The moving party, the wife of the incapable person, brought a motion to set aside a 2019 ex parte Guardianship Order that appointed the incapable person's son as his sole guardian of property and person.
The court found that the original order was intended to be temporary and was granted based on allegations of missing funds and abandonment that were later admitted to be untrue.
The court set aside the Guardianship Order on grounds of procedural fairness and under Rule 59.06(2)(a) based on facts discovered after it was made.
However, the court temporarily stayed the setting aside of the order for 90 days to prevent a vacuum in the incapable person's care while the parties determine the validity of competing powers of attorney.