Worthington v. Palmer et al
Filing
66
MEMORANDUM OPINION. READ Opinion for complete details. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 11/24/2015. (ccol, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COXJRT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
' ^
^
Richmond Division
!
NOV212015 Va
XAVIER WORTHINGTON,
I
i".'
"I-!MOI '0. VA
1 '•;
Plaintiff,
V.
Civil Action No.
ROSE PALMER,
BON
3:15cv410
ESQ.,
SECOURS -
ST.
MARY'S
HOSPITAL,
CASTLE REAL ESTATE, INC.,
BONITA WALLACE,
JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES,
MCGRATH & DANIELSON,
MOTORCYCLE LAW GROUP,
TWO UNKNOWN SIGNATORIES/
WITNESSES
GROUP
FROM MOTORCYCLE LAW
TO ALLEGED WILL OF
CLYDE H. SEGEAR,
SARAH BETH KEUKEN,
ELIZABETH C. MOOZ,
TARA A. CRISINATI,
DONSHEA SMITH,
ESQ.,
HENRICO COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
JUDGE I,
AND
HENRICO COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
JUDGE II,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the MOTION TO DISMISS of
Defendants
Motorcycle
Worthington
Motorcycle
J.
Thomas
Law
McGrath
Group,
Group
t/a
mistakenly
("Worthington")
Law
P.C.
as
("McGrath,
McGrath
named
by
McGrath
P.C."),
&
Danielson
Plaintiff
&
Sarah
Xavier
Danielson
K.
and
and
Rittenberry,
mistakenly
named
Worthington
by
("Keuken/Rittenberry"); Lindsey Norment,
one
of
"Two
Unknown
McGrath,
named
Keuken
Beth
named by Worthington as
Signatories/Witnesses
Group to Alleged Will of Clyde H.
Thomas
Sarah
as
from Motorcycle Law
Segear"
by Worthington
as
("Norment");
one
of
and J.
"Two
Unknown
Signatories/Witnesses from Motorcycle Law Group to Alleged Will
of
Clyde
H.
Segear"
Defendants")
MOTION
TO
DISMISS
(ECF
HOSPITAL,
No.
No.
TARA
7);
(ECF
DISMISS
(ECF
("McGrath")
13);
A.
(collectively,
DEFENDANT
No.
11) ;
DEFENDANT
DEFENDANTS
CRISINATI,
JEWISH
BON
FAMILY
MOTION
ST.
SMITH'S
MARY'S
MOTION
TO
(ECF No.
15); DEFENDANT ROSE PALMER, ESQ.'S MOTIONS TO DISMISS
(ECF Nos.
P.
(b) (1)
TO
(6)
DISMISS PURSUANT TO FED R.S CIV.
12
McGrath
SERVICES'
JUDGES'
SECOURS
DONSHEA
AND
"the
&
26,
27);
DEFENDANT ELIZABETH C.
MOOZ' S MOTION TO DISMISS
No.
35);
and CASTLE DEFENDANTS'
MOTION TO DISMISS
FED.
R.
CIV.
P.
12 (b) (1)
12 (b) (6)
&
(ECF No.
(ECF
PURSUANT TO
43).
For
the
reasons set forth herein, Defendants' motions will be granted.
I.
BACKGROUND
In
a
assertions
(sometimes
Complaint
and
that
short
is
on
self-identified
grandson of Clyde
H.
long
on
rhetoric
specificity,
as
Segear
"XW") ,
Xavier
who
( "Segear") ,
and
Worthington
claims
asserts
conclusory
to
a
the
variety of
claims against twelve named, and two unnamed, defendants.
2
be
Those
claims
arise
out
of
the
following
scenario,
recounted
from
paragraphs 16 through 38 of Worthington's Complaint (ECF No. 1).
The facts are recited as they are stated in the Complaint,
best
they
can be
sorted from
the
rather
rambling,
as
conclusory
text.
On or about March 26,
Mary's
Hospital
2013,
complaining
Segear entered Bon Secours-St.
"about
his
leg/foot."
While
hospitalized, Segear was evaluated on March 28 and April 2, 2013
by Dr. Durre Khan to determine whether Segear "had the capacity
to
make
decisions
for
that
Se gear
determined
himself
and
his
"retained
the
wife."
Dr.
Khan
capacity
to
make
decisions."
For
reasons
Complaint,
Circuit
in
and
under
circumstances
"April/May,
of
Court
2013,"
County,
Henrico
Bon
not
recited
in
the
filed,
in
the
Petition
for
Secours
Virginia,
a
Appointment of Guardian and Conservator for Segear.
that result,
(unnamed)
To secure
it is alleged that Bon Secours and its employees
administered
Prednisone
induce
to
symptoms
of
incapacity in Segear.
Mooz,
a
lawyer,
li tern for Segear.
incapacitated,"
was
appointed by Judge
I
as
guardian ad
Mooz interviewed Segear "to have him deemed
notwithstanding
awareness
evaluations made by Dr.
Khan.
manager at Bon Secours,
and Crisinati,
of
the
two
Mooz worked with Smith,
3
previous
a case
a nurse practitioner at
Bon Secours, to arrange a follow-up evaluation of Segear that,
for unarticulated reasons,
14,
2013,
after
Prednisone,
the
Crisinati
is alleged to be illegal.
date
on
prepared
which
an
Segear
had
evaluation
On June
received
reportedly
concluding that Segear "did not retain the capacity to make
decisions."
Palmer,
a
lawyer,
who was appointed by Judge
I
to be
Segear's "Guardian and Conservator," presented the Crisinati
report to Judge I "so that she could be appointed Guardian and
Conservator."
At the time that
Judge
I
held that Segear was
incapacitated and appointed Palmer, he allegedly knew that the
Petition and the diagnosis were false.
There are no facts
alleged to support that conclusory assertion.
Segear died on July 14, 2013, apparently leaving a will
that was authored by employees of the law firm McGrath,
P.O.,
and that was notarized by Keuken (whose correct name is Sarah
Rittenberry), an employee of McGrath, P.C.^
Jewish Family Services is
said to have
falsely claimed
"rights over [Segear's] bank accounts" and is alleged somehow to
have depleted them.
employees),
Castle Realty, Wallace (one of that firm's
and Palmer are
alleged
to
have
illegally
sold
^ Worthington pled that Keuken/Rittenberry is employed as a clerk
of court.
(Compl. SI 9).
There is no factual support for that
conclusion and Worthington no longer appears to take that view
of her employment.
Segear's properties and retained the profits from the sale.
No
facts are offered to support those conclusions.
According to the Complaint,
Palmer at one time represented
to the Circuit Court of the City of Richmond that Segear had
died
intestate. 2
It
is
apparently
Worthington rests his central thesis:
intestate
and
that,
under
the
on
that
ground
that
that Segear actually died
Virginia
law
of
intestate
succession, Worthington is entitled to "2/3 of Clyde H. Segear's
estate."
From this string of conclusory assertions, Worthington
tries to fashion several legal claims.
Worthington's
claims are
paragraph in his Complaint.
not
delineated by count,
In paragraph 4 0,
but by
he asserts that
Defendants deprived Worthington, Segear, and Segear's wife:
of their property and property rights by
accelerating and causing the death of Clyde
H. Segear, and generating a false diagnosis
of incapacity/dementia through the unlawful
use of Prednisone, to have Clyde H. Segear
declared incapacitated/demented, all under
color of state law and use of the courts of
Virginia, in violation of 42 U.S.C. Sec.
1983
and
the
First
and
Fourteenth
Amendments.
In addition,
paragraph 40 alleges that all defendants conspired
to achieve the alleged foregoing deprivation.
In paragraph
41,
Worthington alleges
that
the
defendants
deprived him:
2
That, says Worthington, occurred when Palmer filed an affidavit
in "Richmond Probate Court."
(Compl.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?