475.062. Procedures for petition for appointment of conservator. — 1. When a petition for appointment of a conservator of the estate of an alleged disabled person is not made or consented to by said alleged disabled person, the procedures as to notice, appointment of counsel, hearing and adjudication of disability as prescribed by section 475.075 shall be followed.
2. If a petition for appointment of a conservator is made by a person on account of that person's alleged disability or is made by another on behalf of that person with that person's consent endorsed on the petition or filed therewith, the court shall first appoint an attorney for that person. The court-appointed attorney shall advise the respondent of the respondent's rights and of the consequences of the appointment of the conservator.
3. If the court determines that the disability exists and the respondent desires the appointment, understands its purpose, and makes a reasonable choice of conservator, the court may, without notice or hearing, appoint the person, organization, or corporation designated by the respondent as conservator of the respondent's estate, provided that the conservator is suitable and qualified and has accepted or will accept the appointment.
4. If it appears that the respondent is a co-depositor or co-tenant, the other co-depositors and co-tenants shall, in any event, be given notice before the court acts.
5. If the whereabouts of a person alleged to be disappeared or detained pursuant to section 475.081 is unknown or the place or nature of his confinement or detention prevents personal service, service shall be made on him by publication in accordance with the rules of civil procedure.
Notes of Decisions
Matter of Est. of Potashnick, 841 S.W.2d 714 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 6× “Appellants raise four issues on appeal: (1) whether the trial court erred in finding Potashnick disabled; (2) whether § 475.062 violates their due process rights; (3) whether they are entitled to intervention as a matter of right; and (4) whether venue was proper in Cape…”
Matter of Weissinger, 720 S.W.2d 430 (Mo. Ct. App. 1986).
“050, but by § 475.062, which provides that when the alleged disabled person consents to the appointment sought in the petition, the court, after appointment of counsel for the alleged disabled person, if satisfied, by interview with the alleged disabled person or otherwise, that…”
Est. of L.G.T. v. N.R., 442 S.W.3d 96 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “062, when a petition for the appointment of a guardian ad litem, guardian or conservator against any person, hereinafter referred to as the respondent, is filed on grounds other than minority, the court, if satisfied that there is good cause for the exercise of its jurisdiction,…”
Fulton v. Walker, 863 S.W.2d 931 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993).
“If a person consents to a conservator pursuant to § 475.062 and the trial court concludes that the person “has capacity to understand the need for it and make a reasonable choice of conservator and that the person nominated as conservator is suitable, qualified and has or will…”
Werner v. Wright, 737 S.W.2d 761 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987).
“Appellant asserts two points of error which conjunctively argue the same proposition, that the court lacked jurisdiction to appoint respondent conservator of the incompetent’s property because the order was made without notice to the incompetent, or anyone acting on her behalf,…”
Est. of L.G.T. v. N.R., 442 S.W.3d 96 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “062, when a petition for the appointment of a guardian ad litem, guardian or conservator against any person, hereinafter referred to as the respondent, is filed on grounds other than minority, the court, if satisfied that there is good cause for the exercise of its jurisdiction,…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.