to the case citation as an Appellee in addition to Paula and Ted Coulter.
1. IV. PRO-SE LITIGANT
2. In Puckett v. Cox, it was held that a pro-se pleading requires less stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer (456 F2d 233 (1972 Sixth Circuit USCA). Justice Black in Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957) "The Federal Rules rejects the approach that pleading is a game of skill in which one misstep by counsel may be decisive to the outcome and accept the principle that the purpose of pleading is to facilitate a proper decision on the merits." According to Rule 8(f) FRCP and the State Court rule which holds that all pleadings shall be construed to do substantial justice." Peter Coulter, the Appellant, is a pro-se litigant in these matters and would request that the Court take this into consideration when making its findings and rendering its decision(s).

V. REFERENCES
The Appellant reference his Motion for Leave to Restore Record with Addendums filed October 10, 2013 as though fully rewritten herein.

COLORADO ATTORNEY OATH OF ADMISSION

I DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR by the Everliving God (OR AFFIRM) that:

I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Colorado; I will maintain the respect due to Courts and judicial officers; I will employ only such means as are consistent with truth and honor; I will treat all persons whom I encounter through my practice of law with fairness, courtesy, respect and honesty; I will use my knowledge of the law for the betterment of society and the improvement of the legal system; I will never reject, from any consideration personal to myself, the cause of the defenseless or oppressed; I will at all times faithfully and diligently adhere to the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct.

VI. BACKGROUND
On February 18, 2010, Paula Coulter and John Berman, Esq., her attorney, filed a sworn Petition requesting appointment as Conservator and Guardian for Irene Coulter in 2010PR204, Jefferson County District Court. See Addendum 1.
¶8 of said Petition states as follows:

¶10 of said Petition states in pertinent part as follows:

10. Said information is sworn to by Paula Coulter in the following jurat:

11. C.R.S. 18-8-502. Perjury in the first degree, provides as follows:

(1) A person commits perjury in the first degree if in any official proceeding he knowingly makes a materially false statement, which he does not believe to be true, under an oath required or authorized by law.

(2) Knowledge of the materiality of the statement is not an element of this crime, and the defendant's mistaken belief that his statement was not material is not a defense, although it may be considered by the court in imposing sentence.

(3) Perjury in the first degree is a class 4 felony.

C.R.S. 18-8-610. Tampering with physical evidenceprovides as follows:

(1) A person commits tampering with physical evidence if, believing that an official proceeding is pending or about to be instituted and acting without legal right or authority, he:

(a) Destroys, mutilates, conceals, removes, or alters physical evidence with intent to impair its verity or availability in the pending or prospective official proceeding; or

(b) Knowingly makes, presents, or offers any false or altered physical evidence with intent that it be introduced in the pending or prospective official proceeding.

(2) "Physical evidence", as used in this section, includes any article, object, document, record, or other thing of physical substance.

(3) Tampering with physical evidence is a class 6 felony.

12. The afore mentioned Financial and Medical Power of Attorney of Paula Coulter dated April 21, 2006 are attached. See Addendum 2
Paula Coulter (with assistance at times by John Berman, Esq.) exclusively used this April 21, 2006 Power of Attorney as fiduciary agent for Mrs. Coulter including:

To fraudulently act as Mrs. Coulter’s agent for Mrs. Coulter’s accounts at Smith Barney and later Morgan Stanley since 2006 which to the best of Appellants knowledge exceeded $500,000;
To fraudulently act to return the joint account of Sheryl Powers and Sheryl Powers, (Irene Coulter’s favorite daughter, best friend and caretaker) into Irene Coulter’s sole account in the approximate amount of $75,000 without knowledge or consulting of any other family members or Mrs. Coulter’s attorney and son in law of 30 years, William A. Powers, Esq. and thereafter removing it in the form of “gifts” to Ted and Paula Coulter at Paula Coulter’s direction.
To fraudulently sell/donate Mrs. Coulter’s car;
To fraudulently place Mrs. Coulter into Atria Center;
To fraudulently and flagrantly “gift” Paula Coulter and Ted Coulter a minimum[1] of $190,000 between the years of 2006 and 2010, contrary to the past history and gifting habits of Irene Coulter and without knowledge or consultation of any other family members or Mrs. Coulter’s attorney, William Powers.
To fraudulently act as Mrs. Coulter’s agent in dealing with the Colorado Division of Mines in dealing with Mrs. Coulter’s largest asset, a 3/4 interest in 400 acres owned jointly with Richard Vento through an LLC (South Central Land and Mining).
To fraudulently profess to the Court in Mrs. Coulter’s current probate hearing (2013PR56 Jefferson County) that the Will Paula Coulter provided is valid because the April 21, 2006 Power of Attorney was previously found valid by the District Court.[2]
To flagrantly and shamelessly desecrate the remains of Leland Coulter who had been laid at peace for 22 years, by John Berman, Esq. filing a fraudulent, misleading and outrageous Forthwith Motion with the District Court in 2013PR56.
To fraudulently and continually withhold essential financial information from interested parties despite requests and direct Orders to do so. The Appellant believes this was/is intentionally done to hide further criminal actions by the Appellees. The result today is that there is not an accounting of Mrs. Coulter’s assets or how much Paula Coulter, Ted Coulter and John Berman have decimated them[3]. It should be noted that John Berman was sanctioned before by the Colorado Supreme Court for failing to provide a professional invoice. In the instant case, despite numerous requests, he has again refused to ever (emphasis added) provide a professional invoice despite extravagant requests to the Court for attorney’s fees in managing Mrs. Coulter’s affairs.
And most ad rem here, Paula Coulter, her attorney John Berman and Ms. Coulter’s brother Ted Coulter, to act with Fraud, Fraud on the Court and Conspiracy to commit Fraud on the Court in submitting a sworn Petition relying on Paula Coulter’s April 21, 2006 Power of Attorney, filed with the Jefferson County District Court; to be Mrs. Coulter’s Fiduciary Conservator and Guardian and purposely and fraudulently concealing Ted Coulter’s subsequent and exclusive power of attorney that was obtained 3 years after police reports indicated Mrs. Coulter clearly had dementia and not cognizant to sign any documentation.

VII. CONCEALED SUBSEQUENT POWER OF ATTORNEY

14. Discovered October 25, 2013, the Appellant presents to this Court a subsequent Power of Attorney (emphasis added) to the one allegedly signed on April 21, 2006. Said Power of Attorney is signed by Mrs. Coulter and notarized; giving exclusive Power of Attorney and authority to Theodore Coulter. It is dated June 19, 2006, 59 days after the Power of Attorney that Paula Coulter has since been fraudulently presenting to parties as evidence of her authority to fraudulently steal (along with Ted Coulter and John Berman) assets from their Fiduciary, their own Mother, Irene Coulter. See Addendum 3.

15. Said June 19, 2006 notarized power of attorney states in pertinent part:

“This durable power of attorney shall be non-delegable and shall be valid until such time as I die”

16. Said Fiduciary power of attorney revokes Paula Coulter’s previous Fiduciary Power of Attorney and any acts Paula Coulter transacted for Irene Coulter after June 19, 2006 are both void and fraudulent including the submission of her Sworn Petition to the Jefferson County District Court to be Mrs. Coulter’s Conservator and Guardian.

1. 17. Ted Coulter used his subsequent exclusive Fiduciary Power of Attorney as agent to sell Mrs. Coulter’s[4] home by Warranty Deed and no Title Insurance for $275,000 to a suspect investor who immediately turned around and sold it for $274,000 by Warranty Deed without Title Insurance. See Addendum 4.[5] The Appellant believes that the investor received a kickback from Ted Coulter but has been unable to prove that because Paula Coulter continually refuses to turn over detailed financial documents despite numerous requests and Court Orders[6]. It raises the question of why would anyone buy a property for $275,000 and two months later sell it for $274,000 without a title policy being provided?
2. 18. Neither Paula Coulter, her attorney John Berman or Ted Coulter ever disclosed to anyone, including the Court, that there was a subsequent Power of Attorney that made Paula Coulter’s April 21, 2006 Power of Attorney invalid. Paula Coulter was well aware of the subsequent Power of Attorney as personnel at Atria have informed the Appellant that Ted Coulter brought a “mobile Notary” to Mrs. Coulter’s room and had her sign the document. Paula Coulter was incensed and for a time gave explicit instructions to the staff of Atria that in addition to Peter Coulter, Ted Coulter was not to be allowed in Mrs. Coulter’s room alone with her. Paula Coulter was protecting her “gold mine”; not caring and nurturing her.[7]
3. 19. The record shows that Paula Coulter and her attorney John Berman brought Paula Coulter’s Power of Attorney up continually to the Court boasting her authority for every action including Paula Coulter’s authority (with Ted Coulter’s express approval and John Berman’s Fraudulent Motion) to shamelessly desecrate our Father, Leland Coulter’s remains.[8]

VIII. DISCUSSION

C.R.C.P. Rule 60, Relief from a Judgment or Order provides:

(a). Clerical Mistakes. Clerical mistakes in judgments, orders, or other parts of the record and errors therein arising from oversight or omission may be corrected by the court at any time of its own initiative or on the motion of any party and after such notice, if any, as the court orders. During the pendency of an appeal such mistakes may be so corrected before the case is docketed in the appellate court, and thereafter while the appeal is pending may be so corrected with leave of the appellate court.

(b) Mistakes; Inadvertence; Surprise; Excusable Neglect; Fraud; etc. On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or his legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) Mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party; (3) the judgment is void; (4) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; or (5) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment. The motion shall be made within a reasonable time, and for reasons (1) and (2) not more than six months after the judgment, order, or proceeding was entered or taken. A motion under this section (b) does not affect the finality of a judgment or suspend its operation. This Rule does not limit the power of a court: (1) To entertain an independent action to relieve a party from a judgment, order, or proceeding, or (2) to set aside a judgment for fraud upon the court; or (3) when, for any cause, the summons in an action has not been personally served within or without the state on the defendant, to allow, on such terms as may be just, such defendant, or his legal representatives, at any time within six months after the rendition of any judgment in such action, to answer to the merits of the original action. Writs of coram nobis, audita querela, and bills of review and bills in the nature of a bill of review, are abolished, and the procedure for obtaining any relief from a judgment shall be by motion as prescribed in these rules or by an independent action.

19. The final District Court Order in 2010PR204 was issued June 23, 1013 and this C.R.C.P Rule 60 Motion is filed this October 30, 2013; well within the 6 month time frame mandated by C.R.C.P. Rule 60.

20. As highlighted above, C.R.C.P. Rule 60(b)(2) specifically addresses Fraud and Fraud on the Court as adequate reasons for relief. Once a valid judgment is entered, the only means by which the trial court may thereafter alter, amend, or vacate the judgment is by appropriate motion under either C.R.C.P. 59 or this rule. Cortvriendt v. Cortvriendt, 146 Colo. 387, 361 P.2d 767 (1961). Authority for relief from a judgment order or proceeding is conferred in an appropriate proceeding by section (b) of this rule. Peercy v. Peercy, 154 Colo. 575, 392 P.2d 609 (1964).
21. FRAUD occurs when all of the following elements exist:

1.) an individual or an organization intentionally makes an untrue representation about an important fact or event:

Paula Coulter with the assistance of her attorney John Berman, made an untrue representation about her invalid Power of Attorney to parties, including the Court who relied on said Fiduciary P.of A. as Paula Coulter’s authority to represent Mrs. Irene Coulter. Further, they purposely concealed the subsequent Power of Attorney in violation of C.R.S. 18-8-502 and 18-8-610; class 4 and class 6 felonies.

2.) the untrue representation is believed by the victim (the person or organization to whom the representation has been made;

Everyone, including the Court believed Paula Coulter’s assertion that she had Power of Attorney under the April 21, 2006 document.

3.) the victim relies upon and acts upon the untrue representation;

The following all relied on Paula Coulter’s fraudulent assertion that she had a valid Power of Attorney for the affairs of Irene Coulter:

Smith Barney, Colorado Division of Mines, Wells Fargo Bank, Sheryl Powers Estate, Marty Powers, William Powers, Esq., Jean Powers, Esq. Lora Powers, Olinger Crown Hill Cemetery, the City of Florence, Colorado,(Highlands Cemetery) Colorado Department of Mines, Dr. Cobb, (Mrs. Coulter’s doctor) Atria Center, South Central Land and Mining, d**k Vento (partner of Irene Coulter), Linda Saunders and Bertina (co-owners of land in Fremont County) court witnesses Marie Perigren(sp) and Martha and John Saviers, Esq.; and especially the Court all relied upon the fraudulent and sworn representations of Paula Coulter and her attorney, John A. Berman, Esq. that Paula Coulter had a valid Power of Attorney, when in fact she knew she didn’t.

4.) the victim(s) suffer(s) loss of money and/or property as a result of relying upon and acting upon the untrue representation.

Through Paula Coulter, Ted Coulter and John Berman’s fraudulent misrepresentations, hundreds of thousands of dollars has either been misappropriated or is missing from Irene Coulter’s accounts[9]. Additionally, Mrs. Coulter’s largest asset (3/4 interest in 400 acres) is unaccounted for. And the most shameless act was the movement and desecration of our Father, Leland Coulter’s remains.

22. As an aggravating circumstance, it must be brought to the Court’s attention that 3 years before either of these 2 Powers of Attorney were signed, there were 27 police reports [See Addendum 5] of Mrs. Coulter believing neighbors were coming in through her front door keyhole, molesting her cat and stealing her food. She was clearly demented and Paula and Ted Coulter both shoved Fiduciary Powers of Attorney and a Will in front of her and had her sign them without her knowing what she was signing. They took advantage of a person at risk who happened to be their own Mother. They were/are both so greedy that they were each even willing to sabotage each other to get Irene Coulter’s entire assets.
23. "Fraud upon the court" has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to "embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery cannot perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication." Kenner v. C.I.R., 387 F.3d 689 (1968); 7 Moore's Federal Practice, 2d ed., p. 512, ¶ 60.23. The 7th Circuit further stated "a decision produced by fraud upon the court is not in essence a decision at all, and never becomes final.
24. Paula Coulter’s attorney, John Berman, Esq. (who is currently under suspension/probation with the Colorado Supreme Court[10]) presented the Original sworn Petition and a plethora of other Motions and Document’s using the fraudulent Power of Attorney of April 21, 2006. He is even using it in the current Probate case to justify that since the Court previously found Paula Coulter’s P.of A. OK, that the Will should be OK also and not subject to collateral attack. And most flagrantly, he used the P.of A. to help desecrate the remains of Leland Coulter by filing a Forthwith Motion with the Court and misleading it with incorrect statutes and the April 21, 2006 power of attorney. He has clearly and continually committed Fraud on the Court.
25. "Fraud upon the court" makes void the orders and judgments of that court. It is also clear and well-settled law that any attempt to commit "fraud upon the court" vitiates the entire proceeding. The People of the State of Illinois v. Fred E. Sterling, 357 Ill. 354; 192 N.E. 229 (1934) ("The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters applies to judgments as well as to contracts and other transactions."); Allen F. Moore v. Stanley F. Sievers, 336 Ill. 316; 168 N.E. 259 (1929) ("The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters ..."); In re Village of Willowbrook, 37 Ill.App.2d 393 (1962) ("It is axiomatic that fraud vitiates everything."); Dunham v. Dunham, 57 Ill.App. 475 (1894), affirmed 162 Ill. 589 (1896); Skelly Oil Co. v. Universal Oil Products Co., 338 Ill.App. 79, 86 N.E.2d 875, 883-4 (1949); Thomas Stasel v. The American Home SecurityCorporation, 362 Ill. 350; 199 N.E. 798 (1935). When any officer of the court has committed "fraud upon the court", the orders and judgment of that court are void, of no legal force or effect. A court may at any time set aside a judgment for after discovered fraud upon the court. Hazel-Atlas Glass v. Hartford, 322 US 238, 64 S. Ct. 997, 88 L. Ed. 1250 - Supreme Court, 1944. Out of deference to the deep rooted policy in favor of the repose of judgments... courts of equity have been cautious in exercising their power [in upsetting judgments]. But when the occasion has demanded, where enforcement of the judgment is 'manifestly unconscionable' . . . they have wielded the power without hesitation." Hayden v. Rumsey Products,196F.Supp.988 (W.D.N.Y. 1951).
26. Where the relevant facts are undisputed, an appellate court may make an independent determination as a matter of law. See People v. Miranda–Olivas, 41 P.3d 658, 661 (Colo. 2001). Here, the undisputed facts establish such fraud as a matter of law. See Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir.1989)(“A ‘fraud upon the court’ occurs where it can be demonstrated, clearly and convincingly, that a party has sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the trier or unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party's claim or defense.”). In re C.L.S.,252 P.3d 556, 561 (Colo. App. 2011) cert. denied, 11 SC 261, 2011 WL 2535031 (Colo. June 27, 2011), Therefore, Appellant is entitled to relief under the “fraud upon the court” provision of Rule 60(b).
1. 1. MALICE, WILLFULL AND WANTON CONDUCT
2. 27. In Colorado, exemplary damages are only available by statute. See Corbetta v. Albertson’s, Inc., 975 P.2d 718, 721 (Colo. 1999). Before a judge may impose exemplary damages, it must determine that the “injury complained of” was “attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, or willful and wanton conduct,” § 13-21-102(1)(a), which must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, § 13-25-127(2), C.R.S. (2010). Willful and wanton conduct is defined as

conduct purposefully committed which the actor must have realized as dangerous, done heedlessly and recklessly, without regard to consequences, or of the rights and safety of others, particularly the plaintiff.

Subsection 13-21-102(1)(b) of the statute complies with the holding in Philip Morris, 549 U.S. at 357 to the extent it permits the jury to consider the “rights and safety of others” in assessing the willful and wanton nature (i.e. the reprehensibility) of the defendant’s conduct. In Philip Morris, the U.S. Supreme Court explained that a jury may consider harm to nonparties when gauging the “reprehensibility” of the defendant’s actions. Id. at 357 (“[W]e recognize that conduct that risks harm to many is likely more reprehensible than conduct that risks harm to only a few. And a jury consequently may take this fact into account in determining reprehensibility.”). This holding built upon the Court’s prior decision in State Farm which directed trial courts to consider whether the defendant’s conduct evinced “reckless disregard of the health or safety of others” when assessing the reprehensibility of a defendant. 538 U.S. at 419. Here, the statute cabins the jury’s consideration of a defendant’s disregard for “the rights and safety of others” to the narrow task of gauging “willful and wanton conduct.” See §13-21-102(1)(b). By listing harm to nonparties as a factor in assessing reprehensibility, the statute complies with the due process limitations on exemplary damages set forth in both Philip Morris and State Farm. See e.g., Grefer v. Alpha Technical,965 So.2d 511, 517 (La. App. 4th Cir. 2007). Thus, because the statute permits a jury to consider harm to nonparties only for the purpose of assessing whether the defendant’s conduct is willful and wanton, it is not unconstitutional.
The Wilfull and Wanton actions and Fraudulent behavior of Paula Coulter, Ted Coulter and John Berman continued for at least 7 years culminating in a planned scheme to commit Fraud on the Court and violate the due process rights of numerous parties including Irene Coulter, Leland Coulter, Peter Coulter, heirs, partners of Irene Coulter and subsequent owners of Irene Coulter’s property. Mr. Berman’s shameless behavior toward the Appellant was/is incessant. He would fail to send copies of Orders and Motions; fail to notify the Appellant before submitting a proposed Order that was Ordered by the Court; send encrypted Motions for attorney fees that ended up in the spam folder; never providing the Appellant with a Professional Invoice of his services (emphasis added) Never providing detailed Conservator invoices and those he did provide were at times off by $90,000 with no explanation. Never complying with Court Orders to provide the Appellant with detailed Conservator reports; the result being that no one but Paula Coulter,
Ted Coulter and John Berman know Irene Coulter’s true financial and medical condition. And the most abhorrent act of Mr. Berman was filing a Fraudulent and Misleading Motion in 2013PR56 where he stated that Paula Coulter had the authority as the prescribed Personal Representative (from a Fraudulent Will and Power of Attorney) to dig up[11]and desecrate the remains of Leland Coulter who had been laid to rest 22 years earlier in the Coulter family plot at Olinger Crown Hill Cemetery. There acts shock the conscience.
Ted and Paula Coulter hatched a scheme sometime back in the turn of the century to take advantage of an at-risk person, our Mother, Irene Coulter. Further, they decided to do it at the detriment of Peter Coulter who they later refused to let see his Mother for the sole despicable purpose of protecting their “gold mine”. They kept this act up throughout the Conservator and Guardianship case (2010PR204) and have continued in Mrs. Coulter’s current Probate case (2013PR56). As in the Conservator case; Mr. Berman refuses to provide a list of Assets of Irene Coulter even though the record indicates at least 10 different e-mail requests that went unanswered. The only possible reason for this is to cover more criminal acts by the Appellees.[12]
In 2011, the Colorado Legislate became alarmed with the Probate Court procedures; did an Audit[13]of the Probate Court system and made many proposals to prevent neglect and fraud in the Courts. Chief Justice Michael Bender signed off on those proposals and implemented them into the Colorado Court system. A review of those directives was brought to the attention of the District Court and Mr. Berman on numerous occasions. John Berman, as an officer of the Court, elected to ignore all of them without exception. Most flagrant was his continued act of refusing to provide a comprehensive and detailed Conservator report including Professional Invoices; when requested and/or Ordered constituting further Fraud on the Court.
Ted Coulter, Paula Coulter and John Berman willfully, wantonly and maliciously decimated the assets of an at risk adult, my Mother, Mrs. Irene Coulter and then proceeded to shamelessly desecrate the remains of my Father, Leland Coulter.
1. X. C.R.S. 26-3.1 PROTECTIVE SERVICES

FOR ADULTS AT RISK OF MISTREATMENT

(a.5) As required by section 18-6.5-108, C.R.S., certain persons specified in paragraph (b) of this subsection (1) who observe the abuse or exploitation of an at-risk elder, as defined in section 18-6.5-102 (1) and (10), C.R.S., or who have reasonable cause to believe that an at-risk elder has been abused or exploited or is at imminent risk of abuse or exploitation shall report such fact to a law enforcement agency not more than twenty-four hours after making the observation or discovery.

(b) The following persons, whether paid or unpaid, are urged to report as described in paragraph (a) of this subsection (1):

(XII) COURT-APPOINTED GUARDIANS AND CONSERVATORS;

Under C.R.S. 26 3.1, Paula Coulter, as Court appointed guardian and conservator, was required to report the abuse and exploitation of Irene Coulter by herself, Ted Coulter and John Berman to a law enforcement agency. The record shows she never did. Neither did Paula Coulter or Ted Coulter. But the record shows that Peter Coulter reported Paula Coulter’s abuse to Jefferson County Social Services.

XIII. CONCLUSION

It is self-evident from the evidence presented here by the Appellant that Paula Coulter, Ted Coulter and Paula Coulter’s attorney committed Fraud, Fraud on the Court, Conspiracy to Commit Fraud, Conspiracy to Commit Fraud on the Court, Concealment of evidence; Theft from a person at risk; desecration of a venerated object, Violations of numerous Attorney Code of Professional Conduct, Abuse of Fiduciary Duty, and numerous violations of Supreme Court Directives and Legislative Audits (2011) They kept this Fraud up for at least 6 years without any remorse. And they did it to their own Mother and Father who they swore to protect as their Fiduciaries. Their acts are shameless and shock the conscience. The Court needs to make an example of them so that this does not happen again by implementing punitive damages in addition to full restitution, costs and attorney fees.

WHEREFORE, the Appellant Peter Coulter would pray the Court grant relief as a matter of law and find:

ThatJohn Berman Esq. Paula Coulter and Ted Coulter committed Fraud, Fraud on the Court and Conspiracy to Commit Fraud on the Court;

That the April 21, 2006 Power of Attorney and Will are fraudulent and void;

That the June 19, 2006 Power of Attorney is fraudulent and void.

That Ted Coulter, Paula Coulter and John Berman committed Fraud on a person at risk, Mrs. Irene Coulter;

That Ted Coulter, Paula Coulter and John Berman’s fraudulent actions were Willfull, Wanton and Malicious and therefore the Appellant is entitled to Joint Punitive Damages equal to the sum of all funds taken from Mrs. Coulter, costs, and attorney fees.

That as a direct result of Paula Coulter’s and Ted Coulter’s fraudulent actions; they are not entitled to any of Mrs. Coulters assets.

ORDER that John Berman’s name be added to this case cite as an Appellee;

ORDER that Leland Coulter’s remains be Forthwith returned to their original resting place and all costs be paid by the Appellees jointly; and further, that Irene Coulter be disinterred from the Florence, Colorado cemetery and placed next to her husband in the Coulter family plot in Olinger Crown Hill Cemetery where she always believed was her final resting place;

ORDER a complete and thorough 3rd party forensic accounting of all of Paula Coulter’s, Ted Coulter and his wife Barbara Coulter, John Berman’s and Irene Coulter assets, including tax returns, checking and saving accounts, invoices, property and any other financial, personal and real estate documentation from 2000 to the present date to be paid by Appellees jointly;

ORDER that Paula Coulter, Ted Coulter and his wife Barbara Coulter and John Berman fully cooperate with any parties executing said forensic accounting;

ORDER that as a result of these unconscionable frauds; Peter Coulter and numerous other parties and heirs were severely hampered in presenting their case(s) And as a result of these flagrant Frauds on the Court, all the Orders and Judgments of the District Court in 2010PR204 AND 2013PR56 are void and of no legal effect;

ORDER that the Appellees jointly pay restitution for all monies, funds, property, stocks, real estate, costs, rents, attorney fees and any other assets of Mrs. Irene Coulter be paid back in full

ORDER that all attorney fees and costs of Appellant (including time spent filing, writing, responding and researching John Berman’s Motions at the same rate of $250 per hour that John Berman charged for fraudulent attorneys fees.)

ORDER that the Appellees be reported to Social Services and Law Enforcement Agencies for criminal prosecution of their action;

ORDER that Paula Coulter be forthwith removed as Personal Representative of Irene Coulter;

ORDER that Paula Coulter, John Berman and any other party who has any documentation, assets, or any other belongings of Irene Coulter be forthwith placed in the custody and registry of the Court until such time as a new Personal Representative can be named;

ORDER that Peter Coulter be Forthwith named as Personal Representative of Irene Coulter in 2013PR56.

ORDER that none of the Appellees, Ted Coulter, Paula Coulter or John Berman may dispose, transfer, sell or donate any of their property or assets until such time as the Forensic Audit of Mrs. Coulter can be completed and Restitution thereof fully reimbursed by the Appellees;

And for such further Orders as the Court deems just and necessary to restore the dignity of the Court; the full restitution of an at risk adult, Mrs. Irene Coulter; and the sanctity and respect of Mr. Leland Coulter,

Or ALTERNATIVELY, for an Order to Remand to the Jefferson County District Court for further proceedings consistent with this Court’s findings and Orders.

Respectfully submitted and dated this November 7, 2013,

/s/ Peter Coulter

5 Attachments/Addendums

Certificate of Service

I certify that on November 7, 2013 a copy of the above Document and was served on each of the following by hand delivery, faxed, first class mail or E-mail:

Name of Person to Whom you are Sending this Document	Relationship	Address	Manner of Service*
JOHN BERMAN, ESQ.	ATTORNEY FOR PAULA COULTER,	JAB@JABERMAN.COM	E-MAIL
TED COULTER	SON	TED.COULTER@WARDNORTHAMERICAN.COM	E-MAIL
JEAN POWERS, Esq.	HEIR		E-MAIL
LORA POWERS	HEIR		E-MAIL
MARTY POWERS	HEIR		E-MAIL
WILLIAM POWERS, Esq.	HEIR		E-MAIL
Jefferson County District Court Olinger Crown Hill Cemetery Florence Cemetery Morgan Stanley Atria Linda Saunders Richard Vento John Williams Colorado Dept. of Mining James and Lora Perry Sheryl Powers Estate John and Martha Saviers, Esq. Mrs. Marie Perigren JoAnne Goddard, Esq. Freemont County Commissioners Energy Fuels Legislative Committee on Judicial Probate Audit Colorado Supreme Court		2010pr204 and 2013pr56	Hand Del. E-MAIL Mail Mail

*Insert one of the following: Hand Delivery, First-Class Mail, Certified Mail, E-Served or Faxed.

/s/ Peter Coulter

[1] Paula Coulter has had custody of Irene Coulter’s financial records since at least 2005. The record indicates that even though requested and ORDERED to provide complete financials; to date that has never happened. The $190,000 is all Peter Coulter could piece together from information obtained and believes the figure is much higher than that.

[2] See 2013PR56 In re Irene Coulter. Personal Representatives Motion to dismiss Peter Coulter and Marty Powers Objection to Will; ¶8.

[3] While there have been numerous Conservator reports; all, without exception, do not meet accounting and probate rules. They are just numbers on a page with no backup documentation as required by statute. Although the record shows that John Berman was paid at least $40,000 in attorney’s fees; he has not provided one professional invoice; an act for which he has been previously sanctioned by the Colorado Supreme Court. (See Colorado Supreme Court v. Berman 11PDJ078 previous admissions of misconduct.) The record shows that the Appellant found errors in excess of $90,000 in some reports. And despite requirements to provide a list of Mrs. Coulters assets in her current probate case (2013PR56; Jefferson County District Court) the Appellant and other heirs have made no less than 10 separate requests to which Mr. Berman either did not respond or refused to provide a list of assets. Further, despite protest from the Appellant to the Court, Paula Coulter has continued to have a joint account with Mrs. Coulter in violation of Probate Rules making it impossible to know if funds were being siphoned off by Paula Coulter. A flagrant example of the abuse of this joint account was an entry for $130 to Camping World. It begs the question, What would a 90 year old woman with stage II Alzheimer locked in a care center want with items from Camping World?

[4] Mrs. Coulter qualifies as an at risk adult under C.R.S. 18-9-113, Financial Exploitation of an at risk adult. See Addendum 5 where the 27 Littleton police report from 2002-2005 indicate that she believed neighbors were coming through her front door key hole; molesting her cat and stealing her food.

[5] The Movant believes that the present owners of Mrs. Coulter’s home (Mr. and Mrs. Perry) will want to join in this action of Paula Coulter, Ted Coulter and John Berman, Esquire’s fraud to protect their warranty deed and cash purchase of Mrs. Coulter’s previous home.

[6] See for example the Appellant’s Motion to Reconstruct the Record filed October 10, 2013 showing Paula Coulter and John Berman’s continued refusal to follow Court Orders and conceal records.

[7] It is important to mention here Paula Coulter’s last words to Leland Coulter before he passed away. Even though he had been stricken with cancer two months before he died; Paula Coulter never came to see him until the day of his death. Her final words to Leland Coulter, “Will you co-sign this note so I can get a car?” and Leland Coulter’s response, “Paula, I’m too sick; I can’t do that.” Leland Coulter passed away within an hour of that conversation. (This shameless conversation was witnessed by more than one family member.}

[8] John Berman filed a fraudulent emergency Motion stating that because Paula Coulter was Conservator and Personal Representative of Irene Coulter; that she had authority under probate rules to desecrate the remains of Leland Coulter by obtaining an ORDER to dig them up. He had been buried for 22 years in the Coulter family plot in Olinger Crown Hill before he was moved, without notice or hearing, to Florence Colorado to be buried in the family plot of Sonny Vento; a brother-in-law that Leland Coulter had refused to talk to for 20 years before he passed away. Further, Mrs. Coulter had not talked to Sonny Vento since 1995 when he tried to fraudulently exclude her from her share of a Trust. Now, for no reason other than the fraudulent acts of Paula Coulter, Ted Coulter and John Berman, Leland Coulter and Irene Coulter are buried in Florence Colorado instead of the Coulter family plot in Olinger Crown Hill Cemetery. Every day is a further desecration of Leland Coulter’s remains.

[9] The Appellant believes the figure to be in excess of $1,000,000 but an accurate figure cannot be acquired until a complete forensic accounting of Mrs. Coulter’s accounts is ORDERED by the Court.

[10] See Colorado Supreme Court v. John Berman, Esq, 11PDJ078.

[11] The Appellant uses “dig-up” intentionally. “Disenter” should only be used when there is a proper hearing. There was no hearing or notice here. As such, this is nothing short of desecration of Leland Coulter’s remains.

[12] Mr. Berman did finally email a response to the 10thEmail request stating that since the Appellant was not a Devisee of the [fraudulent] Will, even as an interested party and listed heir, the Appellant was not entitled to a list of Mrs. Coulter’s assets.

[13] The Report stated: "Overall, we found that the courts' processes do not ensure that the rights, welfare and assets of wards are adequately protected," the auditors reported. Colorado Supreme Court Chief Justice Michael Bender, who represented the judicial branch as the report was presented to Colorado's Legislative Audit Committee, told legislators he is "severely, substantially concerned" about the reported problems — and will make sure they are addressed. (Denver Post Sept. 27, 2011.)

Judge Munsinger, Judge Stephen Munsinger, Chief Justice Munsinger, Steve Munsinger, Susan Munsinger, Brook Munsinger, Gary Munsinger, Elva Munsinger, Eddie McGraddy, Leland Coulter Leland M Coulter, Irene Coulter, Irene C. Coulter, Jefferson County District Court 10PR204, 13PR56, Colorado Appellate Court 13CA1453, Paula Coulter, Paula Marie Coulter, Colorado Tennis Hall of Fame, Meadow Creek Tennis and Fitness Club, Ted Coulter, Kevin Ankenbauer, Greg Skyoldal, Barbara Ammann Coulter, Chantelle Noel Yates, Mellisa Gale Yeates, Stephen Anthony Yates, Yvett Coulter, Christian Coulter, Yvette Yates, Roger Ward Moving San Antonio Inc., Colorado First Judicial District, Charles Pratt, Judge Charles Pratt, Christopher Cross, Judge Christopher Cross, M. Edward Burns, Magistrate M. Edward Burns, Catherine I. Burns, Catherine Irvine Burns, Megan Alexandra Burns, Otasha Tasha Karam, Tammy Herivel, Colorado 18th Judicial District, Colorado Appellate Court, Jane Bailey, Colorado Appellate Court Staff Attorneys, Jane Bailey, Esq., Bruce Bailey, Ann Bailey, Chief Justice Alan Loeb, Karen Loeb, Roine Loeb, Ralph Loeb, Rachael Loeb, John Berman, Esq, Marjorie Berman, Stephen Berman, David Berman, Lawrence Berman, Joshua Berman, Sam Berman, Marlene John, Weiner Zerobnick, Fannie Zerobnick, JoAnna Goddard Esq., Goddard and Goddard, Olinger Crown Hill Mortuary and Cemetery, Olinger Crown Hill, Dignity Memorial, John Logan, Dzen Filipek, Denver Consistory, Scottish Rite Foundation of Colorado, Vernon B. Ingraham, Lee E. Schlessman, Karl J. Hinkle, Richard G. Frohlick, John W. Groves, Gerald A. Ford, Thomas R. Magnuson, Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Ancient Free & Accepted Masons of Colorado, Supreme Council of the Southern Jurisdiction, Supreme Council of the Northern Jurisdiction, Herbert Buchwald, 333 Havana Inc., Tri-Havana, John Gleason, Alex Martinez, Supreme Court Justice Alex Martinez, Brent Evans, Patty Evans, G. Raymond Goodwin, Jesse Aragon, Patti Aragon, Dignity Memorial, William Logan, Olinger Crown Hill Mortuary and Cemetery, Herb Buchwald, William A. Powers, Esq., Bill Powers, Judge Alex Martinez, Alex Martinez, Christopher T. Ryan.Judge Munsinger, Judge Stephen Munsinger, Chief Justice Munsinger, Steve Munsinger, Susan Munsinger, Brook Munsinger, Gary Munsinger, Elva Munsinger, Eddie McGraddy, Leland Coulter Leland M Coulter, Irene Coulter, Irene C. Coulter, Jefferson County District Court 10PR204, 13PR56, Colorado Appellate Court 13CA1453, Paula Coulter, Paula Marie Coulter, Colorado Tennis Hall of Fame, Meadow Creek Tennis and Fitness Club, Ted Coulter, Kevin Ankenbauer, Greg Skyoldal, Barbara Ammann Coulter, Chantelle Noel Yates, Mellisa Gale Yeates, Stephen Anthony Yates, Yvett Coulter, Christian Coulter, Yvette Yates, Roger Ward Moving San Antonio Inc., Colorado First Judicial District, Charles Pratt, Judge Charles Pratt, Christopher Cross, Judge Christopher Cross, M. Edward Burns, Magistrate M. Edward Burns, Catherine I. Burns, Catherine Irvine Burns, Megan Alexandra Burns, Otasha Tasha Karam, Tammy Herivel, Colorado 18th Judicial District, Colorado Appellate Court, Jane Bailey, Colorado Appellate Court Staff Attorneys, Jane Bailey, Esq., Bruce Bailey, Ann Bailey, Chief Justice Alan Loeb, Karen Loeb, Roine Loeb, Ralph Loeb, Rachael Loeb, John Berman, Esq, Marjorie Berman, Stephen Berman, David Berman, Lawrence Berman, Joshua Berman, Sam Berman, Marlene John, Weiner Zerobnick, Fannie Zerobnick, JoAnna Goddard Esq., Goddard and Goddard, Olinger Crown Hill Mortuary and Cemetery, Olinger Crown Hill, Dignity Memorial, John Logan, Dzen Filipek, Denver Consistory, Scottish Rite Foundation of Colorado, Vernon B. Ingraham, Lee E. Schlessman, Karl J. Hinkle, Richard G. Frohlick, John W. Groves, Gerald A. Ford, Thomas R. Magnuson, Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Ancient Free & Accepted Masons of Colorado, Supreme Council of the Southern Jurisdiction, Supreme Council of the Northern Jurisdiction, Herbert Buchwald, 333 Havana Inc., Tri-Havana, John Gleason, Alex Martinez, Supreme Court Justice Alex Martinez, Brent Evans, Patty Evans, G. Raymond Goodwin, Jesse Aragon, Patti Aragon, Dignity Memorial, William Logan, Olinger Crown Hill Mortuary and Cemetery, Herb Buchwald, William A. Powers, Esq., Bill Powers, Judge Alex Martinez, Alex Martinez, Christopher T. Ryan, Martin Plank, Martin J. Plank, Marty Plank, Martin J. Plank, P.C., Martin Joseph Plank, Martin Plank Esq., Kim Plank, Madison Plank, Dworkin, Chambers, Williams, York, Benson & Evans, P.C., Dennis Parr Jeffrey Brenin, Esq., Mr. Randolph Barnhart, Esq., William Barnhart, Julia Phillips, Elizabeth Barnhart, Michael Barnhart, Woodson Barnhart, Jason Hillyard, Melissa Hailey, Esq., Antonio Bates Bernard P.C. Judy Simmons, Judge Timothy Fasing Arapahoe County District Court C/O Chief Justice Seymour Colorado Supreme Court C/O Terry Morrison, Esq. Mr. Benjamin Shloss, Esq., Benjamin Shloss, Ben Shloss, Nancy Shloss, Sidney Shloss, Stephen Shloss, Brian Shloss, Marguerite Shloss, Jennifer Shloss, Jeffrey S. Brinen, Jeffry Brinen, Esq., Kutner Briner Garber P.C., Kutner Miller Brinen P.C., Jennifer Brinen, Frieda Weisbond, Trudyl Brinen, Phillip Brinnen, Gertrude Brinnen, Henry Barber, Mr. Sean Paris, Esq., Mr. James Pearson, Esq., Ms. Maren Skulborstad, Esq.Pearson & Paris, P.C., Gary Stevens, Tamra Palmer, Palmer Goertzel & Associates P.C., William Vollman, Maddison Palmer, Glen Parmer, Tamara Lewis, Austin Selvage, Jennifer Gormley, O'melveny & Myers Llp, John Deacy, Colorado Bar Association, Leonard Plank, Leonard Phillip Plank, Sandra Plank, Jacki Plank, Nicholas Plank, Jacqueline Plank, Megan Plank, Patti Plank Patricia Plank, Colorado Office Of Attorney Regulation, Arapahoe County District Attorney’s Office, Arapahoe County Attorney’s Office, Colorado Attorney General, Fbi, Federal Bureau Of Investigation, Federal Justice Department, Arapahoe County District Court, Case No. 2011pr828, Arapahoe County District Court, Case No. 2007pr579, Arapahoe County District Court Case No. 2013cv31096, United States Bankruptcy Court, District Of Colorado, Case. No. 15bk14201sbb,Emma Parr, Colorado Supreme Court Attorney Regulation Committee,

Complaint Review: DENNIS PARR

DENNIS PARR Officers of the Arapahoe County District Court Unscrupulous criminal officers of the Colorado Judicial Branch attack innocent Trust for $2,000,000.00 Centennial Colorado

7 Updates & Rebuttals

Senator Laura Woods to investigate Colorado Probate Fraud

DENVER POST LEGISLATURE INVOLVED WITH CORRUPTED JUDICIAL OFFICERS.

Colorado lawmaker pledges probate reform after hearing

victim stories

Two dozen witnesses complain about Colorado system at Capitol hearing

PROBATE COURT NIGHTMARES, FACEUS & COFFERGROUP

Ted Coulter and Paula Coulter file fraudulent Powers of Attorney with Court

Malpractice suit filed against Tamra Palmer and Jennifer Gormley

Arapahoe judge dismisses official who heirs say mishandled estates

Arapahoe judge dismisses official who heirs say mishandled estates

Denver Post

David Olinger, Reporter

Heirs cry foul, say two Colorado probate lawyers depleted their estates

Here is a story reported by David Olinger of the Denver Post concerning the same attorneys, including Martin Plank, Randolph Barnhart and Mellisa Hailey and their respective law firms.

Heirs cry foul, say two Colorado probate lawyers depleted their estates