Allison Singleton lives by herself in a historic San Antonio home, sings in her church choir, volunteers at a food bank, and this past August flew to Canada by herself to drop her daughter off at college. Yet more than two years into a court-ordered guardianship in Bexar County, she still cannot vote, drive, or control her own money. She cannot even carry a credit card.
A Case Built On Capacity, Not Freedom
The gap between what Singleton can clearly do and what the guardianship still forbids her from doing is at the center of an investigation by WFAA. The station reports that two separate mental health assessments have now raised questions about whether Singleton still needs a guardian at all. Dr. Melissa Graham, who evaluated Singleton independently this year, said she saw no psychological, physical, or other reason Singleton needed a guardian. Daniel Groven, who was appointed after trial to oversee Singleton's personal and medical decisions but not her money, wrote that Mrs. Singleton is able to meet her own needs and recommended last October that she regain her rights.
Despite those assessments, Dr. Graham did not testify about her findings at a recent hearing. Judge Veronica Vasquez ordered another psychiatric evaluation on September 9, citing concerns about Singleton's impulse control, and that new evaluation will be paid for by the Singletons themselves. Daniel Macneil, an attorney involved in the case, pointed out that state law does not actually mention impulse control as a standard, and said he had not personally seen anyone restored from guardianship.
How a Divorce Became a Guardianship
The case began amid a bitter divorce between Allison and Scott Singleton, along with allegations about her mental state. Her divorce attorney at the time recommended a mental health evaluation. The court placed Singleton under temporary guardianship in May 2024, splitting control between one person over her money and another over decisions about her life. Scott Singleton told the station that the guardians seized Allison's bank accounts and that she lost her car and her driver's license. Two caretakers ultimately lived in her home around the clock, which Allison described bluntly: “Two people were living inside my house at all times, 24 hour care.”
The Singletons have since reconciled and tried to dismiss their divorce, but Bexar County probate court would not allow the case to be dismissed while Allison remains under guardianship. A six-person jury in Bexar County Probate Court No. 1 ultimately found her incapacitated in 2024 and considered whether to make the guardianship permanent, with the argument centered on protecting her financial interests during the divorce. Singleton's family opposed making it permanent.
A Porch Visit, a Warrant, and an Arrest
A pivotal moment came in June 2024, when a psychiatrist visited Singleton's home to conduct an evaluation. Singleton refused to let the psychiatrist inside or consent to the evaluation, and the two disagree on how long their porch conversation lasted — Singleton says about six minutes, while the psychiatrist's report puts it at roughly 30 minutes. The psychiatrist preliminarily diagnosed her with schizophrenia, described her as psychotic and paranoid, and recommended 24-hour home supervision.
The guardian overseeing her personal care then obtained a mental health warrant, and police came to take Singleton into custody. She was arrested on assault charges after resisting, and ultimately pleaded no contest to a lesser charge of resisting arrest, receiving two years of probation that left her without a criminal conviction. She was released from that probation more than a year early this past September. Singleton acknowledged spitting on her first guardian and throwing a small bottle of wine at her, saying, “I will admittedly say I lost my cool.” She and Scott have denied a separate claim that she held a gun to his head, and a caregiver was not brought to testify about an allegation that Singleton had offered $5,000 to have her mother killed. Singleton has also denied abusing illegal substances.
The Financial Toll of Fighting Back
The guardianship fight has cost the Singletons more than $300,000, according to WFAA's reporting. Guardianship fees and expenses totaled about $150,000 in just the first five months, with round-the-clock caregivers billed more than $70,000. Bill Bailey, who billed more than $100,000 for case work over roughly eight months, told the station only, “We have no comment. It's an ongoing litigation. And no one else should comment.”
The court-appointed guardian ad litem submitted a bill for more than $9,400, which Singleton's attorney has challenged, including more than $1,000 billed for preparing a motion to remove Singleton's chosen attorney and additional work pursuing a psychiatric evaluation she opposed. Billing paperwork from the guardian ad litem reportedly included references to Singleton as deceased, despite her being alive. On September 9, when the Singletons appeared in court together, Judge Vasquez gave Scott Singleton two weeks to decide which investment accounts to cash out to cover the bills.
Under Texas Estates Code Chapter 1155, guardianship court expenses, attorney ad litem fees, and professional guardian compensation are generally billed directly against a ward's estate, according to FindLaw, which helps explain why contested cases like this one can drain an estate so quickly. Guardian compensation for personal care alone is capped by statute at $3,000 annually or 5% of gross income unless county funds are allocated.
Fighting Before the State's Highest Court
Singleton filed an appeal through the Fourth Court of Appeals, but her own guardian ad litem filed a brief calling the appeal frivolous and without merit, and requested to withdraw as counsel. The appeals court agreed in May 2026, ruling that no arguable grounds for appeal existed. Daniel Macneil has argued that the appeals court improperly accepted a brief written by Singleton's trial lawyer. Singleton is now taking her fight to the Texas Supreme Court, challenging the evidence used to remove her rights, the consideration of less restrictive options, and the fairness of the appeals process itself.
Her case lands amid a broader legislative effort in Texas to protect wards' autonomy. Lawmakers passed guardianship reform in 2023 giving people under guardianship the right to choose their own evaluator, and Senate Bill 1624 that same year clarified that attorneys representing wards must advocate for their expressed wishes rather than a lawyer's own assessment of their best interest, according to Texas Legislature Online. Under Texas Estates Code § 1151.351, wards retain constitutional rights and legal privileges except those specifically restricted by court order, per FindLaw's breakdown of the statute. Daniel Macneil has urged the legislature to close an exception that still allows judges to bring in another examiner even after a ward chooses their own.
A Statewide Pattern of Strain
Singleton's case is not an isolated data point. The Texas Office of Court Administration estimates that between 34,000 and 50,000 active adult guardianships are under judicial supervision statewide, managing an estimated $4.9 billion to $5 billion in assets, even though specialized statutory probate courts exist in only 10 of the state's 254 counties. The same office's Guardianship Abuse, Fraud, and Exploitation Deterrence Program found that roughly 33% to 41% of reviewed guardianship files were out of compliance with mandatory annual reports or financial accountings.
Nationally, the picture is larger still: the National Center for State Courts estimates that about 1.3 million adults across the country live under guardianship or conservatorship, managing roughly $50 billion in assets, with that population growing by about 32% over the past decade. Research compiled by the National Core Indicators initiative has found that adults under full guardianship report higher rates of self-assessed helplessness and lower psychological well-being than those who retain rights through supported decision-making alternatives — a dynamic disability advocates cite in urging courts to exhaust lighter-touch options before imposing plenary guardianship.
Bexar County Probate Court No. 2 Presiding Judge Veronica Vasquez, who was first elected in 2018 as the court's first woman of color judge and ran unopposed for a third term this year, co-chairs the Bexar County Elder Abuse and Exploitation Task Force, according to Ballotpedia. For Singleton, the legal and financial stakes remain deeply personal. “I have had all my decision-making stripped from me,” she said. Scott Singleton put it more starkly: “You do not have life nor liberty when you are in a guardianship.” Allison added, “And when a guardianship removes your right to life and liberty, they remove your ability to pursue happiness.”
Singleton's therapist, who conducted 10 sessions with her in 2024 and diagnosed her with post-traumatic stress disorder, testified that she believed the guardianship itself had worsened Singleton's stress. Before the guardianship began, Singleton worked periodically as a contract process engineer and now receives Social Security disability; she has an autoimmune disease that limits her work to intermittent periods. Daniel Macneil said Singleton appeared capable of daily activities including feeding herself, dressing, and paying bills. Hoodline previously covered a related Bexar County guardianship dispute in its courtroom defamation showdown report this summer.
