ShareThis Page
Westmoreland

Police: Pleasant Unity woman took $32K from father's estate

Renatta Signorini
| Friday, Feb. 8, 2019, 2:09 p.m.
Tomislav Forgo

A Pleasant Unity woman is accused of taking $32,000 from her father’s estate that was to be split with her two siblings, according to county detectives.

Kim Ellen Shilobod, 62, was charged Thursday with theft and misapplication of entrusted property.

Detectives said Shilobod was named executrix of her father’s estate after the World War II veteran’s 1999 death. Six years later when his house was sold, she opened a bank account with the proceeds, investigators said.

During orphans court proceedings in 2017, Shilobod claimed the amount remaining in the account after paying various expenses and taxes was $32,547, police said. She was removed as executrix in April.

Later in 2018, she was ordered by a judge to provide a notarized record of the account activity and the $32,547 purported to be remaining in the account, according to the complaint.

Detectives said Shilobod has not presented the court the money or notarized accounting.

Bank records showed that Shilobod wrote 22 checks from the account between 2015 and 2017 to herself for $56,244.83, leaving the account empty, according to the affidavit.

A warrant has been issued for her arrest. She did not have an attorney listed in online court records. She could not be reached Friday.

Renatta Signorini is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Renatta at 724-837-5374, rsignorini@tribweb.com or via Twitter @byrenatta.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me