family

Life knows: that in all things, the only true reason we have to live is love/ the only true reason we have to die is hate. But in the middle of these, resides want ( as every behavior unfolds, to direct what is true in you and me). Want cannot make you happy, but it can make you content with life as a winner/ or give cause to believe in revenge as a loser; by those who then measure our existence.

Eternity however resides in the environmental loop, “of an endless circus; so to speak”/ whereby eventually we must decide: loneliness is merely “a vacated moment” which leads back to love. Because anything unending; needs to refresh itself, from time to time; so that all things are new again. Therefore loneliness is an elemental rise in the structure of who we are. Which must accept, only what is true can decide. Whereas sometimes “we must wait”/ because that too, is our destiny. TIME IS: the structural definition of what we do. those who ascend seek purity/ those who descend from its beginning (fair to all); seek to measure and condemn. LIFE survives only by the purity of, “your truth”. Because beyond the safety of time; is the force of energy itself.

All, benefit from “the Lords prayer”; when recognizing the words:  ….judge not lest you be judged….. “because there is NO going back to do this over”.  As death does prove true.

It is evident and true, by the realities of other wills, and their judgments being changed due to health-crisis care at the last moment: by various people I have known. MUST BE ADDRESSED BY LAW, both state and federal. Because these things are not fundamental to life/ but address only death, and the crisis of facing that death, when you know; the time is near. IT IS TRUE: AS I TOLD MY DAD, that you cannot simply spend the entire farm to die/ the future of family has needs: death does not. Therefore laws must exist: to divide life from death.

FOR THE PURPOSE OF A BILL IN STATE OR FEDERAL;

proposed as the beginning discussion of law; to regulate changing a will after a health-crisis occurs.

As to the state of will associated with Larry D. Ideus. As his former inheritors: his legacy pays: for the legal description. “of his own: declared trust”. 25 N.W. 2D 225, 228. he constructed it/ he caused it to occur, promising what he chose to promise/ and he terminated it in silence; so that those who depended upon his “good faith”; could not make other plans. Or deny them a response. We are owed the critical resolution of legal authority to deny or retain: that contract he had voluntarily chose to make; with each of his intended inheritors.

It is his legacy debt: of courtroom payments: to those he chose to betray those promised, by clear voluntary decision. We are owed! 220 N.W. 795, 797.

What is critical, is inherently known by a great many people who are surprised upon death to learn that what had been expected; because he said to them: to expect this inheritance: for “forty years”. Now: Is no longer true/ because a change was made in the will just prior to death; clearly due to a health-crisis. The failure of law to address that with appropriate rulings; is just another constant of university leads life in this USA. The critical consequence of “health in crisis”; is a foundation reality of society: being discarded, because there is no good answer. So we all must decide: what life is, or is not; in terms of “fair healthcare” and how it should affect legal rights . CRITICAL DECISIONS, particularly of family: should not be made by those in a healthcare-crisis. “sound mind and body” does in fact rule: legal life choices.

So then what should the law be/ and how should we interpret that in accordance with the will of Larry Ideus? While that concept does not alter the facts of this case as they are. It is consistent with: necessary changes, for a nation. The reality is: we begin to construct, within an outline of what is considered to be FAIR.

We begin with the law of “consent judgment: ..parties entered into the record…cannot be nullified or removed without the consent of those parties….78 S.E. 2D 323, 326.

law then states: that having recorded the will within the legal constraints of jurisdiction to dispense at his death; Larry did in fact, create and sustain a legal level of contract that cannot simply be dismissed. He consented to the will as he had written and was in place as his legal decision until he was roughly 80 years old.

We can construe from his decision in that will, held for decades as his absolutely voluntary agreement; is in fact his own decision as to how he would choose to be remembered by his family; as were all his intended beneficiaries.

we then move to the construction: that is the change of will/ that altered his decision from all the family should inherit; to what is basically; only one brother and his daughter should inherit. In the last two years of his life/ while under very serious health consequences; as would be indicated by his realities.

The basic elements of this beginning are to be found at www.brainfirst.info/family/

BASIC TO THE NEEDS OF FAMILY ARE:

1. NO dramatic unwarranted changes are allowed in a will or other “trust document”; once a heath-crisis has occurred. CLEAR, CERTAIN, SHORT, DISTINCT: IN ENGLISH (the language of this land) is demanded. So that every citizen: is equally informed and notified of exactly what they are agreeing too. Along with the consequences of that decision, in the future.
2. NO will is to be revoked in any form: without true and proper notification of those previously entitled. Because at a minimum they need that information, AND the necessary time: to adjust their own lives/ if these realities have changed.
3. Old age; beyond __________years old is a health-crisis; and as such does not execute “sound mind and judgment” values. Because death is at the door/ and that does change everything. Which means: the inheritors shall decide, for you or themselves.
4. A base age of ___________ should exist: to prove beyond this point: all inheritance is to be divided equally between all siblings. Will or not. Adopted or step children unless specifically noted; is at 50% of natural born, same parent children. A base age is fundamental to all forms of critical thinking: be it very old or very young. A fact of life.
5. critical changes to the status of wealth, as will cause harm to exist for the inheritors: such as a “reverse mortgage” MUST be identified to the inheritors/ PRIOR to any such dealing being allowed. They cannot refuse it/ BUT THEY MUST be notified, so as to work through the details of what this exactly means to all. CHANGES as would allow the sale of the house for instance/ and re-buy it, with a loan/ so as to take possession of some liquid assets; at bank rates offer an alternative. A family business; which provides a “family job”/ requires a 4 year wait to sell; beyond death. Because a job lost without sufficient notice, is harmful.
6. It is NOT up to the holder of the will, to indicate every asset or amount. Only that the certainty of an inheritance does or does not exist. With special reporting; if given to religion or other. Because family plans are made, that should not be ripped apart.
7. When one child receives significantly more than the rest: a valid reason must be given, as to why. Same is true of one child who receives significantly less. If that claim proves to be “just gossip, or fantasy”: they receive the same. Belief is not truth, it is merely belief. Reality must decide, not want. Hope is: the anchor of life/ it should not be cut away.

LIFE SAYS: WE EACH MAKE OUR OWN CHOICES, as best we can within the limits and boundaries life has given to each. Family is one of those choices, within the limits of what reality does allow. The boundary of it however is: to do no harm to each other/ because we are given to be as truth defines: to aid and abet each other for the success of the whole. Granting the discovery of “groups”/ because we are given to be “just a bit different” than the rest. That is no small thing. The children therefore must go with the parents, if at all possible; but they too will make their own decisions, just as soon as they can. Because life requires it to be so.

Just like parents make their own decisions as well. But it is a fundamental truth; some will make decisions that they did not intend to make/ or proved to be at a greater cost than expected. Therefore family respects that with help, as best they can. Offering to each other: that you are in fact worth more than money/ unless greed consumes you.

Unfortunately “believers believe”/ and they then need no more proof of anything. The evidence does not matter, truth does not matter, reality does not matter; “because they know”. A COST of life & society, that controls most behaviors. Only when truth decides; we choose correctly.

Such is the case of people “trying to bring the same fire here as is on the sun: an atomic fire” which burns atoms: on a planet made of atoms; with their fantasies. Which includes the delusion of evolution: “we can be gods/ just inject chaos”. So reality says: this is worthless, because humanity is a cult worshiper of fools; as is “university plays god”; with life and world based upon fiction. As can easily end this world of life, if allowed to do it. To our shame.

A legacy work to Lucille & Frank R. Osterbur        Call your representative: we need this, as law.

there are irrelevant, but legally irritating costs to putting legal information in public view without permissions. therefore this is a one-sided description of “changes are needed”.  as in “only I,” write here. 

ARGUMENT BEGINS:

Osterbur, James F. versus Ideus trust + [not yet in court]

dated: 4/ 26/ 2024

As a true and vested member of the trust: who has been attacked with regard to income from the trust. The legal representative of that trust is required to justify their claim. This is not optional: the lawyer for this trust is called to duty!

If a compromise cannot be found/ then finding a solution in court, is left.

Therefore we begin the task of identifying how best to proceed by establishing what are the limits and boundaries of legal truth; as best we can.

Once those boundaries and limits are disclosed by both sides; we can then formally enter the court and let the case unfold as reality allows.

Until we get to court: there will be no charges instituted against me or you; for this preliminary task of setting out the various elements to be discussed: within a family trust/ the trust must pay, until a truth is validated with cause. Each litigant is allowed to “do it on your own”/ or prove your claim; so that the case can be dismissed as unwarranted. And settlement made accordingly.

Primary to this elevation of consequences: as begins with the assertion, that the children of Lucille/ the children of Janis/ should wait so that Alan can profit until he has died; before collecting the inheritance of/ from, Lucille or Janis; on the eighty acres described. It is certain: that Lucille had no such intent; our ages being so close together with Alan, as might make it impossible to share in that inheritance. The trust is intended to “extend family”; by making a decision that they should all cooperate; even enjoy the element called family, as a participation benefiting all.

NO EVIDENCE of that fact currently exists; other than the claim of a paralegal or lawyer; “that it is justified”. That will not be accepted; and a clear, concise description of cause and effect are warranted; along with your claim that “this was clearly and distinctly a KNOWN decision” when legal jargon was used. Instead of simply plain english as is the language of this nation. I know: that Lucille nor Frank; for instance, had absolutely NO idea of what or why “per stirpes” meant! Your ability to prove that any, much less all understood; because I know for a fact: mom complained she did not know. As is: the lawyer failed. Consequently the evidence MUST be accompanied by more than a simple signature; as endless legal documents are signed everyday, by those who do not understand what they sign. Because every family needs what is fair, to survive. It is that simple. This foundation being: FAMILY should not need to be divided/ but united by their existence.

The legacy of linage should never be in doubt, in this trust: as is: does my inheritance here go as I direct it? Does trust inheritance fall beyond “named grandchild” whether dead or not? As is: if the named inheritor dies: will this asset of trust: fall to their inheritors/ how far? Can it be changed: identify the trust. It is: a trust debt, to be legally identified to all vested members/ it is not my debt. The attack on income; to the children of Lucille brings this moment of question, to cause an answer/ that applies to the children of Janis as well. Clarity and certainty are a distinct legal right: a legal duty of the trust itself, to insure with safety for all.

As to the state of will associated with Larry D. Ideus. As his former inheritors: his legacy pays: for the legal description. “of his own: declared trust”. 25 N.W. 2D 225, 228. he constructed it/ he caused it to occur, promising what he chose to promise/ and he terminated it in silence; so that those who depended upon his “good faith”; could not make other plans. Or deny them a response. We are owed the critical resolution of legal authority to deny or retain: that contract he had voluntarily chose to make; with each of his intended inheritors.

It is his legacy debt to those he chose to betray: for courtroom payments: to those he chose to betray his promises, by clear voluntary decision.. We are owed, both clarity and certainty in these matters! 220 N.W. 795, 797. What Larry did do: “is to sell his assets, by guaranteeing a claim/ then secretly took it back: and sold it again”.

What is critical, is inherently known by a great many people who are surprised upon death to learn that what had been expected; because he said to them: to expect this inheritance: for “forty years”. Now: Is no longer true/ because a change was made in the will just prior to death; clearly due to a health-crisis. The failure of law to address that with appropriate rulings; is just another constant of university leads life in this USA. The critical consequence of “health in crisis”; is a foundation reality of society: being discarded, because there is no good answer. So we all must decide: what life is, or is not; in terms of “fair healthcare” and how it should affect legal rights . CRITICAL DECISIONS, particularly of family: should not be made by those in a healthcare-crisis. “sound mind and body” does in fact rule: legal life choices.

So then what should the law be/ and how should we interpret that in accordance with the will of Larry Ideus? While that concept does not alter the facts of this case as they are: it is consistent with: necessary changes, for a nation. The reality is: we begin to construct, within an outline of what is considered to be FAIR. So that cost, to me: has some degree of value, other than the claim of money.

We begin with the law of “consent judgment: ..parties entered into the record…cannot be nullified or removed without the consent of those parties….78 S.E. 2D 323, 326.

law then states: that having recorded the will within the legal constraints of jurisdiction to dispense at his death; Larry did in fact, create and sustain a legal level of contract that cannot simply be dismissed. He consented to the will as he had written and was in place as his legal decision until he was roughly 80 years old.

We can construe from his decision in that will, held for decades as his absolutely voluntary agreement; is in fact his own decision as to how he would choose to be remembered by his family; as were all his intended beneficiaries.

we then move to the construction: that is the change of will/ that altered his decision from all the family should inherit; to what is basically; only one brother and his daughter should inherit. In the last two years of his life/ while under very serious health consequences; as would be indicated by his realities.

NO element of those realities can be discarded: as the truth of his situation/ and his choices at those moments in life; created what is clearly a “don’t throw me out”, situation. Which would then govern the last days of his life on earth. The conspiracy of lost personal health; is an extortion against the owner of a body; and constitutes a lack of choice/ because the framework of failure is harsh. The critical enemy here is health, or more correctly the lack of it/ and punishment by a body sickened to the point of pending or implied crisis. As is so observed by a severe bilateral swelling of the neck. Indicating at a minimum; it can be said, his lymph nodes are not working; issues of chemistry exist/ other. No medical record is warranted at this time: the reality of “a health crisis”; is not unknown, or in doubt.

While extortion is a criminal offense: here it is broadened to identify the reality of “a body threatening further punishment/ and things no one desires, but can happen to them anyway”. Which then causes decisions to be made, by that person/ that would otherwise not be made. And that would include the acceptance of an excessive or unauthorized fee. Here however it can be construed as a bribe; because as the body fails, it is known that more is required from the caretaker/ as such they might “change their mind”. Requiring the nursing home instead.

So the critical construction of WHAT IS: “an excessive or unauthorized fee”: becomes an element called compromise with regard to the realities of this matter as indicated: does the law recognize “all or nothing; the medical response”/ OR, does a life of time, with clear purpose count? Reality knows: it is, the health crisis that we are discussing here/ because without that descent into fear, as is a constant for every human being: no expectation, or the decision for change would have existed.

We then consider the extrinsic evidence in determining the true intent of the person involved by death. Finding that a lifetime of one decision/ is not discarded when subjected to a health crisis. 50 S.o. 2D 203, 206

we then search the facts and begin with:

1. Larry D. Ideus did in fact voluntarily create, without any evidence of threat; a will granting to his entire family a dispersal of property, etc; upon his death. That was intended to be fair and friendly and equal to all; so far as I know/ not having seen that will.
2. Larry D. Ideus; did in fact create that originating will decades ago, leaving it as his last will and testament until roughly 80 years old. Thereby being of “sound mind and body”; in this act, proven true: his choice.
3. Larry D. Ideus did in fact after and through the releasing of his will in those originating days: the distinct authority to each family member that they should depend upon his decision; to help them in their own “last days”. And has been so for decades: because the matter of this will was family known, and expected.
4. In the last days of Larry D. Ideus life and living in this world: it is known that he did change his will/ fully known is: “not in sound mind (fear of death/ and debilitation) or a body failing”! If he had been: he would not have kept that change of will; hidden along with his alleged conspirators (whether he told them not to or not) : who refused to identify that change; to those promised. HE had opportunity to do so. Refused: thereby allowing those who had been given a refuge for their old age, in his will: the opportunity to understand, “this is no more”. He thereby took that opportunity to collect what was not owed to him: functionally stealing the value of both family and respect/ as had been given for his gift. The dignity of being remembered in his will. The promise being a lie! As a claim “failing the issue” of responsibilities to those whom he had promised. He had placed: issues of fundamental trust: thrown aside, for the purpose of his own disguise/ to keep, others from doing what he had already taken away. Their own: Trust and respect, a fundamental value that is “possessed” by living!
5. Larry D. Ideus: did in fact choose to make the gift of his possessions to family once dead; as his legacy promised “equal to all”. Being fully competent to know what he did do. 551 S.W. 2D 823 prior to a health crisis, as were his last years.
6. his inheritors: fully expecting him to keep his own promise to them/ were fully discarded at the very end of his life: and deserved not less than proper legal notice of that fact. Which would change their financial position in life; as significant possessions did exist; and we all knew he held: personal estate ground/ farm; as is roughly 160 acres +. So this inheritance was enough to change the lives of some. To depend, upon with certainty, for others: taken away.

I, James F. Osterbur: speaking for my position as member of “the family” then turn to a “fair hearing” in order to resolve the discrepancy of law/ failure of governing members: to conclude, and conceive of, the issues of due process, under which we all intend to live. 212 F. 275, 277. what is “fair play”?

Ask the judge first; because it matters who resides.

There is a legal breech of duty owed: 278 N.E. 2D 504, 510.

it is a legal detriment; formed by knowledge of the will change; so that others are notified 255 N.E. 2D 793, 795.

it is negligence of the law itself; that omits the reality of “health extortion, by your own body”; as is known by the words “of sound mind and body”. Thereby a more critical examination of what is the fundamental truth of “sound mind and body”; whereby the changing of a will, could, or would take place? In the event of a health crisis: the owner of body is “the victim/ patient”. But since they have no legitimate claim to future: the power of attorney resides in what is best for family: beyond this point. Being owner of body GRANTS the right of termination; to you, at your own bequest. What is the legal parameter of/ or for notifying those who do own a claim for legal entitlement by known will legacy/ if suddenly changed. 278 S. W. 2d 466, 470. 31 F. 755, 756. the nursing home collects until you die physically/ thereby herding livestock for profit. Telling you what they will let you do; is not help.

LEGALLY: life decides, because that is for the future. Living with death, does not

So we come to the truth of it: which is, as a bachelor/ there is family or you take what you can get. When old age and poor health comes; those who allow you to participate in their lives; are critically there, & become both family and what you can get. But as in the case of Larry: it is family that created his future, and it is family past that created the life he did live, and it is a “separated family present” that identified the last year or two of his living; when oxygen limitations and a wheelchair defined where he could go. So the critical construction of legal rights: is defined by what is fair to all. The assertion that all of family should participate in that compromise; is fair. He chose to create a declaration of trust; as a reward to those who did in fact help him. But as with money throughout the living years: “people want what they want”/ and do not intend to be fair; because fair does not “win”/ and a health-crisis does not care. You can’t shout “look at me/ look at me”; by sharing or caring or respect; because you did not win; and remain simply equal. So these end in court; to let someone else decide for them. Where unreasonable 268 P 2d 605, 616    rule the occurrence, being disputed; as is seizure of a will due to the “undeniable enforced, cost of death”. As does cause; anger or hate to surface: against death; lashing out. NOT, that it matters at all.

As to legal parameters: for a nation, rather than just for this distinction of choice.

The critical question is: DOES HEALTH AND LONELINESS, change your ability to understand what you do? The critical answer is known; and yes it does. Like romance scams: when in need you grab at any solution that presents with hope. Like healthcare scams: when in need you grab at any solution that presents with hope. Like old age realities of: “where are you now/ when I need you most”? The cost of being dependent is high; and a majority simply can do nothing of value for you at this time/ they have a life too, and there are problems “for all”. Because that is how living goes.

Even so: I provide this conception of eternity, because the world stands ready for extinction; regardless of what you want. People are trying to “ignite atoms on fire; same as on the sun here”/ biggest is www.iter.org . Universities curse nature with genetic chaos/ resources, pollution, poisons, global warming are real; and ten thousand more threats of human want; without regard for human consequences that will occur.

BUT, What is important is as it has always been: what will happen when you die/ because eternity begins; IF life goes on? So if the body is a tool, that death casts aside/ then where does life go? Or more simply: life is based in your recognition of thought/ and eternity is given to those who are welcomed under the three disciplines of order that matter. We choose to live with those: who have love, respect, and truth: as these build for a future we all desire to live within. BUT it does require trust, as that binds life to life

JESUS presented a future with love as its truth for life and living, with respect and trust in GOD as our contribution, to “SOUL life”. A discovery of desire shapes our soul/ while purposes shape our heart. Family speaks: to the value of us all comes with caring.

I would suggest to you: that Larry did not “make the cut”/ and he failed the most important decision of his life and living. As do many; who try to buy their future or even eternity with sacrificing the others. After all: “could live another ten years or more”/ can’t take chances; right? Tragically wrong; because we cannot buy life; we can only accept it for the value we have known. So the balance of that value is: “all of it/ or just the last of it”? When love is measured, it fails. Only truth can be measured.

I would suggest to you: that pride is not a value/ but a graveyard, which threatens your life and living every day. Gossip is not enough/ it buries the truth in want.

I would suggest to you: that love is love/ not a measured thing; but a relationship with truth that cannot be bought. Discarding truth is a tragic thing, because only truth survives beyond your time. Therefore “it holds the key” to who you are; and where you will belong in eternity itself. Truth lets you: be the judge of you/ as is ultimately fair.

While people scream: “dust to dust; ends it”. The reality of life is a force which allows for us each one to individually map out; the life we will live, choosing what we can choose. While the truth of force is: the life we live will be found in decisions we are not allowed to make. Such as the body we get/ family we share/ place we inhabit and so on. Truth is: what you choose to do with these things/ the identity you chose to be. Which makes truth of identity; a great deal different, than truth of body as is called time. They are separate, and how they exactly tie together; is called a mystery. So each must choose: what life means to you. Is it love, trust, truth, value, hope, respect, courage, discipline, balance, order, happiness? Or is it power, pride, want, hate, etc? “truth knows” what your real choice is.

In conclusion then: if no response is given in the next two weeks of the date herein. Then those who were the inheritors will all decide if they want to pursue a courtroom to decide for us. For my part: a will should be divided among family, because family is what supported your own life when it was needed (as best we can). So it should go back to the people who made it possible for us to succeed. WHAT you accomplish as separate from that experience HONESTLY; is for you to decide, if you wish. My life did not accomplish anything for the future of family: as its entire purpose was dedicated to avoiding this; as read in italics below. I failed, but it was worth doing.

I will not be there; as the reality of failure throughout this world is so severe, and so distinct with evidence of: human life ending world! Believe it or not: 22 million people in Mexico city suddenly without water; matters. 3 days till death: matters. WATER IS A REALITY; no delusions or fantasy can ignore. Attacking the US border matters as they have no other recourse. Fighting matters (we cannot support you all)/ as results in war. And there are many cities around the world soon to face the same reality; no water! People already here, in this USA; soon to scream: you can’t kill my people/ so they attack throughout the nation; it matters, as is civil war now exists. But it is “every life, With every gun; etc: for itself”/ as is an apocalypse; hell. Israel believing it is under the umbrella of US protection; is suddenly without support/ and finds their mistake is SERIOUS. Russia decides to take Europe. China decides to take all of Asia; and that will include N. Korea at the close. Which does not even include the ten thousand threats of human led delusions; as is “university plays god with life”. WORST of which is: “lets bring the same fire as on the sun here” to this earth, and ignite it/ no we don’t need to worry; “not enough gravity to sustain; an atomic; million mile long flame” as is a candle flame suddenly growing into 62 miles long”. So, no: I feel no personal compulsion, to get more than I actually need. Because the point of no return is likely to be “Christmas of 2024”. I could be wrong/ but honestly; rarely am. Its Change and face reality: or we all die, as weapons of mass destruction are unleashed! If not simply incinerated first/ nature fails; etc. Feel free to participate, or hide and run away; as is the constant of human decisions. But understand: “want is want (animals)”.

That it makes no real sense to fight for things that have no real influence on the future; is a cost of reality. Others are allowed to feel differently. But in the end family survives/ or it does not; because that is what we chose. I leave it: to those who will decide, for themselves. What is: the price for being wrong? Either way.

Regardless what is now chosen: the reality of family is already diminished. But as every woman knows: when life begins to close, as with old age/ what they want most, is to spend time with those who matter most (mine). This is done by removing the competition, ending outside relationships: as is separating family into “only us” matter now/ forget them. Pay attention to me: It is a choice, constant in living.

Fair and balanced as is needed to understand truth: has been established as best I can. Your decision is your decision: I have made mine, “to realistically participate in what is fair”; but let others decide.

The summary of elements is then:

1. a declaration of trust was made by Larry; as did form a contract through the use of a written will; with those who had been his whole family.
2. A health-crisis caused him to change that will in his last two years or so; BUT WITHHELD that information from those whom he had guaranteed as his inheritors. Which is a breech of contract.
3. Elements of claim: that he, “the dead” can now control his will through any form of threat; does not legally hold substance. As those now threatened with loss are unable to meet the dead in court: he has no standing, and is removed from that legal platform due to death. The legal precedence is in Danville IL court Osterbur versus Selimi; whereby I was removed from trial, in a motion (warranted?) court pretrial; because I did not attend. No certainty of justice did exist; which leaves me open the whim of a court! Having done everything and more, that Larry did as well. HE cannot create an actionable courtroom remedy 272 F. 538,539; by which his claim of a right to threaten exists: unless he can rise from the dead. His legal standing has died as well 392 U.S. 83, 102. leaving behind the truth: a health-crisis did this. So the question is: SHOULD NOT THERE BE A LAW, WHICH PROHIBITS THE CHANGING OF A WILL; once there is a health-crisis involved? Excessive old age is: “a heath-crisis” as well. Limits are needed.
4. EVEN THOUGH, I paid the price of trial/ I created a witness to the proceedings with testimony, as to why/ I demanded trial should exist; and yet not even the courtesy of being advised by mail or other of the trial date: was given to me by the court. And I would not have known; had the defendant attorney not mailed his own notice with the words “you can attend if you want too”. As is the arrogance and evidence: of a corrupt and dangerous court to demand justice within; as we all know, “many lawyers HAVE earned their reputation as thieves, and judges”. I made my statement to the court, and it was up to the defendant to prove no trial should exist! He could not do that; which made my presence there “completely unnecessary”. Other than pay the lawyer. I stood on what I had been given as my own demand for justice. He offered nothing; known by: the court, did not keep a transcript/ nor send notice of termination; or any such thing.

It is: his proven state, within the will of “lashing out”; as is you did not come to my aid, in this health-crisis. That identifies a mental state of imbalance. Because we the family did provide 80 years of balance to his life; and he by no means “aided or abetted Lucille” in her time of need, as she died. Proving same for his own decision: as he did for her/ was done for him, and even more.

As to the claim of service to his health-crisis: the reality of being paid at nursing home levels “thousands of dollars a month”; establishes a business transaction, and no more. Which elevates the claim of mental confusion, even more. Because a lifetime of family, is more than a business relationship. Which he offered to no other. Larry collected: the gratitude and respect for: yes I will.  But, it is also fair to say: that his niece; being deprived of “serious financial” income; “at an unexpected time”. Should be compensated with an income, for a period of time; that allows for adjustments to be made: as that is what family does.

It is hiding the truth of that change in wills: which creates the foundation of a conspiracy to deny the rest, in favor of just one brother. Those who had access: created a delusion of superiority, over the rest. As was not so, in real life truth. Family exists, as proof of life; because we were there, and so was he. When needed; While health survived. Cause existed: to include family in his will.

His mental anguish; was never in doubt. In his last years 114 So 529.

But with his last breathe; he chose to create what he knew would be a confrontation for chaos; to divide and then separate family as intended. Without doubt; an act of revenge; for not being as he wanted family to be; when health-crisis confronted him. He, no longer exists: which leaves us with the evidence of his life; and his last statement of contempt: which was to divide the whole of family. Discarding all that family did mean to him throughout his time on earth. An act of hate. So it comes down to: whether the first 80 years should define him/ or the last 2 years of mental chaos (will proves), or perhaps a sanctuary (not alone): should describe him instead. Either way he abandoned the first 80 years; and set out a path to do harm to his own family; by saying you mean nothing to me. What was in the trust, was already in the trust for “forty years”. Not a gift, a reality. So the question is: does the family who gave him his life, farm, everything required to gain assets OR does the separated family who kept him from being alone in his last 2 years of health-crisis owed anything? Because of his promises made. Without the originating will; he chooses. By creating a trust of his own free will; and upholding it for “forty years”: he made a question.

I have now completed the preliminary round of contention: the grounds for family should remember him/ versus the act of traitor should remember him instead. It is not my choice; but do provide to those in the originating will, proving 80 years of family life. The means to make their own decision. We cannot question him, which means his presence in court is over: the evidence is his truth. The cost of answering the division in that truth; by his chosen silence; is his legacy alone/ his final to family debt. As he easily could have told each: but refused, what he owed to each.

As indicated here: the future looks bleak at best/ making this a worthless battle without true substance for me. As I never fight for “numbers made worthless, by leaders”; as is depicted by www.usdebtclock.org . I do however fight for family, but if greed is all that is left/ then family is dead. And I don’t fight for a corpse. If you find compromise, perhaps family will heal. “your choice”/ rather than what Larry left as: ridicule, for not being what he wanted you to be.

Family was Lucille’s “greatest treasure”; which included the Ideus name, as her trophy; because love was present in her life. Frank contributed greatly to the survival of this Ideus family; when it was needed most; because bankruptcy was close by. Donald Gene; created what was needed for family and for Larry to survive as a farmer. But herbicides destroyed rural america; and ended what was good about farming; and that left Larry alone. Which can be harsh.

So I fight for family/ but never for greed. But that leaves the pendulum swinging toward truth: the best I can do, for “family”; is to create the necessary framework for laws to be written in this state and this nation. Applied by “the Ideus disgrace”. The result of Larry, due to mental anguish, as is feeling alone and discarded; or hate, so he struck out. May other families do better; than division over arrogance, apathy, and disrespect; as is evident here. While Lucille would be mortified at the use of Ideus for that purpose: she would be devastated at the reality of family that she left behind; Larry in particular, as she trusted him, with a legacy for her own children. So, “for the other families of life on earth”; changing the law, is real world help. “let it be so”; is my answer.

Those entitled by the original will are allowed to make their own decision as to whether this will be pursued, and to what end that will be. OR divide the trust, as a withered disgrace to us all; with no further purpose, as family is dissolved. That is their decision. None stand alone: same for all.

Life tests us all: death means, “life has separated or left the body of time; and it has no further value”. Which deliberately asks the question: where then did life go? Religion offers its answers; but I choose, to accept as JESUS claimed. That love is an answer, and it is returned to those who give it with respect. Even into eternity; as is granted only to those who prove: they can endure the cost.

Earlier in this work; I suggested to you that “Larry did not make the cut”/ his choices ended with “what he chose to do; divide and create chaos”. When life leaves the body, it returns to its Creator/ and if you do not go along; then you are left behind to “dissipate into nothing; as is dust to dust”. I had warned him of this; but he failed to accept it. “believe it, or not”.

As to eternity: the evidence of this world is, “extreme miracles, and true diversity, throughout the world of life. With balance, disciplines, law, order, happiness, and hope due to respect by its truth”. So far beyond what human can do, there is no worthy debate. “THE GOD” who created all of this, holds his home in the purity of truth that is love. And it is your own job to find “in that soul of life”; the means to trust, we are not “just a toy; truth is measured/love decides mercy”. HIS HOME, will not be contaminated by anyone. So unlike this world of “human choices, based upon what humanity did do”. The world beyond will not be the same; truth decides. Even so, we are given the job of surviving what humanity did do, to or for us, in our own body and world; as best we can. Regardless of our position in it. Regardless of the body provided, or its costs; that we use as our tool for living this life, and identifying our choice; by our own chosen truth. Reality knows: changes in a will should be regulated: a bill is sent.

So, my legacy to family expanded will then be: the evidence of my truth.

I provide to immediate family,of Osterbur: what family gave to me, in inheritance; as I helped them earn it/ they me. If far greater profits than that suddenly arose; then all must share properly. If an expanded family still exists.

As to the trust and its realities: my mom if it was understood was coerced; because of family. She in fact was the “replacement mother for Alan”/ his being only 3 years older than her first child. Because the fact was George and Anna lived in poverty for the first 15 years of so of their marriage; and a surprise child; making it now 5 proved, (everyone has limits). Reality & Our ages so close; functionally made Alan “her child” in many ways. So no; it is not fair to say there is a real difference. Without Lucille taking care of family, when Anna could not/ without Frank helping “tremendously” when George got his inheritance, & a crop failure; was critical; so no, their contributions should be remembered; as equals. If Alan died first: he would not want his children to wait; simple as that.

As to the will of Larry D. Ideus; what is simple is, he chose to change this, because the end result of it is: no one knows how long they might live. So he tried to create the situation of “don’t throw me out”; by solidifying the claim of a reward. When he knew: he had received basically all he could get out of the previous promises. Last chances, true needs, critical choices. But the end result of it is simply: that family should remain family, and his choices were not measured by the living; but by the dying. And like I told my dad as he lay dying with excess care: “you can’t spend the farm to die/ life and living, has needs”.

So we end up with the truth of values; as a society. That while the real world of health has limits and needs; so does the living, and the future of family itself. And all should be treated as equals; because we are functionally same; in our time on earth.

It is unfair to promise to one group, or in this case the whole group; what they then depend upon if they must/ and take it away, because this person did not get what he wanted; as nobody does in any form of health-crisis. But what he should have done is “raise his payment to; if he wanted too/ or they needed him too” and that would have been fair. Stealing what was promised is not that; it is simply stealing, because in this case: the end result of it was largely “family built”. While it is fair to say: xxxx and her children represent the largest portion (most children) of “a future for this extended family”. The end result of that is: “still equal”/ not more. And in a world that is dying; ____________!

Alan and Larry clearly shared a bond, that might have formed over “army consequences”; as few have valued experiences, so it seems. Remembering him with a bit more is fully reasonable; even if others did just as much for assets as did he. Critical friendships are close; even if marriage and children make that less. Same would be true of my own history with Alan and family; as they were treated as family, rather than customers. So, what is critical is open to suggestion. As would be the year of occupying the home of Janis and Elvin; help from Gene and Charlotte. And more from others such as Frank, and me.

In conclusion: the foundation of family everywhere is built upon what is fair and justified for all; WITHOUT MEASURING; because anything less, will tear family apart. Therefore in Relation to Larry the question is: did he want to tear his family apart? Revenge against a health-crisis of his own suggests he probably did, as a means to say: YOU WERE not here, when I needed you. But that ultimately says: he had forgotten the eighty years previous, and centered his living entirely upon dying, and “sinking into the quicksand of life”. That is not consistent with a sound mind or body; and fails the test of truth for life itself.

details below.

FROM: James Frank Osterbur.

DATED 4-13-2024

With reference to the family trust: called Ideus; as extends from George and Anna; to their children Lucille, Janis, Donald gene, Larry, and Alan. Two of which are now deceased.

The matter of inheritance arises; with considerable disgrace, as the intent of some conflicts with the desire of others; and a host of “gossip” arises to add in more.

The consequence of that is: that a degree of absolute simplicity must be formed; so that what is true, is simply true.

FAMILY IS: the reality of people who are born into a group, that is significantly different than other groups, because this one lives together; in ways that bind them to each other. As people more precious than money, [YOU CAN’T hug your money, or make it talk to you: real world caring, sharing, and respect is the only dimension of life that matters] other consequences of living, being met by survival. To me, the foundation of family is built upon two distinct realities. You don’t get to choose your family, but you do get to decide the level of trust and time spent; the consequences of forgiveness or judgment that will arise over time. Unfortunately people believe whatever they want, regardless of the evidence. Therefore we must search the evidence in order to achieve a justifiable solution. Because the reality is: as it was for George and Anna at the beginning of their marriage. “Who lived in very poor conditions” until George received his inheritance, from the Ideus side.

The foundation of time is its limit/ the foundation of life is its thought/ the foundation of our own existence, is created by what truth will reveal. Love alone extends beyond self.

That being said: we begin with the current delusion that is, a paralegal, or lawyer; can decide what the dead have intended for life and family; from the “rat trap maze of legal jargon that has no validity to life. THEY HAVE NO SUCH AUTHORITY/ and it is merely a suggestion that allows for the greater collection of payments to the lawyer involved. It then merely exists to entrap and thereby provide the financial means of stealing money through the definitions of language and betrayal that is: NOT what people use and thereby understand for themselves. Consequently “pay the lawyer/ who is also a judge/ and give them money for nothing; because a legal maze is nothing.” the BURDEN OF PROOF, that these two individuals each understood perfectly EXACTLY what the meaning of all “legal jargon” meant. Before they signed is entirely upon the lawyer, and without real world proof; that jargon is exhausted and thrown aside; as is “your language (foreign)/ NOT theirs”. 251 F. Supp. 474, 476.

The foundation of any will or trust is its intent: what it means to provide and sustain as a direction for the values being exhibited; are its meaning and purpose. The construction of any opposing view other than what the realities of primary language indicate; is an alteration of that fact due to the legal maze that is not necessarily understood. Making it a trap, that is not fundamentally founded in the reality of CLEAR AND DEFINITE TRUTH. Don’t clearly understand the language, and YOU CAN’T make a clear and understood decision. It is that simple; and no alterations can be made in the distribution of assets unless there is a distinct definition of purpose and intent that aligns with what you claim is wrong. The foundation of the trust and will associated with this inheritance is: that all children are to be treated equally/ and that these children have an inherent right: to fully claim their inheritance from the others for their own purpose. That does extend down to the children/ and in no way identifies the children of the deceased as less than the children of the living. The consequence is once deceased the children are the inheritors; because as with other forms of inheritance: what is fair is ultimately fair. A case example of that is: the John and Hanna Sage inheritance as went directly to all nieces and nephews; because dividing in any other way; would have been unfair.

We then move on to the gossip; formulated by an alteration of contract that was: when the deceased; Larry Ideus had changed his will in the last “year or two” of his life. From a stated and proven to be inheritance to be divided among “up from, all the nieces and nephews, to his own brothers and sisters equally”. That originating will and purpose was by no means forced or intended to provide for just one brother and his children: but was intended for family which includes all as indicated; because there does have to be a dividing line to make distribution realistic.

So the critical question is then: what did prompt the same Larry Ideus to change from providing to all “his family”/ to just the caretaker of his last invalid year or two. Was it his need/ was it outside forces or fears of being rejected/ was it a critical change in his thinking; as is constant in very poor critical health? Or did he find no further value in his actual family which included all his brothers and sisters equally, along with their children. The fact that he deliberately chose to keep this change secret: even though he did have numerous opportunities to tell his promised inheritors of that change. He wanted the reward of all family/ not to change. And while family is not predicated on inheriting any money or assets: when you make the promise to them all that you will have an inheritance of equal value from me; and form that into a contract that is a will; which family knows to exist. Then you have made an actual contract upon which family then depends; in order to adjust their own lives, and their own future accordingly. Even if they don’t know the amount, the term “fair and equal” as is family in its origination does apply.

We see in this the opportunity to tell his inheritors of a change that ended what they believed would come to each/ as a deliberate contractual arrangement depended upon for “roughly 40 years”. To a breech of contract; a duty accepted by the recipients, and presented as a certainty; that has been denied and discarded: without the essential right of a contract, which is mutuality of obligation 286 N.W. 844-846. THE RECIPRICAL RIGHT to be informed of any and all changes to said contract and the expectations of same, do nullify and discard any assertion of “not receiving a dollar” to verify the claim. Length of contract, verification of family identifies what is true. 282 P.2d 1084, 1088. these facts do not align with a severable contract.

But in the matter of a will: the claim is, “its mine” I can do whatever I want with it/ no matter what. So the question is: since Larry already did do what he wanted to do with it/ WHERE IS THE LINE; between what is fair for him to do in the last days of his existence/ as opposed to what he chose to do for the forty years prior to his death; when in good health, and fully independent to make a choice that did not affect his own existence. Because outside the home of his niece for which he paid nursing home costs: there was only the nursing home itself; for him to go. Therefore “the best his life could do, at this moment of time”. Was he then if full capacity of his will and purpose of a lifetime? The answer was obviously not, as every serious health crisis proves: life has changed/ the mental state of existence has changed/ the critical needs of life revolve around very few; and the consequences of a lifetime are surrendered to the cost of death. So then we know that the purpose of his life, and the intent for his family; was provided in the forty years prior/ and NOT the development from what occurred after sickness took control.

Critical health issues: ESTABLISH, NOT “of sound mind or body” exists. Even when the person at the forefront of this debate; has an established mental framework, that seems to be operating in an appropriate manner. Because death, and bodily collapse; is that persuasive. Consequently we must go back: to what we know is true of their intent and purpose when in fact a clear decision could be made. That is indicated by what forty years of planning and purpose do identify as: his originating will.

 

We then ask the question: WHAT PROMPTED his originating decision to give to family freely and without encumbrance of division; to any member separately. That all should receive equally, from his life’s work?

As I am a family member writing: I DO have access to important realities of his life; even though he was 12 years my senior.

History knows: that Lucille was substitute mother, as Anna was having mental problems through the first years. That upon George (dad) receiving his inheritance; the now, “Ideus farm”; from which the trust originated: provided most of Larry’s ability to work, the training, and the opportunities; to build through that work his lifetime of “business/ farming pursuit”. NO family inheritance/ no business to support or define. Therefore it is the originating inheritance of his dad that provided for his future. And same is likely true for his grandparents: because wealth must be built/ or it is likely stolen. Nonetheless George suddenly, buying the farm, building a new house, and having a crop failure in that first year/ nearly bankrupted them; ending Larry’s future as a farmer. SO, he turned to fertilizer and tore down a large barn/ to rebuild it on the new place for livestock. Frank (age 21-22), Lucille’s new husband: providing extensive concrete work/ real building, repairs and other work and machinery, and subsequent friendship; helping them to survive, to sustain the farm. As families do. Because the reality was Donald gene would have been either 15-16 at the time, while Larry was 10-11 at the time, and Alan was perhaps 3 at the time. MAKING THE REAL WORK of that barn the result of George and Frank, with considerable help from Donald gene…. while Larry assisted. For which none were paid, other than to be family, sharing the decisions of life. Because money was short. A footnote: Frank was provided with a “running gear”; which he subsequently had to create a rack wagon for hay out of/ which George used too. Lucille provides “the future”; from her previous participation, and her now husband: the means needed to significantly help the family survive. I also. provided significant work over the decades; as age allowed.

We then come to the critical time of being inducted into the Army, and sent to Korea; to “keep the peace”. A time that clearly took its toll on Larry, who complained BITTERLY, that no one sent him a single letter while in that army. A reality of his own mother; who insisted for her own reasons never made clear: NOBODY SHALL send him a letter, period. Why I do not know; but it is clear she had a plan. However Larry came back ANGRY; as I was more than old enough to remember at the first meal of his return. Suffering from what would be called today PTSD; he literally lashed out at everybody, for “forgetting about him”. And was not happy for the first years back. Donald gene; worked the farm with George while Larry was in the Army; thereby keeping it from sinking, because George could not do it alone. He, “provides the future”; for Larry to return too.

Of interest Lucille always felt badly for letting her mom/ keep her from writing to her brother in Korea; and it is clear to me: sought to make that right, by proving “he was her family, and there should be no doubt of love between us”. While I was not invited into the conversation: I did live with Frank and Lucille, for roughly 55-60 years: during that time, when I overheard a conversation in the next room. Debating upon whether to let Larry keep the income from her trust inheritance: because of Larry’s will. Which Lucille believed was an absolute contract which would not be changed; because he had no wife or child. So then because Larry’s purpose was to gain as much ground as possible/ Lucille believed that her children would gain that much from Larry, upon inheriting, within that contract. Frank however did not like that idea, stating he could do better. But Lucille who always felt that she had betrayed Larry by not sending a single letter: even though when we all made one, at Lucille’s request/ Anna forced them into the trash. I was there, my letter went into the trash too/ I know. Therefore do to the critical nature of the apparent PTSD; choices were made, as family does do. Believing with absolute certainty: “his contract will not be broken/ HER CHILDREN WILL BENEFIT MORE?”. And proof of love will be transparent and real; in order to say, I am sorry we did not do better; when you were in Korea. What transpired, to become reality from that conversation; I do not know. But I do know it was not long beyond that conversation Frank began taking a different view of Lucille (SHE PAID), and subsequently treating her very differently. Pride does that, and became focused against me as well: when tinnitus took over my life. He preferred to believe; I was lying, and that led to endless delusions of why and what” and isolation. Because winner (I judge you less) is a grave you did for yourself: which isolates everyone else beyond your reach/ and you beyond theirs. Unfortunately true!

In other elements of time: Larry began to have mental problems: as established by “social security benefits before the age of 65”. In accepting the decisions that were necessary, in farming operations; because the money involved made that hard. Wrong choice/ lose money for all: by your decision. He did not want to be responsible for that, anymore. It began to go wrong, on a very wet fall/ where Larry’s equipment did not provide the means to harvest. Frank had to bring his own equipment, and provide for a large portion of that harvest; to be done. In addition another year or few down the road: CRITICAL rains were too abundant in the spring; and Larry had not planted roughly 400 acres of ground by the second week of JULY. Asking for help: Frank, Elvin- Janis husband, and I helped him plant (we decide_)/ and he was lucky the rains continued and got a crop.

Significant elements of FAMILY HELPED LARRY, throughout the years; sustain his desire to “farm bigger”. Which included help from Alan and family as well. Which produced “family cares” the foundation of all trust established by the truth of “it is so”.

The end result of it is: he chose to give back to family, who treated him as an equal/ and helped when needed; along with the friendship that is required to be “happy” with life.

Unfortunately: the ending period of life/ loss of freedom/ crisis of health: produces a cost of living that makes the past disappear. But the alternate truth of that is: it is the past, that makes the present possible: they are inseparable.

REALITY KNOWS AS WELL: that when experiencing mental distress, in the recent past. Elvin and Janis took Larry into their own home for “a year”; providing the safety of that space/ the existence of friendship for you: family. While it was possible for them to do that: without a cost to Larry so far as I know. But as with most situations of this kind: the relationship of Janis to Elvin suffered a bit: until he had to go “back to his home”. Loneliness is a tragic thing; but participation in life is elementally your own decision, when possibilities do exist. I tried to get Larry to come to dinner “once a month”, but he refused. The end result is: facing certain death is hard; simple as that. Loneliness, fears, everything life is; can beat you down into the cost of living is dying. Reality “bends the mind”/ and clarity ends, even when you believe it does not. Because there is no mercy here/ and the grave has no friend. Making eternity the question most important to know: as is; as it is meant to be: “a decision of your own”.

We then summarize the construction of family, as a myriad of decisions; that form the basis of how we interact. Believing one needs more, is not inconsistent with “a change”/ but discarding all the rest is consistent with the devaluing of life itself, and that is proven by removing family; even if they were not in the end what you wanted them to be. It cannot be said that Larry was of sound mind or body; even if cognizant of what he was doing. Because poor health, and fundamental needs (as is keep me out of the nursing home: a clear threat); changes everything: AND WE ALL KNOW THAT IS TRUE. That is elemental, to every life; and it does interfere with the foundation of all life and living; which is known by the truth of what life, throughout the years; in its entirety has been.

 

Law should exist: to prove, NOBODY CHANGES THE WILL, once the age of 65 has been reached: UNLESS YOU TELL ALL THE INHERITORS of that change, AND PROVIDE TIME: so they can adjust their own lives accordingly/ same for all exists, if no clear will does.

NO PERSON SHALL CHANGE their will, trust whatever; IF CRITICAL ILLNESS (certainty of primary losses) EXISTS. It should never be so; because true choice fails. Larry is just one example of a great many failures, throughout humanity: where wills are changed in these last minutes of need or vulnerability. Realities of people being vulnerable to the sacrifice of family for religion: trying to buy an eternity; is always wrong. And the law of life, should never allow it to be so; unless there is no family. Only then; does reality grant: someone else will benefit. Once critical age or realities exist.

 

We then elevate the question of inheritance: to its intended value, which is to elevate the future for family by providing a step towards the right direction in living; by leaving the means to do so. At least as best I/ we, can. Constructing through time: what is the apparent and real world purpose of this instrument: as your own life defines, by your own truth through, “the living of time”.

The foundation of family remaining: that life is worth more than money/ and no life is valued according to money. But every life assembles its fate or future through the evidence and proof of money. Therefore what is FAMILY presides, over what is fair. Which raises the question: was this life/ these lives: family or not?

JAMES FRANK OSTERBUR

a personal footnote: I represent myself in all legal matters/ THIS IS MY STATEMENT; and no other. As the case may be/ until otherwise legally advised by me in writing, with my signature for verification. Clarity is being assembled: are we family, which is defined by fair, equal, and balanced by justice/ or is there merely greed/ a mirrored image of selfishness (standing close) to hate; “all that is left”? There is no middle ground; because time will end. If there is no family left/ then there is no further legal purpose for the trust to exist. As the entire purpose of this trust; was to contribute and continue as family should. IF the foundation of trust, is lost: then, documents are “dead is dead”. A rotting corpse, or its “trust” should be buried or removed; as its time has past, and has no worth.

Preemptive to legal consequences: the proof of service, at this time is provided as a courtesy; to assure no misunderstandings should occur. Ultimately, this is about my mother Lucille’s legacy; and her distinct contributions of value, to family; as well as my dad Frank: whose work contributions to “the Ideus farm survival”/ at a time when it was critical: as should never be denied or destroyed by greed. Making the reality of Larry, as with all: what family does for each other: all benefit/ all share+ care.

The current realities of money, and belief in a future; are not consistent with truth, of any war, at this time; as explained on www.brainfirst.info my site. Where reality meets the evidence, and humanity decides. This document and its companions; will be found at www.brainfirst.info/family/ as reality will determine the scale of my response; in definitions that do, affect most.

Therefore, we begin only to identify “love, as is the value of family; or hate, as is the value of money, conceived by greed. But a step too far, over a trust. Creates this question; and we will now decide/ rather than allow, what our own future as family will be. IT IS, your choice. But that choice decides or implodes family. Because in the real world: “you can’t scrap every penny, and claim its all mine.

Failure to properly respond in a timely manner; results in a courtroom/ wherein the Ideus trust shall be assigned for payment of legal costs. As it is: the executor and legal agent of the trust which now attacks me, and others; fully vested in the trust. The cost of that attack: is then the executor that may face “legal costs”alone. By demanding, without court order; that they the legal agent and executor shall change, by their own interpretation of the trust. Using that solely as their intent/ as their right: to remove income from inheritors with justified standing: who, I as one: say no. TRIAL must come first! PROVE your claim. Which means you have deliberately attacked the trust/ and by the effect myself. Choosing to proceed, to remove the property of income; without an order of the court; as is forbidden. The trust MUST then defend us: who stand to lose. That is not true of the attacker; you must prove an absolute right by law as stated within the confines above: “with reference to the family called Ideus”. 220 N.W. 795, 797. [good faith]

Further legal standing now exists: to challenge the will change; of Larry Ideus; now stands in dispute, as reality examines the evidence for greed, and the distinction which follows; as is the potential called, treachery. MORE DISTINCTLY; WHY, exactly did Larry choose against family, who supported him throughout his life/ to extract just one element matters? 319 P 2d 983. [good cause]; as is,We then examine: the personal home of Larry Ideus was remodeled with trust fund money. Letting the inheritor gain, while the trust paid. Prove family, or prove not family; as no middle ground exists. Choose, a compromise, with all inheritors/ original inheritors, involved. THE LEGAL STANDING is as equals! Family created the foundation upon which wealth arises: therefore it decides what is true; as is the legal reality description/ intent; of both the trust and originating will of Larry Ideus. THAT would be, “for all to decide”; as best they can.

The primary question to be answered: IS the first 80 years of life the determinant factor in what this person meant to do? Or is the last 2 years of life, with failing health, stuck in a wheelchair, on oxygen, with clear signs of deteriorating condition: the only reality of what matters or is intended by his entire life and living? The answer.

Is fear enough to say: “what else is money for”? While the reality of taking in a person otherwise subjected to a nursing home; is no small matter either/ if money is not the object. Realizing some things, you just can’t buy; as is health or time or true friendship. There is a value in saying “thank you” for what you did do for me; but is there a limit to what is fair, as family? So the question is: what is family value: the summary of an entire lifetime? Or, is self: the last two years, when in crisis; the essence of survival, which claims: money?

That trial: will be centered on the critical conceptions of what constitutes a fair and legitimate description of: “sound mind and body”. To determine exactly when society gets to decide; if the changing of critical direction, as evidence proves: remains, the ultimate right belonging to any one (who fails that description): as is a will or trust or other. The critical question will be: shall this change, be considered justified; as mentally, and fairly balanced or not. As all truth must be. What is the ultimate right of an inheritor: to be informed of a change that will affect their lives/ and what right is inherited by the declaration of a will, and in particular a long term will; that states you will inherit? Reality does include the boundary line of age: as beyond this point, without a clear and deliberate will in place: all assets and things of value; shall be declared as: to be divided equally among all distinct and real family members. WITH a two year isolation period: which does not allow for any change to be made, unless it is absolutely necessary. The age limit imposed by social security in this society: “you are no longer considered safe, necessary, or vital to the future of the nation”; having earned a rest. Simplifies the start.

Appellate jurisdiction: as to “retroactively applied”, to the dispersion of will: “Larry’s will”/ no doubt follows.

Along with potential legislative action; as is fitting to society itself. From this beginning of real world truth, in how limits and boundaries are conceived of: for the safety of primarily: ANY AND ALL, families. IF democracy exists: THEN once the parameters are in place, making the basic framework visible: the public votes; on what will be the answer of society itself, as to FAIR and JUSTIFIED. Because in a democracy: WE ALL GET TO PARTICIPATE; in our legally defined answers, called: OUR government. OR MORE DISTINCTLY: WHAT IS FAIR FOR ONE/ IS IN FACT FAIR FOR ALL. Therefore it is applied.

Reality adds in: WHAT IS, the fair and deliberate necessity of “legal power of attorney”/ and WHERE does it stop. Because as with a nursing home: the legal right to say, “this life is mine/ this death is distinctly and only mine; and YOU cannot interfere with my decision”. Is ultimately true, that the division between personal and what is the cost to another: must be assigned as well. The nursing home should never be a prison; as is a fear probable with Larry Ideus/ therefore protect me, help me, save me: is consistent with poor health, or disease. “personal only/ the future has died”. The mirrored image begins. As is the bilateral swelling of his neck, for at least several weeks prior; indicating the possibility of death does approach.

Reality has proven to me: this is a necessary “societal change”/ I did not expect to participate in. As wills continue to prove more tragic to family than expected. Nursing homes continue to prove, more prison than help; inflicting the damage “of experts”/ where the “livestock” is kept alive: for the money. The real world truth about reverse mortgages/ statistical realities of medicines and surgery/ EVERYTHING about healthcare should be investigated: as is needed for life and truth and a fair and balanced society of values/ instead of thieves. YES IT IS a bit beyond the purpose of this proceeding/ but we are not in court yet; and I will speak my mind. As more than money is needed to convince me; the world itself, won’t end before I am done. Case in point 22 million people expect to be “out of water” before the year is over; in Mexico city: so they are coming here, or dying/ where the water resources will fail, so there will be war/ so they are all coming north; where the water cannot survive: so there will be civil war (they are attacking “Latino”/ we can, kill them back), “an apocalypse” because water or death is true!

According to the water survey people: it takes 50 inches of rain to equal a one inch recharge in the aquifer/ and they are already collapsing to turn into rock. NO “quick hurrah”. In a world unlikely to survive; with a thousand other major threats, it is foolish and stupid to fight for numbers that are not even backed by reality/ only lies.

OR if compromise is not desired; then as is the same thing you would do to me, court will follow/ as if: the situations were reversed. The warning is: “winners create losers”: family resolves to be balanced and fair to all, as best we can. As is the foundation for peace, and its reward called happiness. As family should be.

proof of service: I, James F. Osterbur: do hereby state and prove true by declaration. That this letter to the Ideus trust of which I am a member; is hereby delivered to the following people at their address. By placing said letter into the US mail service, with properly placed postage for that purpose on this day ____4/ 13/ 2024____________.

those names and addresses are: you who receive this letter are asked to identify any mistakes as may exist: so that all properly informed people as need to know. Shall be so informed.

The list of those to be, affected in this litigation: if court proceeds: shall be provided by lawyers for the trust. To date: it is only me James Frank Osterbur. So that all can decide independently, for themselves.

SUMMARY EXISTS: 

as a legacy to Larry D. Ideus; IT IS reported true, that his earlier life was shared, cared, valued, disciplined, and conformed to love as family and society lived within the confines of a life we all shared. The curse of fools, as is: “university run everything; where failure, liar, traitor, thief, terrorist, and worse; changed our world; by stealing life, and forcing death”. That, in a counterfeited world; changed what was good, into all that a life of loneliness would be; which then for the last two years, became the relief of family once again. even though he paid. Life decides, is a fact of living; regardless of what you desire, plan for, or expect. But within that experience; you decide as well. Choosing your own truth, as circumstances change, and expressions are altered as well. We do have to live the life we are given, no exceptions. Because as it is for all: time is a walk into eternity.

Reality did not provide a wife or child; in part because he was not fully educated in “the truth of life, or the methods needed to balance want with that reality of existence”. Too much time working, and he did not take advantage of what “High school” provided; which was the opportunity to test how best to get along with the other sex. As is the constant of “university devised schooling; they failed life”. But he was busy, with farming and friends and life was good; until induction in the army failed him, and balance left. In part due to his mother; who had a plan “whatever that was”.

Nonetheless happy returned, until herbicides killed rural america/ and made farming a competition, without friends. Because chemicals made it possible: for a few to take it all; and they did. Larry participated in that; because if you don’t, you get left behind and fail. Regardless of the cost to life and world and truth of living.

So as time went by; friends dissolved, rural america failed, people became angry at being forced out, political corruption “Reagan” destroyed the foundation by changing the rules; giving disgrace and traitor, to all. And rural america became a lonely place for most who were left. Unless you were married and had children to fill the gap. Larry did not, and as with all living: “life is a pyramid”. Expansive when young, but it ends at the pinnacle of what you built, from the test of all things; when done. It ends with: being alone, when faced with death, which none can escape. But that means YOUR CHOICE; in the value of life and living will take control. What you have accepted as true; will decide “how the journey goes”; beyond time.

The end result of it is: that love failed when pushed to the test of a reality, where little caring was found; just how it is. I tried to help, but he refused late in life; but reality knew: my only real purpose was to fight for life and world, and everything/ everyone else; was left to the side; because without a world, there is no love or life. So it was necessary. Even if I failed; because “one second too late”, and its over for all life on earth. That fact cannot be discarded, for anyone.

So, I tried and tried; but humanity said, “all that matters is stuff, pride, power, and want; as is “full throttle” greed. Offering only ridicule or gossip as their true response. Or they ran away to hide; refusing law, because that does not offer protection, unless the whole of society fights with you. Unfortunately for humanity and earth: truth will always win. Nothing less can survive.

 

So humanity asks: WHY SHOULD ANYONE be so tested with the truth of loneliness that they fail themselves, and let love disappear from their own lives? While there is no “solid answer” for that, it seems to me that eternity will test us all, to the maximum of what we can withstand. And only those with the foundation that lives for love, rather than lets love die; join the rest, in their own quest for love is what we live for.

While no living human should be measured except by the law; because we must. The last living will and testament of any human being is: his or her decision, to be remembered in this way.

Some choose for love/ some do not. Larry, need not be measured for a life past; because it is “his eternity, as he chose it to be”. The will however is specific to the definitions of family; and it should be measured for what it is.

The most telling part is: that he promised by “guaranteeing his will early on; to collect what he could collect: thereby receiving payment for what he did do. But then a health-crisis occurred, and he then SECRETLY: sold those same assets to “a separate group”; hoping for “extra benefits, in the level of his care”. BUT: That would be functionally illegal to do; because a will is, a LEGAL transfer document of possessions. And once you commit it to common knowledge; those who now possess what you leave behind: commit themselves to what you have in fact promised to them.

SO, is it fair: to allow a dying man, his need to conceive of: “functionally take care of himself (I want it back)”: even after the transfer is done. Or is it functionally fair: to demand, what has been legally transferred, and payment received “in respect and values not directly tied to possession”: is in fact a guaranteed right to expect “the contract” shall be held valid by law.

It is not my place to decide for you. However it is my place, to remind each, that family is worth more than money/ but greed is not.

Even so: EACH is allowed to choose their own identity, whether greed or not. “their decision/ their eternity/ not yours”. Just like you, and your decision. “family or not” is an alternate decision; even if its greed: which always comes with consequences! As to Larry; his eternity is now sealed, by what he chose. So that is not measured or considered in time; his day is done. Family however is: what we choose for it to be, each one. “like Larry” no going back, once the decision is done; like an escaping bullet: truth will be what it will be.

Reality then says: this is not about money “for me”/ but it is about beliefs. My mom believed in Larry, and although she is gone/ it seems likely to me, that she paid for that belief in her relationship with my dad. Pride attacked him after an inheritance, and he did not escape it until just before death. Even so, that was only after confronting him: “with you are not my dad anymore/ …..we are equals”. So he ran off to the lawyer, to empty “the measurements”/ and leave me with those. Because he did not believe in tinnitus; which meant he was certain I was lying…etc. That is what brought him back to life; as is the view of what is inside yourself.

So to family, I remind you: what you believe is important, because it controls everything you do. Pride is a tragedy, because it tears relationships apart; so you can play winner/ or seek revenge as loser. Money does not repair life, it just changes what is easy or not. And sometimes, no matter how much you love; a relationship cannot be repaired, because measurements have made that impossible. Trust binds us; but belief buries life under want, and that is where sadness begins. Make your own decision; but understand, “for the moment at least”, I might have enough “claim of money” to survive until death. But even if I don’t: I personally seek eternity/ not fame or prizes or other. Love is love, it is not “for sale”. In his last days Larry failed his life, by creating discord; I do not choose the same. Truth however is truth, and it will decide. Belief on the other hand is “whatever you want to believe”/ and it is rarely correct, even when like gossip “you hold a grain of sand” in your hand. Belief is easy, “you get what you want”; not lonely anymore, “got hate, love, whatever you want”. Truth is harsh, it is what it is; and the past cannot be changed. You must change, to change your truth; few do. However what is true, survives; and if you are true to life, and love (beyond self), so then do you. That is called faith in truth, rather than religion in belief; it is a choice.

Reality knows:  that last minute changes to a will from someone in a health care crisis;  IS COMPLETELY unethical/ and should never stand up as true. Because even if you have a signed will of change/ that does not mean it wasn’t coerced; fear/ pain/ death/ tired/ etc all cause that to be true. Doesn’t mean “the signature on the last page” didn’t have every other page replaced; after signage.  People do conspire for money. People DO;  steal, lie, cheat, want, etc; just a fact of life.

As for me:  in a dying world (truth not fantasy)/ we must hope for the changes needed for life and world to survive. in accordance with that, what is truly in error; as is “the tragedy of wills, trust, inheritance of all kinds” needs to have a framework that allows for family to go on. Without being subjected to failure. Without believing;  you can choose revenge, by measuring; at the end.