Update 2006: We got the divorce done in about two weeks once we fired attorneys Karen Ehler and Roger Hahn. Mediation is the way to go. We both got what we wanted. As Rob (respondent) joked "you finally got to meet your attorney". Yes, that day in court. Karen Ehler showed up and scribbled in illegible handwriting that neither of us could read. We finally gave up and went back to mediation. One meeting. It was done. Our original agreement. The Quit Claim Deed. No nonsense about Clinique facial wash. Is he paying the court ordered amount? No, but we never expected that he would.
On November 3, 2005 we met at 812 Court Street in Woodland, California.
The Petitioner's attorney Karen Ehler, a member of the
Yolo County Bar Association,
said that the purpose of the court date was to file a motion on
behalf of the Petitioner (that's me) for support.
The Respondent had offered $800 per month to help with medical bills but had not made a payment.
She (Karen Ehler) rearranged that so that the Respondent will pay $121 per month instead of the $800. Huh? Who hired Karen? That would be me. Wouldn't the reduction in the support amount be the job of the Respondent 's attorney? She also accused her client of ridiculous things like sending the spouse gifts of Clinque facial wash. Yes, she did that in the court waiting room. Why? I never did find out "why" we were even appearing in court.
"I can see that you and your husband are on good terms"
~Karen Ehler, Esq
No Ms. Ehler, we are not on good terms. The Respondent, Rob Wooliscroft, was acknowledging that he was ashamed for participating in the Karen Ehler and Roger Hahn attorney trickery. He knew it should not have happened and knew that my being there had to be due to an attorney trick in his fantasy world. No person in my medical condition would use the little physical endurance required to show up for court, cancel a medical appointment, or otherwise jeopardized my health and well-being for a motion that did not require my presence or benefit me.
My own attorney (Karen Ehler) did this. Temporary custody of my home. I have no idea what she filed or why we appeared in court. It was a motion. All I know for sure is that she left me with "temporary custody" of my own home. My retirement home purchased before marriage. Temporary?
Before attorney Karen Ehler stepped in I had full custody of my own home. In addition, she filed something about communications between us (husband and wife). Huh? Who cares about communications? Not us.
Home is not temporary, home is home.
Michelle Goodrich
Why Karen? Why would you do that? Why did you do that? Can you imagine your home suddenly being called your "temporary" home? Home is not temporary, home is home.
Update 11/7/2005: The papers arrived from Karen Ehler. It was worse than originally thought. The $9000 check is not mentioned and the amount $121 was actually written in the documents filed. I thought it was an estimate that would be corrected by the judge since the original calculation had been $800 per month. There was no mention of the $60,000 check that Rob and his "hired protection" collected from me.
Maybe Karen felt stupid for showing up unprepared to address the motion that she initiated and made up this other stuff that had nothing to do with her client. That wasn't my income she listed. The medical bills were not even mentioned. The medical insurance was not addressed. The $9000 check was not included. The $60,000 check was not included. Do people really go to court for $121?
Instead of a motion on my behalf, I was ambushed by my attorney Karen Ehler, the Respondent 's attorney Roger Hahn, and the Respondent - Robert Wooliscroft.
Before yesterday I owned my home, my fourth home, my retirement home bought before marriage. Karen Ehler unilaterally decided that I should have "temporary custody" of my own home. I did not hire an attorney to ask for temporary custody of my own home. I had full custody before she stepped in.
"Temporary Custody of home..."
~ Karen Ehler
Three people knew what was on the agenda that day. I was the only one not in the loop. Why? The Petitioner's attorney - Karen Ehler - did not bother to mail the agenda on time for the client to have it before the court date. Worse, she predicted that the client would not have received the change since it was sent only a day or two before using standard US Postal Service. Ms. Ehler refused to use FedEX as requested.
If Roger Hahn said it then it must be true.
With undue coercion and pressure, the Petitioner was forced to sign a document that she could not read (no reading glasses). However, the client could easily say that she did not agree with the phrases that attorney Karen Ehler read aloud. The client absolutely did not agree with it and said that she did not agree. It didn't make sense. "No."
"No"
~Michelle Goodrich to Karen Ehler
When one person meets with injustice it renders invalid the entire system that dispensed it.
The disagreement was clear. The client did not know that the attorney (Karen Ehler) had actually written in the amount of $121 per month. The Respondent 's attorney had calculated it low at $800 per month based on a full income. The first attorney calculated it at $2800 per month using the computer-aided guideline model.
"No"
~Michelle Goodrich to Karen Ehler
The clients attorney, Karen Ehler, just kept writing right there in the waiting room, never explaining clearly what in the heck it was or why. Karen, the attorney, kept repeating phrases and regurgitating the words of the Respondent 's attorney Roger Hahn. There was an if-Roger-Hahn-said-it-then-it-must-be-true attitude that the client couldn't break through.
No
The client absolutely did not want to file the document and repeatedly told Karen Ehler that. Karen continued to write.
No
The forms were hastily prepared by attorney Karen Ehler in the court waiting room. Handwritten and prepared within earshot of the Respondent and the attorney for the Respondent .
No
The repeated "No" was dismissed by Karen Ehler. She continued to write insisting that the judge would...whatever. It didn't matter. Her client was ready to leave. The motion did not make sense. Roger Hahn was blocking the handicap exit.
At one point, the attorney for the Respondent --Roger Hahn -- showed Karen Ehler how to do something on the computer. He also reminded her she had a client to talk to about the $500,000 income listed for 2004. Yes, he reminded her to talk to her client. She didn't.
After Ms. Ehler sat down again the Petitioner (me) had to ask the attorney, Karen Ehler, to lower her voice and not talk in the disciplinary tone or so loudly. Attorney Karen Ehler replied "this is done all the time".
It's not done to me.
Now today, the motion arrives in the mail and it is obvious what the judge was trying to say - there's something wrong with this picture. Very wrong.
The judge was openly questioning the documents. I interpreted his questions to mean "hey, there's something very wrong with these dollar amounts". Karen Ehler didn't catch it - that she had neglected to put in the cost of medical insurance, dental insurance, union dues, medical expenses, retirement, and other items that were listed in detail by the client in the Income and Expense declaration prepared for the Motion.
The Petitioner's attorney, Karen Ehler, did not include the client's expenses, (primarily medical) in the calculation. She also entered an incorrect income amount - a higher amount than her client's actual monthly income. Consequently, the calculated amount was $121 per month support rather than the previously calculated and agreed amount of $800 per month as a temporary amount to help with medical expenses.
The Respondent 's attorney, Roger Hahn, assisted Karen Ehler in calculating the final amount of support. She plugged in only the wages (incorrect wages) of her client who was for the most part confined to bed with a serious spinal condition. No medical expenses, no medical insurance expenses. No mention of Mr. Wooliscroft canceling the wife's medical insurance. I think the judge could have figured out that it isn't legal to cancel his wife's health insurance the day he left. However, Karen Ehler did include the new medical insurance expenses for the Respondent -- Roger Hahn's client. That insurance didn't cover her client.
We already did the mediation thing. That's over. We agreed on everything but the stall. There was one final day offered to end it all. Rob could not agree to sign the agreement that day. He wanted to prolong the process by adding his own personal verbiage, not the verbiage of an attorney.
Karen Ehler's client (Michelle Goodrich) thought the motion being addressed was the $9000 check and support for medical expenses. Karen made a comment that the judge would not rule on it today. She did not elaborate.
Why would Judge Warriner not rule on replacing the $9000 check? Why would they not rule on the medical insurance? This may not be correct but it does not appear that either the $60,000 check or the obvious bad check for $9000 was included in the Motion.
When one person meets with injustice it renders invalid the entire system that dispensed it.
The mail today (November 7, 2005) shows a motion hand written asking for $121 per month for the client. That's $6 less than Karen's disabled senior client pays for the Respondent's double health insurance each month. Health insurance he doesn't want or need. Karen refused to address the medical insurance. He canceled her client's health insurance who was having spinal surgery.
The client would gain more by the changing the agreement so that the client would not be required to continue to pay for double health insurance for the Respondent. Karen advised against that earlier even though the Respondent's attorney Roger Hahn and the respondent, Robert Wooliscroft, had agreed that her client did not have to continue to pay for the medical insurance.
The Petitioner will be requesting full medical coverage equal to the coverage lost when the Respondent canceled the COBRA option (while being treated for a serious spinal injury with an upcoming fusion surgery). .
The Income and Expense declaration completed by the client is detailed and accurate. The attorney, Karen Ehler, did not use the Income and Expense Declaration and instead made up numbers on the fly that were wrong, or incomplete. No expenses were included, about six line items.
"this is done all the time"
~Karen Ehler
Maybe you do that Karen, but I hired an attorney who uses an office, a typewriter or a computer or a phone and one who does not use the court waiting room to prepare documents within earshot and sight of the other party.
We already did the mediation thing. That's over. Rob couldn't agree to the sweetheart deal offered. It was a one-day offer to get the divorce over with. No taking of each others retirements, spousal support of $800 for one year just to help cover the medical. But, the Respondent wanted his own verbiage added. Not the verbiage of an attorney/mediator. Mediation ended that day.
This client expected an attorney that meets with the client or phones or uses some means to communicate with the client. In private. Also, we specifically requested no contact with Roger Hahn. If that could not be done then the client should have been informed so that she could find an attorney who would agree to not consult with Roger Hahn. Roger Hahn is famous or infamous for the Reggie Hicks Child Molestation case and Karen Ehler's client (me) wanted no contact with Roger Hahn. None.
Karen Ehler prepared a motion that her
client didn't ask for and didn't want.
It made no sense, it makes no sense.
$121
While attorney Karen Ehler may think that her tone of voice is acceptable, I do not. Not in the court waiting room. My impression is that it is not appropriate or conducive to a good attorney/client relationship. I'm a fifty-something-year-old woman. If you want to speak in that tone of voice don't do it on my dime. Don't do it in front of my husband and his attorney in the waiting room. The conduct and accusations from Karen Ehler are not acceptable in any situation. She apparently believed in his fantasy world.
All of the documents appeared to be for the benefit of the Respondent and the Petitioner had no clue what was going on. Oddly, it had been the Petitioner's attorney Karen Ehler who initiated the motion for $121 per month instead of the original $800 per month that was agreed upon in July.
Huh? We went to court for $121 per month while in the meantime the client was been losing $127 a month in medical insurance that the spouse agreed to stop. The medical coverage my attorney said not to stop even though his attorney and told her that the spouse (Respondent) didn't need double coverage and that it was fine to cancel it.
Who goes to court for $121? This is a man who made over $500,000 last year. What was attorney Karen Ehler thinking? The Respondent offered $800 per month. Was all of the sidetracked agenda added because she the attorney realized what she had just done to her client?
Huh, again.
Karen Ehler was a mistake. That just should not have happened. None of it, most importantly, to have one's attorney file for "temporary" custody of her home. That implies that it is not her permanent home and gives ideas to the Respondent . Gee, thanks Karen. Maybe you and Roger Hahn can do lunch now. The Respondent already agree to sign a Quit Claim Deed. His home went into foreclosure long ago.
"Fed EX would be too cumbersome"
Karen Ehler, Esq.
Woodland, California
Ms. Ehler showed up for court unprepared and did not send her client an agenda on time because "Fed EX would be too cumbersome" as she had previously said. Karen Ehler called her client, Michelle Goodrich, the day before the November 3, 2005, Court date for verification of meeting at the courthouse, but Ms. Ehler did not mention that the agenda had changed.
Because Karen Ehler, did not send the documents for review in advance, the Petitioner (that's me), was ambushed. The other three parties were prepared. Karen Ehler (attorney for Petitioner) , Roger Hahn (Attorney for Respondent ) , and Robert Wooliscroft (Respondent ) all knew the agenda. Karen Ehler disciplined her client for not having adequate vision correction to read the handwritten notes.
I was ambushed by my own attorney.
I owned my retirement home and had permanent custody of my home.
Karen Ehler managed to get "temporary custody" of my home.
My home.
Huh?
There are custody issues about my home?
Since when? I bought it before we married.
Huh? Whose side is Karen Ehler on? I thought she worked for me...
That should have been a Quit Claim Deed.
I am, and have always been, solely responsible for
all of my retirement home purchased before marriage.
The homeowner expenses - taxes (took out a loan, just have to deposit the check),
gardener, housekeeper, maintenance, utilities, etc. have always been mine.
This difference now is that Karen Ehler just asked for
"temporary" custody of my own home.
Update: November 8, 2005
The Quit Claim Deed does not appear to be
online in the Yolo County Forms but may
be online in the State Government forms.
For now the $8.95QuitClaim Deed form
can be downloaded.
When one person meets with injustice it renders invalid the entire system that dispensed it.
Somebody said something like that once...
Gee thanks attorney. With attorneys like you I don't need any enemies or ex-husbands. Even he (spouse) could see that I had been ambushed and acknowledged the situation. He could see what my attorney - Karen Ehler - had done. And, he knows me well enough to know that I would not have been there in person for that Motion due to poor health, and would never initiate such a Motion intentionally or let an attorney trick me into showing up.
Thanks to Karen Ehler I now have "temporary" custody of the home that I bought before marriage had permanent custody of - my home.
His home went into foreclosure long ago.
Now I have to get an attorney to undo what this attorney Karen Ehler just did.
This Motion was a giant step backwards.
I assumed that my attorney would help me get some basic household items like the vacuum cleaner, a TV, cell phone, normal household items. If she had no plan to get anything back (yes, he even took the handicap placard as "community property") then it seems she should have mentioned that early on. Instead, she wrote a lengthy note on why I should be able to afford to buy things like a cell phone service. How? My income was reduced by more than 90%. I am not mobile, use taxis for transportation, and couldn't afford adequate medical supplies. We didn't even afford the luxury of separate cell phones when we were together with two incomes, and suddenly during a divorce I can afford a cell phone? I can't even pay the medical bills.
In-home Medical
Ms. Ehler had no comprehension of the medical situation
and thought her client
had returned to work full time. Huh? How? There was never any
prognosis for being able to return to work full time.
The spinal fusion was successful but no surgery can
be that successful. More spinal surgeries are anticipated.
In-home support was required and that was $25 per hour post-surgery. Karen Ehler still thought that I should be able to afford to replace the household items taken and pay for proper medical care. There just wasn't that kind of money available. I have no idea what she was using for calculations. My retirement home was in tax foreclosure and I was confined to bed for the most part. That is how he left me. In bed. No nurse. No in-home care.
The Yolo County Bar Association is a California State Bar approved provider of Minimum Continuing Legal Education programs and the program is approved for 1 hour of MCLE credit. The Yolo County Bar Association (YCBA) Newsletter appears to be current.
The Yolo Courts Web Site has a link to the Yolo Courts Calendar.
Yolo County Family Law Forms Note: The Stipulation and Order on Order to Show Cause/Notice of Motion is one form listed in Family Law Forms. No filing fee required.
Superior Court of California - Yolo County - Request to Calendar Form
51103 830 DP11 GOODRICH VS. WOOLISCROFT CVFL5958 MOTION* MOTION FOR SUPPORT
Today it contains the calendar for the GOODRICH VS. WOOLISCROFT motion on November 3, 2005
Yolo County Superior Court 725 Court Street #103 Woodland, California 95695
The letter sent is handwritten (printer not working).
was filed by Karen Ehler, the Petitioner's attorney.
Today I can see what I signed.
It says "we have read the entire foregoing stipulation..."
That is not true and I still thought until today
that the motion was for replacement of the
$9000 check.
What I received today does not resemble in any way what thought (sic) we were going to court for.
And since the court calendar page may disappear here it is in its entirety (read the source code).
Official Calendar Superior Court of the State of California County of Yolo Department 11 November 03, 2005 Date Time Dept Name Case# Hearing Type Defense Atty Comments 51103 830 DP11 BARRY HINESLEY ET, AL VS. OAKSH CVCV991491 MOTION* WATSON, KHACHADOURIAN, RE & KR TAX COSTS 51103 830 DP11 BUCCOLA VS. CALIFO, RNIA SHINGLE CVCV31188 MTN FOR SUM JDG/ADJ CODYKEVIN MOTION SUMMARY JDG 51103 830 DP11 BUCCOLA VS. CALIFO, RNIA SHINGLE CVCV31188 MTN FOR SUM JDG/ADJ CODYKEVIN 51103 830 DP11 DEROSA VS. FISHER, ET AL CVCV42080 MOTION* DEFAULT HEARING 51103 830 DP11 ESTATE OF MABRY, CVPB5208 PETN* TFR COMMUNITY PROPERTY 51103 830 DP11 GIBSON VS. GOBSON, CVF35943 REVIEW PRO PER RTN ON LONG TERM 51103 830 DP11 GOODRICH VS. WOOLISCROFT CVFL5958 MOTION* MOTION FOR SUPPORT 51103 830 DP11 GUARDIANSHIP OF DA, YTON CVPG5151 PETN* GUARDIANSHIP PETITION 51103 830 DP11 IVERSON VS. IVERSO, N CVFL5741 MOTION* PRO PER CUSTODY/VISITATION 51103 830 DP11 LIBERTY MUTUAL VS., MORRIS CVG32366 MOTION* SET ASIDE/VACATE JUDG 51103 830 DP11 MATTER OF GRIFFIN, TRUST CVP25216 PETN* FOR INSTRUCTIONS 51103 830 DP11 MATTER OF KENNETH, MARSHALL CVPB98189 ACCT AND REPORT SECOND 51103 830 DP11 MOLD SOLUTIONS VS., YEE CVCV41035 MOTION* WILKE, FLEURY, HOFFELT, GOULD MOTION TO COMPELL 51103 830 DP11 MORALES VS. JORRIN, CVF351479 OSC* 51103 830 DP11 STIMSON VS. NALDRE, TT CVFL31964 REVIEW 51103 830 DP11 TURNER VS. REGENTS, OF THE UNIV CVCV3391 MOTION* PORTER, SCOTT, WEIBERG, ETC ENTRY OF JUDGMENT 51103 830 DP11 WOLTMON VS. WOLTMO, N CVFL51498 MOTION* VISITATION 51103 1330 DP11 PRIEDITIS VS. CHAN, G CVFL41096 COURT TRIAL COURT TRIAL
Karen Ehler, the client attorney, said it would be hard to prove that the respondent withdrew over $20,000 from the checking account the day the divorce was filed.
...
WITHDRAWAL MADE IN A BRANCH/STORE $2,008.00 $25,755.52
WITHDRAWAL MADE IN A BRANCH/STORE $21,000.00 $4,755.52
WITHDRAWAL MADE IN A BRANCH/STORE $1,000.00 $3,755.52
NATL TOBACCO PAYROLL 0426 369C4T WOOLISCROFT,ROBERT $280.52 + $4,036.04
BILL PAY Robin Wooliscroft RECURRING ON 11-26 $900.00
etc. etc. etc.
It's easy Karen. I keep copies online of our bank statements, especially this one that shows the $21,000 cash withdrawals and more. It is clear that Robert Wooliscroft made the cash withdrawals. It isn't clear that Roy Wooliscroft - Rob's Father - demanded more than the initial $20,000 or that Jeffrey Fields came to my home with my husband to collect the $60,000 check or that Rob identified the man who came to my home with him to collect the $60,000 as "hired protection". But the checks and withdrawals are right there on the computer screen in front of you. You don't even need a password.
The $60,000 check? Of course I have a copy. Online and hardcopy.
The $9,000 check? Of course I have a copy. Online and hardcopy.
Proof? What more proof could there be?
...
WITHDRAWAL MADE IN A BRANCH/STORE $2,008.00 $25,755.52
WITHDRAWAL MADE IN A BRANCH/STORE $21,000.00 $4,755.52
WITHDRAWAL MADE IN A BRANCH/STORE $1,000.00 $3,755.52
NATL TOBACCO PAYROLL 0426 369C4T WOOLISCROFT,ROBERT $280.52 + $4,036.04
BILL PAY Robin Wooliscroft RECURRING ON 11-26 $900.00
etc. etc. etc.
There was a time that I thought this was all trivial, but the truth is that I will never get over the accusations made by Karen Ehler. The mysterious gifts and all the rest. Did they vaporize? I never got to see the mystery gifts. Karen Ehler alone decided that Rob had won the email wars and that the judge would not care about getting my $60,000 or the $9,000 check back.
This man, my husband, destroyed not just my job, but my career by accusations of professional integrity breach. In my profession we are held to the highest level of integrity. Any judge would see the inequity.
Husband destroys wife's career, wife sends an email to the football pool.
I showed up to get a freeze on the bank accounts and to get the money back - $69,000. But Karen Ehler wanted to talk about emails that had little to do with the money. Email? Isn't this a dissolution? He came to my home with his "hired protection" and made me write a $60,000 check, put a stop-payment on the $9000 check and my attorney, Karen Ehler, wants to discuss emails? His emails? My emails? Who cares? My character, career, and sense of safety was destroyed by this man who makes me live in total fear. Afraid of spinal surgery because he threatens with his "hired protection".
Then she glorified the Respondent's job of selling cigarettes saying he had "colleagues". Cigarette sales people are cigarette sales people. He didn't have colleagues, it was a football pool. Roger. Hahn or Rob made up the euphemism - "colleagues" for the cigarette sales job.
I have colleagues, Karen may have colleagues, and Roger may have colleagues. We are all professionals. My husband Rob Wooliscroft is a simple man who sells cigarettes for a living. He didn't have colleagues until Roger Hahn and Karen Ehler said he did. And he didn't go to the Ivy League college, and he didn't get a Baseball Scholarship, and whatever else went on in his fantasy world.
My attorney, Karen Ehler, never discussed the email wars with me outside of that environment and sent something that said her documents were accessibility standard as required by the court. Not true. Karen Ehler's handwriting is not legible with perfect vision. The court documents (preprinted in normal font sizes) are readable but I hired an attorney to fill in the blanks. I assumed she would use a computer or at least a typewriter, not illegible handwriting. I was in very poor health, not able to work and still had to pay health insurance for my spouse that was more than Karen Ehler asked the court for him to pay me. $121 per month? Not even enough for me to pay his required medical insurance while I was too sick to work, drive, or go to all of the medical appointments for lack of money. He canceled my medical insurance but according to Karen Ehler I still had to pay his, so I guess the $121 she was asking for was to help me pay his medical insurance. A perfectly healthy man in his 40's. Strong.
State workers were not in the disability program and NDI pays $19 per day. She (attorney Karen Ehler) did nothing to help me. Nothing. She added stress and even my spouse (Respondent) cried when he saw what she did to me in that waiting room. He is a heartless Con but actually seeing what he did was difficult for him. He knows that I can not read documents without magnification, he knew he had lied, he knew Karen Ehler was falling for it. All of it.
Rob Wooliscroft and Roger Hahn played her and knew she had fallen for the accusatory communications diversions and was paying no attention to the money being sucked out. He intended for Karen Ehler to fall for some of it. Not all of it. She did. "Hook, line, and sinker".
The money was gone by the time she advised her client (me) to
"don't do that. Don't give him any more money".Duh. There is no money left Karen. That was my life savings. When two men come to your home to collect money while you are in a wheelchair and they wait while you make the bank transfer and promise to not bother you again then you do what has to be done. What Karen Ehler was saying was like saying "don't let that man hold a gun to your head".
Rob Wooliscroft (now Respondent) played Roger Hahn too. They both fell for it. Maybe. Roger Hahn knew how the client had been devious not letting his wife know a divorce was in progress while he lived in the home and refused to help pay bills. He knew his client's health and medical liability was the intent of the dissolution. Every day this man who had a divorce filed said to the wife that they had the "perfect marriage". He had to sneak out and file for a secret divorce so that people wouldn't know he was abandoning his spinal injured wife. He canceled her medical insurance and Karen Ehler made no attempt to get that back.
Roger Hahn knew the situation. What Rob Wooliscroft and Roger Hahn did should be against the law. Divorce papers were never served and the wife had no idea what was going on.
Money.
The husband and his attorney Roger Hahn were able to keep the divorce a secret. My beloved husband had a secret divorce in the works while we lived together in harmony.. No hints. He had received $500,000 and wasn't contributing to the household but the relationship was still being presented as a "perfect couple" in the "perfect marriage" to the wife and everyone else (except one relative, his step-daughter knew). She also knew about the gun.
I had never seen him (my husband) get teary-eyed before. He's a Con but he didn't expect Karen Ehler to fall for all of it. She did. She was incredibly naive and spoke of phantom gifts that were never identified. None of what she did or said was making sense. She was conned with his diversion techniques. He kept her focused on emails, gifts, and what might be minor distractions for the naive, but not the focus by anyone. Karen Ehler had tunnel vision. She could only see accusations against her client, accusations she believed. She never asked for the truth.
Karen Ehler refused to return her clients phone calls and then ambushed her own client in the court waiting room. She showed up unprepared and had accusations that were ridiculous, not even worth defending or explaining. She had fallen for all the usual tricks of the con man. Different wife, same tricks. After wife #3 he had perfected the con and learned to manipulate common folks and now a naive attorney. Roger Hahn was blocking the handicap exit so I couldn't leave. There was obviously no reason for me to be there.
Karen Ehler asked the court to lower her clients monthly payments from the agreed upon $800 per month to $127 per month. This is from a man who made over $500,000 the year before and was withdrawing amounts (according to the bank statements) of up to $21,000 cash at a time. Why did Karen Ehler do that? Lower the mere $800 to $127? Nobody knew. Especially me. The medical bills were more than the $800. It would make sense that the judge might want to let the spouse leaving his wife due to a spinal injury pay 1/2 of the medical bills. Or 1/4? Instead I got stuck with continuing to pay for his medical insurance (yes, his medical insurance after he canceled mine) and every other bill. He did not take one bill with him when he left. I was left suddenly, in bed unable to work and the monthly bills all came to me. I needed an attorney to help. I had to continue to pay his auto insurance, his medical insurance, every other bill. No exceptions. He was a few months behind on every bill including his rent.
After that we (petitioner and respondent) together decided on mediation. My health was still going downhill. It is April 2006 now and I am back to work 1/2 time, but the physical pain is still intense and I am still heavily medicated at all times. The medical doctors recommended disability retirement.
Karen Ehler made ridiculous accusations, accusations she had typed but wouldn't put her name on. Accusations that were not included in the file she handed over. She called his coworkers his "colleagues" to glorify his occupation of selling cigarettes and misunderstood the email to the 3-year-old-football-pool to be to his "colleagues". Right Karen. Maybe you have "colleagues" and no football pool. Whatever. The Quit Claim Deed takes about 15 minutes. Done. Instead Karen Ehler asked the court for "temporary custody" of my home. He wouldn't try to take my home. Sure, Karen Ehler said he would because Roger said it. Whatever. He never did try to take my home. That was between Karen and Roger. He couldn't leave me in bed sick and homeless. No judge would agree to that.
I hired an attorney but got a gossip. A nut case. An attorney who scribbles. No thank you. If you don't have staff to type your documents then get another job or hire more staff. My attorney never once returned a phone call. Not once. But, she complained when I emailed. I was paying her by the hour and have no idea why she never returned a phone call. Her assistant Pat was the only person I got to talk to and she didn't read the tax forms correctly. She gave various legal advice. That is not the gross wage. But, she isn't paid to understand the difference, the attorney is.
Karen Ehler didn't hire a forensic accountant or make any attempt to find the $400,000. I did all of that myself when it became obvious that Karen didn't have a clue. She said the accounts would be easy to track. Karen thought I was confusing that account with the Profit Sharing/401K Account that I've been managing for the last nine years? Huh? Nobody is that stupid.
How? The PI never found the money and neither did anyone else. They did want to know if Karen Ehler ever found them to let them know how she did it. They have access to everything legal and not-so-legal. They couldn't trace it. They remarked that he, Robert Wooliscroft, was the most difficult person they had found to trace. He leaves no marks. All of the bills were in my name. Not one in his.
He has a previous history of "identity theft", meaning that he claimed his identity had been stolen. That may be true. Not likely.
We do know that Mark was using Cayman Islands as a residence and that's likely where the money was even though when they (PI) first suggested that it might be offshore I said "he's not that sophisticated". Mark was that sophisticated, Rob didn't have to be.
You don't have to be sophisticated. When they hire workers at these bottom-feeder places they do all of that for you (or so Robert Wooliscroft claimed). They show you how to establish residency in the Cayman Islands and pay less in taxes. I didn't have a clue. Karen Ehler didn't have a clue. She thought she could find our money using her magic wand and his social security number? He isn't that stupid. I'm not that stupid. There's no way it would be under his SSN. No way. He's not sophisticated but he isn't stupid either, or not that stupid. Even I'm not that stupid...you don't hide money using your own SSN.
I gave up on finding the money. He needed time and Karen Ehler's stall gave him plenty of time to get rid of the money. That (the money) was never as important as keeping my home. He's not a good guy but he wasn't going to take all of the money and my home, the retirement home I purchased before marriage. He can be mean, even cruel, but not cruel enough to leave me homeless in poor health. He is also smart enough to know the consequences of trying to take my home.
It was nearly worth the experience, just to see how attorneys can screw up a perfect agreement and make a big deal out of little email diversions about buying his Clinique facial wash. Karen Ehler unilaterally decided to not even ask her client about these communications or events. She couldn't make sense of them because her one-sided story from Roger Hahn was just that. Rob Wooliscroft's excuses. She did not ask for my input or why an email went to the football pool.
I kept Karen on until that little retainer was gone but in the meantime hired people who are trained to do what she said she could do but wasn't doing. She's a flake of an attorney and at the time I personally considered her to be a "nut case". This wasn't her first rodeo. She should have known what Roger Hahn and Robert Wooliscroft were doing. Instead she fell for their wild stories. She complained to me that Roger Hahn had staff to type his work. Gee thanks. Roger charges the same as Karen and she complains to her client that she does not have adequate staff?
I later got to see all of the communications between the Respondent and his attorney. There was none of that with Karen Ehler. Phone calls were never returned. Not once. There was no communication. Karen Ehler thought her client had returned to work full time shortly after a spinal fusion. She was clueless. If there is ever a return to work it would be only part time, perhaps as a retired annuitant. Her client was determined to be permanently physically disabled several years before the surgery. Technology may allow the six-disk fusion someday, but that isn't likely. The Respondent left on the planned retirement date. A disability retirement. He did not expect his wife to ever get better. He was divorcing a medical liability. He filed for divorce on his wife's birthday, the date of planned disability retirement. The wife would not find out for some time. The Respondent and his attorney Roger Hahn kept the divorce a secret while the Respondent let his wife pay all the bills and ...well, until the money was no longer an issue. He stopped helping with bills and let the home go into tax foreclosure. All of it hidden from the unsuspecting wife. He withdrew large amounts of cash. And Ms. Ehler offered no solution or even to help get the household items back. Nothing. She wrote a few paragraphs on how her client should be able to afford a cell phone. She had never had her own cell phone, they shared the one. But, now that she was single and confined to bed she was supposed to be able to suddenly afford a cell phone like the rest of the world. That wasn't her world. The Respondent got the cell phone. The Respondent got the vacuum cleaner. The Respondent got whatever he wanted. Ms. Ehler never offered help of any kind. She asked the court for $121 per month "emergency" money. That stopped the agreed upon $800. The respondent now paid $121 per month, an amount equal to about a week of medical bills.
That shouldn't have happened. Not to anyone. Ever.