Trending...
- Continuous You Foundation Announces Partnership with Haawke Neural Technology
- Amaris Mint® Confirms UK Availability of Swedish-Made BioBoost Daily Nutrition Range
- Tacoma: Applicants Sought for the Board of Ethics
Will Nevada's Highest Court Confront Corruption—Or Allow It to Continue?
LAS VEGAS - Washingtoner -- Source: The Verity Project
Karina Singer, a pro se appellant and daughter of the late Steven J. Singer, is awaiting a critical ruling from the Nevada Supreme Court after filing extensive, unrebutted evidence of fiduciary misconduct, elder financial abuse, and judicial irregularities in her father's trust and estate case.
The appeal—Case No. 89171—was originally retained by the Supreme Court for over eight months before being suddenly transferred to the Nevada Court of Appeals just days after Singer formally requested summary disposition, citing NRAP 31(d), and presenting direct evidence of court record tampering, elder exploitation, and constitutional due process violations.
Despite following every procedural rule available to self-represented litigants—including the Court's own Informal Brief Form, which lacks a section for a routing statement—the transfer was carried out without addressing any of the pending dispositive motions or the substantial evidence submitted into the record, some of which includes:
Singer has since filed an Emergency Motion to Recall Transfer and Retain Jurisdiction, along with a Supplement and Renewed Request for Summary Disposition or Evidentiary Hearing, refuting every baseless argument in the Respondents' opposition. All motions are currently before a panel of three Supreme Court Justices, Patricia Lee, Linda Bell, and Douglas Herndon.
More on Washingtoner
"The law is not in question. The facts are not in dispute," said Singer. "If the Nevada Supreme Court fails to apply the law and address the uncontested evidence already in the record, it exposes both the Court and the State of Nevada to federal intervention, civil rights litigation, and a potential RICO action for coordinated misconduct involving trustees, attorneys, and judicial officers. This is no longer just about my father; it's about a systemic breakdown that cannot be ignored."
The Court has everything it needs to act. The real question is: Will the Nevada Supreme Court stand for truth and justice under controlling law and binding precedent; or sacrifice its legitimacy, trigger federal scrutiny, and lose the trust of the people it was created to protect?
Singer's filings argue that the transfer violated the Nevada Rules of Appellate Procedure and, if not reversed, would leave constitutional violations unaddressed and incentivize further abuse within Nevada's probate and guardianship courts. She asserts that the Supreme Court has a mandatory, non-waivable obligation under NRAP 17(a)(9)–(11) to retain jurisdiction over appeals involving judicial misconduct, systemic due process failures, issues of first impression, and matters of statewide public concern. Singer requests that the Court recall the transfer, retain jurisdiction, and summarily rule in her favor under NRAP 31(d), citing the complete absence of an answering brief and any disputed facts in the record. She further urges the Court to grant en banc review, hold responsible parties accountable, and issue a published decision that restores public trust by acknowledging and correcting the serious legal errors committed in the lower court.
More on Washingtoner
As Nevada watches, the decision in The Matter of Steven J. Singer Trust & Estate - Singer v. Boekankamp could set a precedent for how the state's highest court handles self-represented litigants, judicial accountability, and the integrity of trust and estate proceedings.
Karina Singer, a pro se appellant and daughter of the late Steven J. Singer, is awaiting a critical ruling from the Nevada Supreme Court after filing extensive, unrebutted evidence of fiduciary misconduct, elder financial abuse, and judicial irregularities in her father's trust and estate case.
The appeal—Case No. 89171—was originally retained by the Supreme Court for over eight months before being suddenly transferred to the Nevada Court of Appeals just days after Singer formally requested summary disposition, citing NRAP 31(d), and presenting direct evidence of court record tampering, elder exploitation, and constitutional due process violations.
Despite following every procedural rule available to self-represented litigants—including the Court's own Informal Brief Form, which lacks a section for a routing statement—the transfer was carried out without addressing any of the pending dispositive motions or the substantial evidence submitted into the record, some of which includes:
- Forged financial account documents and unopposed motions for trustee removal, accounting, criminal fraud, and elder abuse.
- Allegations of perjury and false police reports by opposing parties,
- Tampering with electronic court service systems and docket manipulation,
- Improper distribution of over $1 million in trust assets in direct violation of the trust's provisions.
Singer has since filed an Emergency Motion to Recall Transfer and Retain Jurisdiction, along with a Supplement and Renewed Request for Summary Disposition or Evidentiary Hearing, refuting every baseless argument in the Respondents' opposition. All motions are currently before a panel of three Supreme Court Justices, Patricia Lee, Linda Bell, and Douglas Herndon.
More on Washingtoner
- Baird Medical Turns Global Expansion Into Tangible Growth: N A S D A Q: BDMD Posts 25% Revenue Surge as U.S. and International Markets Accelerate
- City of Spokane Launches 'Emergency Streets' Pilot Program
- Spokane: City Seeks Feedback on Future Land Use Map
- Shelter Structures America makes European debut at TEMPOR EXPO 2026 in Fulda, Germany
- Longevity Academy Announces J.P. Medved of Longevity Advice as Next Guest in the Longevity Leaders
"The law is not in question. The facts are not in dispute," said Singer. "If the Nevada Supreme Court fails to apply the law and address the uncontested evidence already in the record, it exposes both the Court and the State of Nevada to federal intervention, civil rights litigation, and a potential RICO action for coordinated misconduct involving trustees, attorneys, and judicial officers. This is no longer just about my father; it's about a systemic breakdown that cannot be ignored."
The Court has everything it needs to act. The real question is: Will the Nevada Supreme Court stand for truth and justice under controlling law and binding precedent; or sacrifice its legitimacy, trigger federal scrutiny, and lose the trust of the people it was created to protect?
Singer's filings argue that the transfer violated the Nevada Rules of Appellate Procedure and, if not reversed, would leave constitutional violations unaddressed and incentivize further abuse within Nevada's probate and guardianship courts. She asserts that the Supreme Court has a mandatory, non-waivable obligation under NRAP 17(a)(9)–(11) to retain jurisdiction over appeals involving judicial misconduct, systemic due process failures, issues of first impression, and matters of statewide public concern. Singer requests that the Court recall the transfer, retain jurisdiction, and summarily rule in her favor under NRAP 31(d), citing the complete absence of an answering brief and any disputed facts in the record. She further urges the Court to grant en banc review, hold responsible parties accountable, and issue a published decision that restores public trust by acknowledging and correcting the serious legal errors committed in the lower court.
More on Washingtoner
- Medcurity Introduces a Better Way for Healthcare and Its Vendors to Build Trust
- Haven Treatment Center Now In-Network Partnership with Aetna, Expanding Access to Youth Health Care
- Applicants Sought for the Tacoma Arts Commission and the Tacoma Creates Advisory Board
- Spokane City Council Approves Emergency Tenant Protections
- HydroExcavation.com Relaunches With Exclusive Local Service Areas and Dedicated Hydrovac Manufacturer Directory
As Nevada watches, the decision in The Matter of Steven J. Singer Trust & Estate - Singer v. Boekankamp could set a precedent for how the state's highest court handles self-represented litigants, judicial accountability, and the integrity of trust and estate proceedings.
Source: The Verity Project
0 Comments
Latest on Washingtoner
- Tidy-Up Tacoma Teams Up with Community Partners for Citywide Cleanup Event September 19
- Lynnwood Heating LLC Helps Homeowners Take Advantage of 2026 Heat Pump Installation Rebates
- Tacoma: Applicants Sought for the Board of Ethics
- Tacoma: Applicants Sought for the Landmarks Preservation Commission
- Heritage at Manalapan Welcomes New Sales Team as Luxury Single-Family Home Community Continues to Grow
- Mandeville Pests May Pose Serious Health Risks for Your Family
- Tacoma: Arrest Made in 2021 Homicide
- Share your workplace safety solutions at 2027 Applied Ergonomics Conference
- Parents No Longer Have to Wait 3 Weeks for a Sleep Consultant: Nora Talks Tonight, Stays for 5 Days, Costs $89
- May The Worst Team Win! Loserball Kicks Off Another NFL Season of Hilarious Mayhem
- Black Women Living With, and Impacted by, HIV Express Gratitude, Grief, Joy, and Resilience
- MainConcept Easy Video API Extends Full Transcoding to Arm and NETINT VPUs
- Continuous You Foundation Announces Partnership with Haawke Neural Technology
- Metamora Events Brings New Interactive Event Experiences to Portland and Vancouver
- Cruxy shortlisted for two Private Equity Wire® US Awards 2026: Advisory Firm of the Year (Overall) & Value Creation Consulting Firm of the Year
- Lake Norman Philharmonic - Free Community Concert
- Amaris Mint® Confirms UK Availability of Swedish-Made BioBoost Daily Nutrition Range
- Sea Tales Strengthens U.S. Leadership Team as Retail Expansion Accelerates
- Spokane Police Officers Arrest "Grave Robber"
- Spokane: "Keep Kids Moving" – A Fund to Help Replace Recreation and Sports Gear
