A granddaughter's fully documented account of coordinated trust fraud — sourced entirely to public court records, sealed billing invoices, and a hearing where she was muted before she could speak. Every claim has a document behind it. Every document is public.
My grandparents Frank and Margaret Clark spent a lifetime building something. In 2007 they executed a meticulous, private, irrevocable living trust — funded with approximately $6 million, designed to protect their family through every generation, specifically built to operate without court involvement. They named their successors. They wrote down their wishes. They did everything right.
And then Frank died on February 1, 2024. And the people who were supposed to protect that trust destroyed it instead.
Not with a single dramatic act. With attorneys. With billing entries. With a ballot scheme. With a 22-month federal tax void. With a court that approved a final accounting without ever reading the governing instrument. With a Family Law judge who gave me five minutes to speak at my own hearing — after someone muted me on the Zoom call — and then charged me $10,000 for having objected.
I am Morgan Ladwig. I am the successor trustee my grandparents named. I am their granddaughter. I have been fighting this for two years while four law firms billed against me, the American Diabetes Association ran the process that removed me, my siblings stopped speaking to me, and financial institutions hung up on me because attorneys told them I was "crazy."
I was not crazy. I was right. And I can prove it — because they sent invoices. Those invoices are public court records. An independent review of those invoices states plainly:
"The billing record does not read like neutral administration of an already-established trustee chain. It reads like a prolonged effort to construct, defend, and then bill for authority before the underlying authority premises were cleanly proven in the filed record."
— Invoice Memorandum, EX-000025, Clark County Superior CourtEvery claim in this article is sourced to a specific court filing, billing invoice, or hearing transcript in Clark County Superior Court — Case Nos. 24-4-01200-06 and 25-4-00636-06. All public record. All real.
The Frank and Margaret Clark Living Trust was executed May 2, 2007 by attorney Robert C. Pittman of Pittman Law Office, Fircrest, Washington. Approximately $6 million in assets. When my grandmother Margaret died in March 2017, the trust became irrevocable. The Family/Bypass Trust was funded at approximately $5.49 million. Generation-Skipping Transfer subtrusts were established to protect my inheritance through every generation — separately held, separately administered, separately accounted for.
The trust named two successor trustees: Maryann Marklein (Margaret's sister, primary) and Barbara Jean Seversen (Margaret's sister, alternate). Both still alive. Both confirmed in writing by the drafting attorney on May 3, 2024. The American Diabetes Association was named only as a charitable remainder beneficiary — meaning it gets a share of whatever's left at the very end, after the family is provided for. Nothing more.
Under Washington State law, only the Attorney General can represent charitable interests in trust proceedings. The ADA cannot hire its own private lawyers to participate in trust governance. The Attorney General was never notified. Not once. In two years.
"No standalone trust was created by our office under terms of the living trust (see Article Eight)."
Every single action in this case was taken under the name of a trust that the man who drafted the governing instrument confirmed in writing never existed.
There's also my grandfather's second wife — I'll call her Mary to protect her privacy. After my grandmother passed in 2017, Frank eventually reconnected with his high school sweetheart. They moved to Vancouver in 2019. When Frank died suddenly in 2024, Mary was devastated and trusted the attorneys Frank had worked with. Those attorneys — Landerholm Law Firm — also held the governing documents for Mary and Frank's separate trust. That dual access to both trust instruments is the operational foundation of everything that followed. Mary is not a villain. She is, I believe, another victim.
This wasn't impulsive. It was constructed. Here is how, step by step:
Landerholm Law Firm held governing documents for both the Frank and Margaret Clark Living Trust AND the separate trust belonging to Frank and Mary. Complete visibility into the combined asset base of both instruments. This is the operational foundation.
The pour-over wills were never given to beneficiaries. The wills would have shown our names, tied both trusts together, and revealed the full picture. Landerholm withheld them entirely and waited six months before producing even the trust instrument. The entire authority chain was constructed during that window while we were blind.
Frank died February 1, 2024. His death was effectively concealed from the IRS. No new EIN. No Form 56. The existing historical EIN — used during Frank's lifetime — continued to be used. For 22 months, the IRS had no idea who controlled this trust or that Frank was dead.
The trust was renamed from the Frank and Margaret Clark Living Trust to "Margaret Clark Decedent's Trust" — making it look like a single dead person's solo trust. This renamed identity was used to access bank accounts and move assets. The drafting attorney later confirmed this entity never existed.
Maryann Marklein and Barbara Jean Seversen — Margaret's sisters, still alive — were never actually removed. Their removal was based on two documents dated June 11, 2019, prepared by Landerholm (not the original drafting attorney), never seen by any family member, submitted as copies not originals, and contradicted by Landerholm's own billing records.
Timothy Schiller sent beneficiaries a letter promising to distribute $3.7 million. We signed the approval ballots trusting that number. Those ballots were never returned to us and were never filed with the court. Schiller then said he could only find $500,000. He liquidated it. When I asked for an accounting explaining the gap — none was ever produced. Not to anyone. Ever.
ADA signed its W-9 on April 19, 2024 — 77 days after Frank's death, before a successor EIN even existed. I privately warned ADA's General Counsel Sean McDonough about attorney Jeffrey Renshaw's disciplinary history (proceedings in Oregon and Washington for stealing from trust funds). McDonough said he didn't care. In April 2025, Renshaw's ballot letter CC'd Gregory Hall of Landerholm — connecting both firms in their own correspondence when they were supposed to have no relationship.
Four law firms billed sequentially to build, formalize, court-harden, and close an authority chain never grounded in the governing instrument. Jennifer Nugent filed this private irrevocable trust into the court system — making public what my grandparents explicitly designed to stay private.
Judge Snider recused October 31, 2025 citing impersonation of Renshaw in communications to her staff. Sheriff was notified. Nothing came of it. Case transferred to a Family Law judge with no probate experience — who had somehow already reviewed the file on October 17, before the transfer. On November 6, I was muted on the Zoom call before I could say a word.
My siblings stopped talking to me. I was charged $10,000 for objecting. My entire inheritance withheld. Schiller and Spurgetis told every financial institution I was "crazy" and had no authority — while I was the only person who had filed Form 56 and held the EIN assignment number.
The only person who corrected this was me — in November 2025. I obtained the successor EIN and filed Form 56. By then, $261,572.92 had already been distributed to the American Diabetes Association. The court's response to my having done the one thing no one else did in 22 months: charge me $10,000 and withhold my entire distribution.
The following entries are drawn directly from court-filed billing records. These are not allegations. These are the professionals' own descriptions of what they did — and what they billed for.
February – August 2024 · Invoice 299202 · Client: Jane A. Clark · Total: $11,681.00
June – December 2024 · Schiller Invoice 118856: $12,420 · Nugent Invoices 3798 & 3917
Timothy Schiller is a CPA with Opsahl Dawson in Vancouver, WA. Not a licensed trust company. Not an attorney. No court ever asked whether he was legally qualified to serve as a compensated trustee before approving his appointment, his fees, or his final report.
On December 20, 2024, Judge Jennifer K. Snider approved Schiller's final report — without the governing instrument before the court, without proving the succession chain, without tracing the gap between $6 million funded and $471,125.73 remaining.
March – June 2025 · Sealed Invoice · $16,182 sought · $10,000 charged to Morgan · $6,182 to trust corpus
May – November 2025 · Invoice 1529 · $12,450.56 · Balance outstanding: $12,450.56 · Trust balance: $0.00
Everything — every trustee, every fee, every distribution, the entire $261,000 to the ADA — rests on one claim: that Maryann Marklein and Barbara Jean Seversen were lawfully removed, creating a vacancy.
The evidence for that claim is Exhibits B and C in the Schiller final report. Documents dated June 11, 2019. Prepared on Landerholm letterhead — not by the original drafting attorney. Submitted as copies, not originals. Never seen by any family member until they appeared in a court filing.
Judge Snider recused herself October 31, 2025 — citing someone impersonating Jeffrey Renshaw in communications to her staff and attempts to redirect the hearing through the Clerk's set-over system. She reported it to the Clark County Sheriff's Office. Nothing came of it. No investigation. No charges. The case was moved five days later to Judge Nancy N. Retsinas — a Family Law judge with no probate background who, according to the transcript, had reviewed the file on October 17 — before Snider even recused.
On November 6, I was on the Zoom call for the entire hearing — three to four hours. When Judge Retsinas asked if anyone on Zoom wanted to speak, I said "hi." I was immediately muted. Not by me. I grabbed my second phone, called back using *67, and broke anonymously into my own hearing while the judge was already ruling on my inheritance.
I was given five minutes. Here is what I said — and what happened next. This is from the court transcript:
"This is an irrevocable trust and it's free of court supervision... the American Diabetes Association isn't even a qualified beneficiary that is eligible to do that through the trust instrument... the only person that can represent a charitable beneficiary is the attorney general... the attorney general was not notified this entire time..."
"There's not been an EIN number assigned to my grandfather's social security number since he passed away on February 1st, 2024... Mr. Spurgetis has been running it off of my grandmother's EIN number which came to a close at the death of my grandfather..."
"Mr. Spurgetis is asking the court to set aside my grandparents' distribution plan of their irrevocable trust and approve a new one of his making... both are asking that their fees come from my personal trust distribution despite the trust's strict no contest and protective clause which forbids any judicial proceedings that attempt to alter and interfere with the trust's irrevocable terms..."
"All right. Thank you... the court is relying upon the adjudication that took place on 6-27-2025... the court is proceeding..."
"What exactly did I do? What was the behavior?"
"I would refer all beneficiaries back to the filed pleadings..."
"I've read them. But what exactly did I do? What exactly did I do?"
[No answer. Proceeds to approve all fees, charge $10,000 to Morgan, withhold Morgan's entire distribution. Other beneficiaries approved for distribution.]
She could not name a single act. When I asked, in desperation, if I could just distribute my share to the trust and be done — that too was denied. The case caption throughout the entire hearing: "Diabetes Association versus Margaret Clark." A national charity. As plaintiff. Against my dead grandmother. In a Family Law courtroom.
Judge Jennifer K. Snider (Probate Division, Case 24-4-01200-06): Accepted the "Margaret Clark Decedent's Trust" identity without requiring the governing instrument. Approved a final accounting that didn't trace where the money went. Approved fees for what the billing records show was authority construction. Recused October 31 — nothing came of the Sheriff referral she made.
Judge Nancy N. Retsinas (Family Law Division, Case 25-4-00636-06): No probate background. Reviewed the file October 17 before being assigned October 31. Gave me five minutes. Ignored every point I made. Approved everything. Charged me $10,000. Withheld my entire distribution. Discharged Spurgetis while simultaneously authorizing him to continue exercising trustee authority — an internally contradictory order. Could not name a single act when I asked what I had done wrong.
Frank and Margaret chose me. They wrote it down. They named me specifically. And when Frank died, I tried to honor that.
I asked where the documents were. I asked who authorized the vacancy. I asked about the missing $3.7 million. I warned ADA about Renshaw in writing. I filed the IRS forms nobody else would file. I reconstructed the wills from the drafting attorney when Landerholm refused to produce them. I filed a 16-page Memorandum of Judicial Defects in open court under penalty of perjury. And when they muted me at my own hearing, I called back on a second phone.
For all of that: $10,000 charged to me personally. My inheritance withheld. My siblings stopped talking to me. Financial institutions hung up on me. And a judge who couldn't name a single thing I did wrong.
I'm telling this story because it should not happen to another family. Not in Washington State. Not anywhere. The warning signs were all there — the withheld documents, the wrong trust name, the charity in governance, the federal void, the private trust dragged into court against its express design. If you see these signs in your family's trust administration, act immediately. Don't wait for someone to answer your questions. They won't. Get a lawyer. Document everything. Don't back down.
And know this: being punished for asking questions is not evidence that your questions were wrong. In trust exploitation cases, it is frequently evidence that you were right.
The more people who know these warning signs, the harder it is for this scheme to succeed. Share widely — especially in elder law, estate planning, and trust administration communities.