In the Matter of a Mail Dispute ) February 10, 1998 Between ) ) CLIFFORD HERRINGTON ) ) and ) ) SUZIE HERRINGTON ) P.S. Docket No. MD 97-488 APPEARANCE FOR DISPUTANT Clifford Herrington CLIFFORD HERRINGTON: 3513 Debbie Court Duluth, GA 30097-3407 APPEARANCE FOR DISPUTANT Suzie Herrington SUZIE HERRINGTON: 1451 McDaniel Mill Road, SW Conyers, GA 30094-5631INITIAL DECISION This mail dispute has been docketed pursuant to Postal Operations Manual (POM 7, August 1, 1996) Section 616.21, which requires the Chief Field Counsel to forward certain unresolved mail disputes to the Judicial Officer for resolution. The mail in dispute is that addressed to L. D. Herrington, 1451 McDaniel Mill Road SW, Conyers, GA 30094-5637. The mail is currently being held by the Conyers Postmaster.
Disputant Clifford Herrington submitted the sworn statement of L. D. Herrington, with accompanying documents in support of his claim. Disputant Susie Herrington has not made a submission. The following findings of fact are based on the submission of Clifford Herrington and information from the Postal Service that was included in the file referred to the Judicial Officer.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Disputant Clifford Herrington is the son of L. D. Herrington. Disputant Susie Herrington is the estranged wife of L. D. Herrington. (Postal Service Submission).
2. L. D. Herrington has been, and is presently incarcerated in Federal prison for over five years (Affidavit of L. D. Herrington).
3. On October 14, 1997, L. D. Herrington executed a power of attorney appointing his son Clifford Herrington as his Attorney-in-Fact to conduct "any and all business" on his behalf. (Affidavit of L. D. Herrington).
4. Disputant Susie Herrington also has a general power of attorney dated July 15, 1992, which was purportedly executed by L. D. Herrington (Postal Service submission).
5. By affidavit dated January 26, 1998, L. D. Herrington state that he directs all his mail to be delivered to his son Clifford Herrington, at 3513 Debbie Court, Duluth, Georgia 30097. He further states that he has never executed a power of attorney appointing his wife as his Attorney-in-Fact and that a power of attorney used by his wife, Susie Herrington, is false. L. D. Herrington was not present in Cobb County, Georgia, the location and the date (July 15, 1992), on which Mrs. Herrington's power of attorney purportedly was notarized but, instead was in a Federal Corrections Institution in Fort Worth, Texas on July 15, 1992. (Affidavit of L. D. Herrington).
DECISION Disputant Susie Herrington did not submit a sworn statement (or make any other submittal), as required by 39 C.F.R. §965.5 and is, therefore, technically in default under 39 C.F.R. §965.7. Nevertheless, all the evidence filed in this dispute has been considered in reaching this decision.
This mail dispute has arisen because of conflicting powers of attorney to handle the affairs of L. D. Herrington, one possessed by his wife, Susie Herrington, and the other by his son, Clifford Herrington. Mr. L. D. Herrington's sworn statement is quite emphatic that the power of attorney used by his wife to seek delivery of his mail is false and that the power of attorney he granted his son is valid.
More importantly, however, as Mr. L. D. Herrington also makes quite clear in his sworn affidavit, he wishes his mail to be delivered to his son, Clifford Herrington. In this regard, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM) D042.1 provides that addressees may control delivery of their mail. Moreover, DMM D042.2 further provides that an addressee's mail may be delivered to any person designated by the addressee to receive delivery of his or her mail. (See also, POM 7, Section 612.11). The designation should be in writing, but need not be in any special form. Thus, the direction expressed by Mr. L. D. Herrington in his sworn affidavit, to have his mail forwarded to his son, should be honored.
This decision addresses only the right to delivery of the mail. It does not purport to address the question of ownership of the mail or any other dispute between the parties. If Disputant Clifford Herrington receives mail that is obviously intended for Susie Herrington, he should have that mail forwarded to her promptly.
The attached Delivery Order should be issued.
William K. Mahn Administrative Judge