LAS VEGAS - nvtip -- The Nevada Supreme Court is now at a critical crossroads in a high-stakes probate and trust appeal that has exposed years of fiduciary misconduct, elder abuse, and alleged judicial record tampering. The case, 'In The Matter of Steven J. Singer Trust and Estate,' Karina Singer v. Lenore Boekankamp (Case No. 89171), centers around the irrevocable trust of Steven J. Singer—a disabled father who was isolated, deprived of proper care, and ultimately died after being placed in an abusive locked facility against his wishes and the trust's express provisions.

Where the Case Stands Now

• The appeal is fully briefed. There is no opposition to the appellant's opening brief or motion for summary disposition.
• Appellant Karina Singer has submitted undisputed evidence proving over $1 million in trust assets were converted by her sisters, Natasha and Lenore Boekankamp (the majority co-trustees), in direct violation of the trust terms.
• The district court failed to hold a mandated evidentiary hearing, ignored all the forensic accountants' objections, refused to rule on Karina's unopposed accounting petitions, denied discovery, and entered orders based on misrepresentations and fraud.
• The Nevada Supreme Court originally retained the case, but when the Karina filed for summary disposition, they improperly transferred the case to the Court of Appeals. Now, the court is being asked to recall the transfer and retain jurisdiction, based on the case's constitutional implications, public policy concerns, and unrefuted, direct, evidence of systemic court misconduct.

Background for New Readers

More on nvtip.com

• Americans Are Trading Offices for Beaches: How Business Ownership Enables the Ultimate Location Freedom
• Boston Industrial Solutions' Natron® DC Series Ink Has Had an Upgrade!
• Colony Ridge Proudly Supports the All Ears! 2025 Sporting Clays Tournament
• Jacob Emrani Nominated for LA Executive Award
• Kansas City Steak Company Shares the Return of Their Holiday Gift Box

Karina Singer is the daughter of Steven J. Singer, whose trust designated all three daughters as co-trustees and equal beneficiaries. After Steven was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, two of his step-daughters—Lenore and Natasha—secured guardianship over his person, locked him in a facility he never wanted, and began rerouting his trust income, his retirement benefits, his IRS refunds, stocks, bonds, and life insurance proceeds into their personal bank accounts.

They misrepresented account statuses to the court, submitted fraudulent pleadings, and paid their personal attorneys, to defend them from the consequences of their own misconduct, with trust funds, meant for Steven's care. Karina was denied access to her father, cut off from bank records, and ultimately removed from court service without notice, causing her to miss critical deadlines—a procedural violation that was never corrected.

What the Supreme Court Must Decide

The Nevada Supreme Court now has the opportunity—and obligation—to address the following:

• Whether it will retain jurisdiction over the appeal or avoid ruling by leaving the matter to the Court of Appeals;
• Whether a ruling can be issued without an evidentiary hearing, since no opposition or rebuttal exists;
• Whether to grant full summary disposition in favor of the Appellant, including restitution, removal of trustees, denial of attorney's fees, correcting the court record, and an order for sanctions;
• Whether the court will acknowledge the pattern of due process violations, record tampering, and unequal treatment between parties.

If the Court Rules in Favor of the Appellant

• Nevada's highest court restores public faith in the judicial system and confirms its commitment to equity, trust law, and due process.
• Karina Singer is vindicated, the trust is repaired, and fiduciaries are held accountable.
• The ruling becomes a landmark precedent for trust and probate disputes involving co-trustees, especially those involving elder abuse and self-dealing.

If the Court Avoids a Ruling or Upholds the Lower Court

• The court signals that justice in Nevada is conditional—available to the public in theory, but denied in practice when it threatens those with influence, money, and political access.
• The appeal process itself is delegitimized.
• The door opens for federal escalation, including a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court and potential civil RICO litigation against the parties and court officers involved.

"This isn't just about a trust. It's about the integrity of the judicial system," says Singer. "If the truth is undisputed, and the law is clear, then justice should be automatic. The only thing left to see is whether the court has the courage to say so."

More on nvtip.com

• Dr. Jay A. Johannigman Delivers Lecture at the John R. Border Memorial Lectureship in Buffalo
• Powering the Next Frontier of the $1 Trillion Space Economy: Ascent Solar Technologies (N A S D A Q: ASTI)
• Taikan's T-V856S VMC Earns Prestigious 2025 Vogel Global Pioneer Award
• Flick Truck Accident Law Joins the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance to Strengthen Truck Safety Advocacy
• PebblePad Announces Global Partnership with Inside Higher Ed and Times Higher Education

The decision is expected in the coming weeks. The outcome may define whether Nevada's highest court chooses justice—or protects its own.

See the video evidence they don't want you to watch — uncover how the court enabled misconduct, concealed key evidence, and obstructed justice in this explosive case.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEWvWahUfFfzs88Hze6Lb7A/videos