Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

In Re Richard J. Fields

Paid petition


Certiorari denied · December 9, 2019
Pre-decision estimate: 0% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Question presented

This case relates to a 9 million dollar estate of a 96 year old blind man and his family which had three ' mental patients. Within one hour Judge Rita Mella in the New York County Surrogate’s Court gave all Sydney Fields’ estate to the nieces of his third wife (she predeceased him). After that all the appellate courts rejected my appeal. That is why I am here looking for justice. Below are questions raised in my Case. Thank you for your attention. (0 Should we ignore a forged initial because our law does not require an initial to make a Will valid? How about people falsifying a will by switching its pages? (ii) Should we allow lawyers to conceal a person’s psychiatric problem before accusing him and causing him a big loss? (Nine Million Dollars) (iii) Should we allow a judge to recognize a will-drafter’s affirmations rather than the decedents’ statements which were recorded on audiotape? (iv) Shouldn’t video and audiotapes be manda­ tory and required by law for Will drafters who provide service for blind people? Shouldn’t we at least require their Wills being read aloud in front of the witnesses?

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Richard J. Fields

For respondent
Jules Martin Haas
Jules Martin Haas, Esq.

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences

Proceedings

  1. Jan 27 2020
    Rehearing DENIED.
  2. Jan 08 2020
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/24/2020.
  3. Jan 02 2020
    Petition for Rehearing filed.
  4. Dec 09 2019
    Petition DENIED.
  5. Nov 13 2019
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/6/2019.
  6. Nov 08 2019
    Reply of petitioner In Re Richard J. Fields filed. (Distributed)
  7. Oct 28 2019
    Brief of respondent Diana Palmeri in opposition filed.
  8. Sep 20 2019
    Petition for a writ of mandamus filed. (Response due October 28, 2019)