Mary Joy Quinn (1940-2024): Probate Pioneer and Active ABA Commission Member

• Date: 01 March 2024
• Author: Erica Wood

Bifocal Vol. 45 Issue 4

127

Mary Joy Quinn

(1940 – 2024):

Probate Pioneer and Active

ABA Commission Member

By Erica Wood

Mary Joy Quinn had

a smile that could

light up a room – and

early on she lit up the

probate and elder justice

elds with her positive

energy and insight. The

ABA Commission on

Law and Aging was

fortunate to have her as a

member and liaison from

the National College of

Probate Judges for many

years. I knew her through her long ABA Commission

involvement, and she became a valued colleague and

good friend.

Mary Joy’s life path was interdisciplinary and cut-

ting edge. Born in rural North Dakota, she settled in

San Francisco. Her nursing degree led her to clinical

nursing and into public health nursing. She directed

a psychiatric day treatment program for older adults,

and earned a master’s degree in clinical psychology,

with emphasis on gerontology. With that basis, she

came to the San Francisco Probate Court in 1977. In

reecting on her career (in a talk to legal services

lawyers), she explained “I came to the courts from the

community perspective, with knowledge about older

people, and with a medical background. As I added

knowledge about conservatorship law, I began to feel

like a multidisciplinary team all by myself!”

A new California law passed in 1976 was funded in

1977 to create the position of probate court investiga-

tor. The position was unique in the nation. Investiga-

tors visited subjects of conservatorship (the California

term for guardianship of adults) as the eyes and ears

of the court, and informed the adult of their rights. The

investigators also visited after the appointment of a

conservator to check on the adult’s welfare, determine

whether modications were needed, and investigate

credible allegations of abuse. This was the Cadillac

model of court visitor, long since sought by other

states. Mary Joy became one of the rst probate court

investigators, and later Director of Probate Services

in the San Francisco Circuit Court. She brought her

interdisciplinary vantage point to both of these roles.

Mary Joy and her team at the Probate Court created

practices to implement the new law, and made many

innovations that were best practices for replication by

other states -- especially when Judge Isabella Hor-

ton Grant was assigned to the Probate Court in 1986.

Mary Joy recalled: “That is when the department

blossomed. We were able to hire sucient profession-

al sta including a probate attorney, examiners and

investigators. We developed new procedures as we

learned from our cases that had gone wrong. We began

to require full bond for liquid assets. . . . We estab-

lished self-help clinics for those who might want to

be conservators. We created a mediation program and

provided training to probate attorneys.”

Mary Joy and team also produced a conservator

handbook, which encouraged other states to develop

similar guides. They oered free classes for family

conservators. In 2005, they completed a landmark

study on “Improving Access to San Francisco Superior

Court and Family Court for Elders,” for the rst time

providing an empirical picture of court services for

older adults. Additionally, Mary Joy and Judge Mary

Wiss, who currently presides over the San Francisco

Superior Court, created an education program on elder

abuse for San Francisco judges.

Judge John Voorhees, a past president of the Nation-

al College of Probate Judges, remarked: “Mary Joy

was an innovator. With the support of her friend and

mentor, Judge Isabella Horton Grant, Mary Joy was a

pioneer in the oversight of guardians and conservators

in the probate division of the San Francisco Superi-

or Court and ultimately became the Director of the

Probate Department for that court. Her work has been

duplicated throughout the country and now serves as

a virtual standard for many probate judges in their re-

view of the performance of a guardian/conservator and

the ultimate safety and security of the protected person

and their assets.”

Indeed, Mary Joy’s inuence was felt far beyond the

San Francisco Probate Court. She wrote and spoke

nationally and was a mentor to many. Because she reg-

ularly encountered cases of elder abuse in her work at

the court, she and geriatric social worker Susan Tomita

in 1986 authored a groundbreaking book, Elder Abuse

and Neglect: Causes, Diagnosis, and Intervention

Strategies, that became a classic and was later repub-