91-Year-Old Man Raised Money to Prevent Eviction by Daughter

A 91-year-old man wants to stop his daughter from evicting him from the home he built 56 years ago in Zaleski, Ohio, a small community south of Columbus.
 

In 2004, John Potter and his wife, who has since died, gave the general power of attorney to his daughter for future matters if they declined in health, including to take care of her autistic adult brother, now 63.

But unbeknownst to Potter, his daughter Janice Cottrill eventually used that power to convey the deed to the one-story home to herself. In 2010, Potter said he learned of the deed transfer and switched power of attorney to his granddaughter, Jaclyn Fraley, now 35.

Potter, a World War II veteran and retired train dispatcher for the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, sued to get the home back, arguing that his daughter had transferred the deed to herself illegally because those with the power of attorney are not permitted to transfer assets to themselves from the estate they oversee.

Potter won in Vinton County Court, but an appeals court ruled last year that the statute of limitations of four years had passed on the accusation of fraud and thus the deed could not be handed back to Potter.

Early this year, his daughter and her husband sent Potter an eviction notice, saying they had terminated his “existing lease.” An eviction hearing will take place on June 12, during which the judge will have no choice but to evict Potter, Fraley told ABC News.

When asked how he feels about being evicted by his daughter and son-in-law, Potter was at a loss for words.

“I just cannot believe my daughter would ever do anything like that to me,” he said.

Full Article and Source:
91-Year-Old Man Raised Money to Prevent Eviction by Daughter

Advertisements

5 Responses to “91-Year-Old Man Raised Money to Prevent Eviction by Daughter”

  1. Anonymous Says:

    Is is not so. Fraud has no statute of limitation….See federal stratutes http://www.Fraud and Fraud on the courts.

  2. Thelma Says:

    True – statutes of limitation are tolled when fraud is proven.

  3. Betty Says:

    There is no worse betrayal than when a child betrays a parent.

  4. tvfields Says:

    This is another example of why no one with evidence of being harmed by another should be barred by statutes of limitation.Meanwhile, "fraud upon the courts" has a very specific, narrowly interpreted meaning. Most frauds do not constitute such fraud. And even if you a victim of such fraud, as I was, you are likely looking for it to be recognized by judges who are going to ignore it …

  5. David Says:

    I agree with you tvfields on the statute of limitation issue.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: