Skip to main content

Elder Justice Initiative Home

Elder Justice Prosecutor Samples

Find publicly-filed, sample elder abuse federal and state pleadings and documents. PACER citations have been provided where available.
Displaying 751 - 775 of 1552
Motion Seeking Attachment and Attachment On Trustee Process with Incorporated Memorandum of Law, , 5 pgs
Trial Pleadings

Requests Court grant order to safeguard proceeds from sale of elderly plaintiff's home, its contents and other assets against concealment, transfer or expenditure (2009)

Me. Rule Civ. Proc. 4A and 4A(a) and 4A(c ) and 4A(i) and 4B and 4B(i) and Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. 14 §2601 and 33 §1021 et seq. and §1021(2) and §1021(1) and §1021(5) and §1021(4)and 33 §1022(2) and 33 §1022(1) and 33 §1022(2)(A)

Maine
Verified Complaint, , 9 pgs
Trial Pleadings

Alleges: improvident transfer of title; abuse of a confidential relationship; actual fraud; fraudulent misrepresentation; common law deceit; constructive fraud; unjust enrichment (2009)

Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. 4 §105 and 14 §6051(4) and 14 §6051(13) and 33 §1021 et seq. and 33 §1022(2)(A) and 33 §1022(2) and 33 §1021(4)

Maine
Plaintiff's Position Statement, , 5 pgs
Other Materials

Elderly plaintiff prepared to reach mediated/arbitrated solution or submit to Court's judgment (2008)

Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. 10 §1486 et seq.

Maine
Plaintiffs' Opposition to Sandy River Health Care System, LLC's Motion for Summary Judgment, , 9 pgs
Trial Pleadings

Requests Court deny motion because: fiduciary and contract breaches not barred by statute of limitations; parties had confidential relationship; discovery rule appropriate; defendants breached development and consulting agreements (2007)

Me. Rule Civ. Proc. 56 and 10(c ) and Me. Riv. Stat. Ann. 14 §752

Maine
Motion for Ex Parte Approval of Attachment and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, , 3 pgs
Trial Pleadings

Requests Court find elderly plaintiff entitled to attachment because, if given notice, defendants will: encumber property; expedite property's sale; cut property's timber or lease the land (2006)

Me. Rule Civ. Proc. 4A and 4A(a) and 4A(g) and 4B and 4A(i) and Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. 33 §1021 et seq. and 33 §1022(1) and 33 §1022(2)

Maine
Motion for Approval of Attachment and Trustee Process, , 6 pgs
Trial Pleadings

Requests Court grant $213,708.97 attachment and trustee process against defendants' property (2006)

Me. Rule Civ. Proc. 4A(g) and 4A(c ) and 4B and Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. 33 §1022 and 33 §1022(1) and 33 §1022(2) and 33§1021(5)

Maine
Brief of Petitioner, , 9 pgs
Other Materials

Argues Court must affirm award to petitioner including attorney's fees because: trustee erroneously omitted children in the Will; probate court erred in distribution and amount taken by trustee; partial attorney and trustee fee awards were incorrect

Me.Rev.Stat. Ann. tit. 14, §1602-C(B) and tit. 18-A, §1-601 and tit. 18-A, §2-606(b) and tit. 18-A, §3-712 and tit. 18-A, 3-904 and tit. 18-A, §7-205 and tit. 18-A, §7-302(a)(f) and tit. 18-A, §7-306(b) and (b)(c )(d) and tit. 18-A, §7-703

Maine
Motion for Summary Judgment and Incorporated Memorandum, , 7 pgs
Trial Pleadings

Requests Court grant motion because: reasons for termination never published; attorney privileged to publish defamatory statements (2004)

Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. 26 §831 et seq. and 26 §833(1)(A) and 26 §630 and 5 §19501 through §19508 and 22 §5107-A and 34-B §1205 and 22 §3470 through §3487

Maine
Complaint and Request for Jury Trial, , 7 pgs
Trial Pleadings

Alleges: breach of fiduciary duty; negligence; negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress; unfair trade practices (2001)

Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. 4 §155(4) and 4 §155(5)

Maine
Brief of Appellees, , 5 pgs
Other Materials

Argues Court must uphold orders because: plaintiffs were permitted to present claim against estate; there was no evidence court abused its discretion; evidence supported wage award

Me.R.Civ.P. 11 and 52(a) and 75(b) and Me.Rev.Stat. Ann. tit. 18-A, §3-804 and tit. 26, §626

Maine
Amicus Curiae Brief of Michigan's State Long Term Care Ombudsman Program, , 7 pgs
Other Materials

Argues Court should affirm ombudsman's right to long term care facility residents' medical records because: health care facility factual information is not privileged; in-patient resident observations are medical records; public policy protects vulnerable adults from exploitation and abuse (2014)

Mich. Comp. Laws §28.712 and §333.20175(1) and §333.20175(8) and §333.21515 and §333.26261 and §333.26263 and §333.26265 and §400.586i and §750.145m and §750.145n and Mich. Admin. Code Rule 325.21101 and 325.21104

Michigan
Plaintiff-Appellee's Brief on Appeal, , 16 pgs
Other Materials

Argues Court must deny appeal because: trial court did not abuse discretion; liability for negligence was established; defendant lacked standing to appeal; claim of peer review or privilege was waived

Mich.Comp.Laws §333.20101 et seq. and §333.20102 and §333.21513 and §333.21513(d) and §333.21515 and §666.5838a and Mich.R.Evid. 401

Michigan
Amicus Curiae Brief of Michigan's State Long Term Care Ombudsman Program, , 7 pgs
Other Materials

Argues Court must affirm trial court findings because health care facitity patients, residents or their representatives have a right to medical records and information about their care

Mich.Comp.Laws §28.712 and §333.20175(1), (8) and §333.21515 and §333.26261 and §333.26263 and §333.26265 and §400.586i and §750.145m and §750.145n and Mich.Admin.Code r. 325.21101 and 325.21104

Michigan
Brief On Appeal By Defendants-Appellees Ingham County Medical Care Facility, Ingham County Department of Human Services Board and Fred Frye Exhibit, , 18 pgs
Other Materials

Argues Court must affirm grant of summary disposition because: plaintiff failed to establish prima facie case; plaintiff failed to demonstrate link between protected activity and alleged adverse action

Mich.Comp.Laws §15.362 and §333.21771 and §333.21771(6)

Michigan
Application for Leave to Appeal, , 23 pgs
Other Materials

Requests Court vacate current judgment, vacate costs, grant leave and remand or, in the alternative, grant fair and just relief because: applicable law's validity is questionable; principles of jurisprudence are involved

Mich.Comp.Laws §438.31 and §438.41 and §500.3142 and §500.3148 and §600.4803 and §600.6013 and §750.349 and §769.1 and §769.34 and §771.3 and §777.33 and §777.34 and §777.38 and §777.40

Michigan
Brief of Amicus Curiae Alvin L. Storres Low-Income Taxpayer Clinic at Michigan State University College of Law, , 16 pgs
Other Materials

Agrues Court must affirm opinion because: holding achieves parity between taxpayers and Michigan Department of Treasury; tolling rulings are correct

Mich.Comp.Laws §38.1301 and §205.4 and §205.5 and §205.8 and §205.21 and §205.22(1), (4), (5) and §205.24 and §205.28(1)(a) and §205.35 ad §211.7ff(2)(b) and §791.265a and §800.401 and r. 205.1011

Michigan
Defendant Appellee's Brief On-Appeal, , 11 pgs
Other Materials

Argues Court must deny appeal because: trial court determined specialty applicable to transesophogeal echocardiogram order was echocardiology; trial court granted motion for summary judgment with prejudice

Mich.Comp.Laws §600.2169 and §600.2912d and §600.5805(6)

Michigan
Brief on Appeal - Appellees, , 8 pgs
Other Materials

Argues Court should affirm decision because court of appeals decided presumption of undue influence established (2012)

Mich. Evid. Rule 301

Michigan
Appellants Sachinder S. Hans, M.D. and Sachinder S. Hans, M.D., P.C.'s Brief On Appeal, , 19 pgs
Other Materials

Argues Court must bar plaintiff's experts from testifying because: untested hypotheses are not admissible evidence; causation testimony must be based on accepted methods and principles

Mich.Comp.Laws §600.2955(1) and §600.308(2)(e) and §7.205(A) and Mich.R.Evid. 702

Michigan
Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee, Michigan Insurance Company's Reply to Defendant-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, National Liability & Fire Insurance Company's Answer to Application for Leave to Appeal, , 6 pgs
Other Materials

Requests Court restore trial court's opinion and order because: no genuine issue of material fact exists; plaintiff-appellant/cross-appellee is entitled to summary disposition

(Intentionally Left Blank)

Michigan
Joint Final Pretrial Order, , 8 pgs
Other Materials

1. Plaintiff's Claims; 2. Defendant's Defenses and Claims; 3. Facts or Other Matters Stipulated; 4. Issues of Fact to be Litigated; 5. Issues of Law to be Litigated; 6. Evidence Problems Likely to Arise; 7. Witnesses, A. Plaintiff's Witnesses, 1. Live Lay Witnesses, 2. Lay Depositions, 3. Live Expert Witnesses, 4. Expert Depositions, 5. Rebuttal Witnesses, 6. Plaintiff's Exhibits, B. Defendant's Witnesses, 1. Live Lay Witnesses, 2. Lay Depositions, 3. Live Expert Witnesses, 4. Expert Depositions, 5. Rebuttal Witnesses, 6. Defendant's Exhibits; 8. Itemized List of Special Damages; 9. Estimated Length of Trial, A. Time for Plaintiff's Proofs, B. Time for Defendant's Proofs, C. Jury Trial Stipulation; 10. Statement That Counsel Have Met

(Intentionally Left Blank)

Michigan
Appellant's Brief On Appeal, , 12 pgs
Other Materials

Argues Court must reverse decision and remand because: plaintiff proved causal connection between protected activity and adverse action; issues of fact existed; trial court incongruously determined inapplicable statute barred public policy claims

Mich.Comp.Laws §15.361 et seq. and §15.361(d)(iv) and §333.21771 and §333.21771(6) and §600.308(1)(a)

Michigan
Brief on Appeal - Appellees, , 8 pgs
Other Materials

Argues Court must affirm court of appeals decision because preponderence of evidence rebuts presumption of undue influence

Mich.R.Evid. 301

Michigan
Respondent-Appellant's Reply Brief, , 6 pgs
Other Materials

Argues Court must reverse court of appeals decision and reinstate trial court decision because court of appeals inappropriately applies preponderance of evidence standard that recharacterizes trial court determination and achieves an erroneous result

Mich.R.Evid. 301

Michigan
Appellant's Brief On Appeal, , 13 pgs
Other Materials

Argues Court must reverse trial court decision because: plaintiff lacked requisite ability to understand financial transactions; defendants knew plaintiff was mentally disabled; defendants breached fiduciary relationships between attorneys and clients

Mich.Comp.LawsAnn. §438.31

Michigan
Each document is provided solely for informational purposes, and including any particular document here should not be construed as an endorsement by the United States Department of Justice (USDOJ). The copyrights, if any, to the content contained within the documents are held by the respective copyright owners of such content, not USDOJ. These documents should not be construed as giving permission to distribute or otherwise reproduce the content other than as properly authorized by the owner. Thomson Reuters has granted permission to reproduce materials, as obtained from Westlaw, for information use on this site. The documents contained in the database are not guaranteed to be legally current and/or accurate.