In re Guardianship and Conservatorship of Parkhurst

Nina Parkhurst executed a durable power of attorney and an advanced health care directive appointing her son, Randall Boykin (defendant), as her agent to manage her personal, financial, and healthcare decisions if she became incapacitated. Parkhurst subsequently became incapacitated, triggering her durable power of attorney. Several years later, Parkhurst’s other son, Douglas Boykin (plaintiff), petitioned for the appointment of a guardian and conservator for Parkhurst, alleging that Randall was abusing Parkhurst and dissipating her estate by leveraging the durable power of attorney for his own benefit. The court appointed a guardian ad litem (GAL) to investigate whether the appointment of a guardian or conservator for Parkhurst was necessary. Parkhurst was then 75 years old and suffered from moderate dementia. The GAL found that Parkhurst was in good physical condition, that she was living in appropriate accommodations with constant adult companionship and assistance, and that Randall was properly managing Parkhurst’s finances and estate. The GAL’s only concern was that the durable power of attorney gave Randall the power to gift Parkhurst’s assets to himself, even though Randall had never exercised that power. The GAL recommended appointing Randall as Parkhurst’s guardian/conservator because that appointment would require Randall to report to the court on his management of Parkhurst and her estate, something he was not required to do as Parkhurst’s agent. The district court accepted the GAL’s factual findings but found that appointing a guardian/conservator for Parkhurst was unnecessary. Douglas appealed.