Rogers, Yolanda Chormicle v. Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary - Indian Affairs (Operations), 13 IBIA 247 (1985)

• Court: Interior Board of Indian Appeals

Appeal from a decision of the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs (Operations) denying additional disbursements to the natural mother from the individual Indian money accounts of her minor sons for their support and welfare in the absence of an approved disbursement plan under 25 CFR 115.4.

Affirmed.

1. Indians : Financial Matters: Individual Indian Money Accounts

Disbursements from a minor's Individual Indian Money account may be made in accordance with a plan, approved by the Secretary, showing that the funds will be expended in accordance with the best interests of the minor.

On January 2, 1985, the Board of Indian Appeals (Board) received a notice of appeal and brief from Yolanda Chormicle Rogers (appellant), a non-Indian. Appellant sought review of a November 7, 1984, decision by the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary-- Indian Affairs (Operations) (appellee) upholding an August 17, 1983, decision of the Palm Springs Office (PSO), Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). The PSO denied appellant's requests that all current income from trust properties inherited by her two minor Indian sons from the estate of her deceased Indian husband, Donald Patrick Chormicle (decedent), be released to her; that income previously advanced from the estate for home improvements not be charged to her; and that all accumulated prior income be made available to her upon request. On December 30, 1983, the PSO decision was upheld by the Acting Area Director, BIA Sacramento Area Office (Area Director), and appellee's decision followed. For the reasons set forth herein, appellee's decision is affirmed.

Background

The August 17, 1983, PSO decision recites that it is based upon 2 days of discussions among appellant; her present husband, Richard Rogers (Rogers); her attorneys, Glenn B. Neumeyer (Neumeyer), and Norman E. Todd; and PSO

IBIA 85-15-A

officials. It notes that appellant has a one-third life estate interest in decedent's trust lands and will continue to receive the income from those lands, and that PSO has paid and will continue to pay one-half of decedent's estate income monthly for the support of her sons, James and Richard Chormicle. The decision sets forth no dollar amounts or reasons for the denial of appellant's request, except to note that the foregoing discussions involved an April 26, 1983, letter from Neumeyer to PSO. 1/

Decedent, Palm Springs Allottee No. 81, died intestate on September 17, 1974, when James was 5 years old and Richard was 2-1/2. A Departmental order determining decedent's heirs gave appellant a one-third interest in decedent's Indian trust property. Appellant asked for rehearing so that she could disclaim her interest in favor of her children. The final order, dated December 16, 1976, gave her a life estate in one-third of the property's income. The property itself remained in trust with BIA for James and Richard.

The record contains an October 26, 1982, letter from PSO to appellant that refers to a recent visit and suggests that her income payments be made directly to her so that she might have more control over her budget. In addition, PSO proposed that she receive a specific portion of her children's income for their support, and another $10,000 for house repair and maintenance. 2/ PSO also requested that the title to the house be placed in joint tenancy in her and the boys' names only, to protect their interest in the property. The previous arrangement, according to the October 26 letter, was that if the house were sold, money expended from the boys' funds would be reimbursed. On November 16, 1982, Neumeyer replied to this letter, proposing that PSO pay appellant one-half of the boys' income, and agreeing to PSO's joint tenancy request.

Four months later, on March 25, 1983, PSO wrote to appellant acknowledging her visit 2 days earlier, confirming previous correspondence, noting that expenditures for house renovations now totaled $75,809.20, and again requesting that the boys' names be added to the title on the house as joint tenants to "settle [appellant's] obligations to their estates for this sum." The letter also stated that other advances to appellant out of the boys' income now totaled $49,672.30 and were "a continuing indebtedness to the boys' estates." Appellant was asked to sign and return a copy of the PSO letter if it expressed her understanding of the agreements the parties had previously reached.

On March 29, 1983, PSO responded to appellant's request for a schedule of the payments making up her one-third interest in the land leases. These payments totaled approximately $44,500 in 1983, but presumably would increase substantially because of existing lease provisions regarding minimum and percentage rents. 3/ __________________________ 1/ This letter, which is included in the administrative record, states that Neumeyer had...