Slithering SMART seeking more MONEY

Do you know why the lady holding the scales of justice is blindfolded? – So, she won’t see all those lawyers making deals.

The following article is actual events that took place in a case in Meigs County Court of Common Pleas.  What does this article show for Americans and the justice system?  Justice is blind?  A person takes money and then proceeds to sign themselves to free programs with free lawyers.  The legal system is upholding these types of actions and in return, certain organizations receive more State and Federal Funding for these supporting offices.

The following actual case listed in Meigs Co Court of Common Pleas as CASE 13-CV-024 is shown as Elizabeth Bobo, Plaintiff and Carolyn Smart, defendant.  This is a clarification to March 19, 2014 paper submittes to the Court by Defendant Titled, ”Response to Plaintiff’s Filing and Reply”.  Any document related to this case can be accessed by going to Meigs County Clerk of Courts.  For clarification in this case and to help others,

Now, comes the Plaintiff, for the record, to clarify and unravel the misleading exposition of statements made by the defendant, statements which were made in this case by the defendant – Case 13-CV-024 in Meigs Court of Common Pleas.

For the record to be clear regarding case 13-CV-024, this action was not to include a previous case filed in Athens County by Carolyn Smart against her sister, M. Bobo.

1.  Carolyn Smart has certainly interposed and thrust that closed case in Athens into this case brought against her, for a contract she owes to the Plaintiff.

2.  Carolyn Smart’s counsel, legal aid attorney, Robin Bozian has also brought the previous Athens case forward by intertwining and allowing false statements on behalf of her client, Carolyn Smart, in counterclaims directly from that closed case and yet at the very same time, Bozian claims it has nothing to do with this case in the reply of defendants on March 19, 2014.  PROOF – The last paragraph from counsel Bozian’s, “Filing and Reply”, does open up that particular previous case in her own stated opinion but leaves out the pertinent information leading to the decision in that case.

3.  Carolyn Smart’s counterclaims in this case reverts back to the closed Athens Case including M. Bobo’s Name and Tying Her into Another Defamation, Libelous Statement Against Both the plaintiff and her mother, M. Bobo in this Meigs County Case against Smart.  Carolyn Smart’s deposition in the Athens case, proved Smart to be a liar then, as she is now by the facts. 

4.  Smart goes on to say – she gave the Plaintiff money.  FACTS – Smart took out a loan on her own property on Meigs County.  Records will and do prove that Smart took out the loan, on her own and deposited the amount, into her own bank account.  Again, false fraudulent statements made by Smart, makes no sense unless it would be to try and extort more money from the Bobo’s.

5.  Since Defendant in this case brings it forward, in the Athens case, Let’s review to make public.  The Athens Judge stated this regarding the Bobo’s concern, quoting “the women were concerned that when the Meigs Co. Jobs and Family Services discovered the Plaintiff’s fraud, it would seize their assets, too.  They were concerned that because their property was in their names as well as the Plaintiff’s, Meigs County Jobs & Family Services would attached their properties after if attached the Plaintiff’s.”   

6.  Christie Shane from Meigs Co Jobs & Family Services, testified that because Smart owned property with others and could not dispose of that without the others consent, this property could not be counted towards her income.  Christie Shane did a “spend down” so Smart could qualify even though she has a retirement income, medicare, approx. hundred acre farm and other income she receives from renting that farmland and what she received from selling timber.  Again, in Smart’s deposition, money she received from various sources plus the money loaned to her by the Bobo’s.  The Plaintiff in that case did not want to litigate any other claims due to her own damaging deposition which disclosed several things. 

To be more unambiguous regarding the mysterious decision of Meigs County Dept of Jobs & Family Services and their reasoning for that decision - 

A.  Christie Shane claimed she did a “spend down” for Smart.  Did Smart lie to get this.  Yes, if you count the information she did not disclose.  Christie Shane testified that the welfare department would not attach Bobo’s other properties because Smart could not sell then without their consent.

B.  Smart’s property has no mineral rights but she sold the timber.  Did she disclose this?  The IRS will have to deal with disclosures to them.

C.  Smart was going to give or sell off part of the back of the property to her nephew with a right of way leading from the road to the back of the property.  Smart was reminded by Bobo’s that she could not do this after she signed estate recovery for welfare.  She had mortgaged the property on her own and also receiving welfare.  She recanted and admitted, she didn’t know what she was thinking of at the time- she told her nephew she would.  Again, this is not speculation but Smart’s deposition.  There is no conspiracy, the deposition from the Athens County case proves this.  It is not a question to answer by Bobo, but by State Law, the property in question which the defendant brings up with regard to her own mortgage, belongs to the State and/or the right to dispose of the property when someone signs an estate recovery form.  In this case, what the welfare dept. has given is allegedly more than the property would sell for plus Smart’s mortgage, so, will justice prevail?  No conspiracy by the Plaintiff as defendant alleges, only deception and lies from the defendant, Carolyn Smart.  PROOF – Smart’s deposition in Athens Ohio conducted by Attorney Susan Gwinn and Attorney Robert Toy on September 22, 2011.

D.  So Far, so much for this case not having anything to do with the Athens case where she allegedly tried to extort money.  Smart is making allegations in this case directly referring to that case in Athens by especially naming M. Bobo in this case.  There are no misconceptions to make.  In this case, Meigs County, Smart names M. Bobo in her counterclaims making libelous accusations. 

7.  The Athens Judge states further regarding Bobo’s actions, “the defendant was intent on protecting herself from the Plaintiff’s alleged financial misconduct.”  It wasn’t the place of M. Bobo to protect Carolyn Smart from herself.”

No conspiracy by the Bobo’s as stated by the defendant, only self protection and trying to give justice the benefit of the doubt.  As a principal in a power of attorney is suppose to do, as in the Athens case, which showed Bobo safeguarded Smart as Bobo was delegated by Smart in 2001 to be a power of attorney until the Court decided Bobo did not have to put herself, Bobo, in a position of jeopardy because of the actions carried oiut by Smarr.  Again, there was no conspiracy found in that case as Smart has claimed a great conspiracy and is retrying conspiracy in this case.  Smart has clearly stated and slandered M. Bobo in this MEIGS County case.

Counterclaims are exactly that, “claims” -

In this case 13-CV-024 on paper submitted by defendant, Carolyn Smart, dated March 19, 2014 – The defendant states on page one, fourth paragraph, “as that action involved claims against M. Bobo, not the Plaintiff.”  Yet, in this case, defendant Smart pursues sneakingly and unethically making the claim, at several paragraphs in counterclaims, Smart states,

At paragraph No. 11, “the Plaintiff conspired with her mother…to deprive defendant…”

At paragraph No. 12, “the documents were then signed by M. Bobo”, “resulted in the deeding of the property into the Plaintiff’s mother, M. Bobo.  As resolved in the Athens case, Bobo reminded Smart of the estate recovery that Smart signed to get welfare.  The State was notified by Bobo long before the Athens case ever made it to an attorney or through the Court System.  Bobo does have the documents showing what State offices were notified, how and when, as well, the State offices have these records and transmittals.

This property referred to, must go to the State of Ohio by the State of Ohio’s own regulations, not to the Bobo’s, not to nephews or nephew’s wife as Smart’s personal will allegedly claims.

At paragraph No. 01, “at the request…and her mother, M. Bobo.” – How many times in this Meigs case, against Carolyn Smart, is the name of M. Bobo unethically and illegally mentioned?  An Athens case that was dismissed with prejudice.  A case that had a deposition of Carolyn Smart showing Smart’s deceit and lies.  The deposition of Bobo and the deposition of Carolyn Smart clearly show, the mortgage was Smart’s, Smart’s closing, Smart’s money, Smart’s debt, Smart’s mortgage, Smart’s problem.  Plaintiff and her mother quit loaning Smart money with discovery of medicaid, as this was disclosed in the Athens County Case.  But yet, arrogantly and knowingly, the defendant, Smart, in this case 13-CV-024 proceeds to involve a party, M. Bobo which Smart has already tried to accuse Bobo of this, in the Athens Case.  Again, that case is past and closed.  Why would an attorney uphold this kind of behavior?  Is this acceptable to have knowledge of these facts and pursue this libelous and slanderous activity when an officer of the court knows better or should know?  Just really good Questions? The legal aid attorney is the same legal aid attorney Bozian that Carolyn Smart used in the Athens case against her sister.

In Smart’s counterclaims, she continues with self-pity and lies and denial of the facts.  The fact that Smart’s mortgage is hers and only hers with indisputable evidence but the defendant keeps blaiming others for her own misconduct making more libelous, defamatory claims by bringing forth the mention of M. Bobo.  Please refer to the Athens Co. Case (since defendant wanted to bombard this Court with a dead case) WHERE Smart wanted the Bobo’s to keep paying Smart’s mortgage, Smart’s expenses, Bobo’s paid Smart’s car off (again, with facts and evidence to support this), wanted Bobo’s to provide trips, clothes, food and more and more money.  The envy, the hate, jealousy that Smart has for her sister is unconscionable.  Once Smart signed onto the welfare program without the knowledge of M. Bobo, a person paying bills for Smart (car, money etc) (again, proven in depositions in Athens County) – Bobo refused to extend any more money or frivolities to Smart.

Another lie by Smart – Counterclaims state a breach of fiduciary duty.  The Plaintiff owed no fiduciary duty to Smart.  It would be a waste to mention statute of limitations because the Plaintiff had no duty to the defendant in any manner whatsoever.  Plainiff is simply trying to collect on promissory note executed by defendant.  Again and again the defendant tries to implicate M Bobo in this case with the exact accusations in the Athens case which was dismissed with prejudice.  Since the defendant, Smart, maliciously attacks M Bobo in this Meigs case trying again and Again to involve her in this case for Smart’s own greed, these facts have been brought out to display the deceitfulness and unethical behavior.  Smart could not get money from her sister after the performance Smart gave in her own deposition, so now, Smart circles around to try and collect again, does Smart think no one will notice implicating M Bobo?

Smart leaves out, it was her sister, who insisted that she get treatment for health problems.  After several years, it was Bobo who took her for evaluation and treatments.  Smart leaves out the part where the doctor who first evaluated her, told her she was “lucky” because the type of illness she had was treatable and if she took care of herself, she could have a normal lifetime even though she had waited several years and refused to seek diagnosis.  This was also brought out in the Athens County case by testimony and depositions.

Due to the seriousness of the accusations of fraud upon the Plaintiff which have been submitted and viewed by several parties, the defendant is guilty of defamation per se as fraud is a crime.  The defendant, Smart, has made libelous statements regarding M Bobo in this case which are statements that are vile and despicable especially in light of the facts and evidence by the Athens case with supporting proven facts in depositions that M Bobo conspired to do nothing.  As the Athens case states by the Judge, Bobo attempted to protect Smart using her power of appointment requested by Smart in 2001.  The necessity to use the power appointed by Smart came from Smart’s own actions which were signing herself onto a medicaid program while receiving large amounts of money from the Bobo’s.  As Smart did not want to litigate and bring to full courtroom fruition her deposition testimony , Smart dismissed her claims with prejudice.  The property was titled back in her name, relieving the Bobo’s of any further responsibility.  In this case 13-CV-024, the defendant, Smart is circling around to come back and litigate what she tried in Athens County Court and is making the same allegations but stating that M Bobo had a co-conspirator, her daughter, the Plaintiff.  On March 19, 2014 the defendant states, “This action and Defendant’s counterclaim were not part of the previous lawsuit filed in Athens County as that action involved claims against M Bobo, not the Plaintiff.”  Just the opposite, the defendants counterclaim is directly accusing M Bobo of criminal activity, being part of a conspiracy, accusing Bobo of a conspiracy.  Even a layman could interpret the counterclaims.  The counterclaims being spewed by defendant are unconscionable and fraudulent.  Smart’s legal aid attorney for the Athens case was one and the same as for this Meigs County Case, Attorney Robin Bozian from the welfare department of Athens Ohio.

The Issue of Power of Attorney Claimed by Defendant In this Case 13-CV-024 in Counterclaims

The POA was not the idea of Bobo but the idea of Carolyn Smart.  Smart, being Bobo’s sister, ask her to, on different occasions to get Smart out of chaotic troubled situations that Smart had gotten herself into.  For a factual example on court dockets, Smart was:

1.  was sued by her own neighbors, the Burtons, over a fence dispute.  Smart asked her sister, Bobo to help her – Bobo got Smart an attorney at Smart’s request which settled the case for Smart.

2.  Again, Smart gets involved in a dispute with some renters she had, again Bobo is ask by Smart to help her with that mess.  Bobo gets an attorney again and is supportive again of Smart in this case of Carolyn Smart’s which Bobo again and again supported Smart when she had to go to court regarding this mess with Smart’s renters.  Smart did nothing to help herself except to ask Bobo to take care of the mess which was Smarts.  Bobo got her out of this mess. 

3.  Then, Carolyn Smart goes to work for Kimes Nursing Home as an LPN.  She is accused by Two Co-Workers of Hitting Patients.  They turn her into the State for patient abuse with the approval of the owner, Mrs. Kimes.  Once again, her sister, is ask by Smart to help her out of this mess and to keep her LPN license.  Bobo talks with Mrs. Kimes, the owner, an investigation is done from the State against Carolyn Smart but with Bobo’s support and the owner, Kimes, at Bobo’s request, Smart is not charged with but loses her job.  Mrs. Kimes did not press charges but refused to keep Smart as an employee.

Deposition of Carolyn Smart on September 22, 2011: Page 9 at line 8 – Question to Smart was the following: “And at Kimes, were you accused of hitting a patient…” Answer by Smart – “Yes…”

Page 9 and 10, line 25 – Attorney ask the following question:  “Ma’am, your sister supported you when they accused you, is that correct?”  Answer by Carolyn Smart – “Yes”.   (INVESTIGATIONS ARE DONE IF THE BOARD DETERMINES THERE HAS BEEN A VIOLATION OF NURSING LAWS AND RULES – THE BOARD CONDUCTED AN INVESTIGATION – THEY CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS WHEN THERE IS MERIT TO THE CLAIMS)

4.  Smart then goes to work for Russell’s Nursing Home, she has more trouble there.  When asked in a deposition on September 22, 2011 – Smart was asked if she was fired from that jo referring to Russell’s Nursing Home in Albany, Ohio, Smart’s answer was – it was a mutual decision.  Direct quotes from that depostion:  Page 6 states on line No 7, “You are claiming that you were not terminated?”     Answer by Carolyn Smart – “No”

Page 4 at line 25 – Quote from Carolyn Smart about termination, “So it was kind of a mutual thing.”

Bobo never wanted to be Smart’s power of attorney but Smart kept getting into situations and wanted someone to get her out.  Regarding the POA of Carolyn Smart – Smart took her own POA paper to her own bank and had it notarized.  Deposition of September 22, 2011 on page 13 at line 4 states the following:  Answer by Smart, “Anything that I needed notarized, I took over to the bank at Hocking Valley in Albany.”  On page 14 line 3 – Question Asked to Smart – “You must have read those terms and conditions, is that correct?”  Answer by Smart,”Yes”.

5.  Carolyn Smart designated by her own request a power of attorney but without telling her POA, Bobo, Smart signed herself onto Meigs County Jobs and Family Services even after Bobo had been loaning her money.  Smart proceeded to hide the fact she signed to this program.  Deposition at page 55, “You did not disclose this to Bobo, that you went down to apply for benefits, did you.”  Answer by Smart, “No”. 

Deposition Question on Page 54 to Smart, “It says that you sneak off to sign up for Medicaid using a nephew who has allegedly been diagnosed with mental problems.  Which nephew has mental problems?  Answer by Carolyn Smart  – “That would be my older brother’s son…”

Question to Smart – “It doesn’t matter, but he had mental–.”  Answer by Smart at line 25, “Yes…”  Smart answers YES before the attorney could finish the question.

Page 55 Question to Smart, “You did not disclose to Meigs County that you have a POA or disclose the money that you had been given or your name on the lake property, did you?”  Question at line 23 – “Your name is on the lake property.  It has been on there for 10 years, is that correct?”

Page 56 Question to Smart, “You knew you were not eligible for Medicaid when you took the money that was supposed to go for medical bills, health insurance, and so on.  That is what she wrote you, correct?”

page 39 Question to Carolyn Smart, “So the only piece of property that you owned in the entire world was on LeMaster Rd?  Answer by Carolyn Smart – “Yes”.

Example of bills being paid by Bobo – page 21 at line 7 states the following:  9/5/07 they paid $1259.30 to pay off your car.  Do you recall that?”  Answer by Carolyn Smart – “Yes”.

Another example of money to Smart – Page 23 at line 4 – Question is “…So they gave you $6000.00 on 7/17/08, they being M and Elizabeth?  Answer by Carolyn Smart – “Uh-huh”.

Deposition page 25 – QUESTION to Smart – How much was in the money market account?”  Answer by Smart – “To start with 36,000 in it.  Question, “How much is in it now?  Answer, “I closed it out.”

Page 21 of deposition – Question to Smart: “4/04/08, check for $1000 from either M or Elizabeth?  Do you recall that?  Line 22 – Answer from Smart, “Yes”.  Page 21 – Question to Smart – “And if you claim that they gave you a check for $250 on 10/10/05, do you recall that ma’am?  Answer by Smart, “A lot of times–”

On and On – But – Smart kept the POA and did not revoke UNTIL – Bobo found out about the application of Smart’s to Meigs County Job and Family Services.  Deposition – Page 57 asks Smart – “You had your power of attorney revoked.  Who revoked it?  Answer by Carolyn Smart, “I did”.

On page 59 of that same depositionn, Question asks at line 8, “When it says, “Prepared by Carolyn L. Smart,” you did not really prepare that?  That is not your signature, is it?  and then at line 12, “That is not your signature is it? Ma’am is that your signature, yes or no?”  Answer by Carolyn Smart, “No, My Niece–” (referring to Pam Smart) 

Pam Smart is not a niece but married to Smart’s nephew, Edward Smart.  Page 57 question to Smart, “And who was present when it was revoked?  Answer, “Pam drove me into the courthouse”. 

Question -”Where did you get the form at?  Where did you get the form at?  Answer – “I don’t know, I don’t know”.

On page 59 – Question to Smart – “…your sister wrote you, being very concerned about you defrauding Medicaid, and you never answered the letter, did you?”  Answer by Smart – “No”

Question to Smart – “It says, “The lake property, you received the cash and we paid the mortgage, taxes, insurance, the HOA fees, and all you had was the use of the plafce, but not once did you pay for expenses.”  That is correct, you did not pay anything for the lake property, did you?”  Answer by Carolyn Smart, …”I went there with them for vacation”.

Page 60 question states, “At that time she says, “We were stupid in trusting you, “is that correct?”  Answer by Smart – “That has been a while”

Page 60 Answer by Smart concerning timber and money received – “I didn’t give it. I shared the money with them.”  Question to Smart – “Who was that?”  Answer by Carolyn Smart, “My nephew, Ed.”

Bobo continued to safeguard the principal in the best possible way.  How?  By notifying Meigs County that Smart did not disclose these facts regarding her situation and reminding Smart it was wrong.  Smart is again accusing M Bobo of conspiracy in this Meigs Case which is circling around to a case that was dismissed with prejudice in Athens County.  The definition of conspiracy is what?  Conspiracy is a secret plan made by two or more people to do something harmful or illegal.  Source of this definition is the Merriam-Webster Dictionary.  So, no matter how the defendant, Carolyn Smart or any counsel upholding what she has done, should know and is plain to see – M Bobo is being accused again by Carolyn Smart in this Meigs Case in Smart’s counterclaims.  As the foregoing has shown by the Athens case decision, Bobo did no harm to Carolyn Smart but defended herself against vile attacks by Carolyn Smart.

Stay tuned