Elder Justice Prosecutor Samples

Requests Court grant motion because: plaintiff lacks standing to pursue statutory elder abuse claim; no issues of material fact exist

Requests Court enter summary judgment dismissing claims for elder abuse because plaintiffs lack standing to bring claims

Argues Court must reverse decision and remand because court granted summary judgment based on deemed admissions, answered late, while elderly citizen was pro se

Argues Court must deny request to withdraw admissions and motion for reconsideration because plaintiff did not show good cause for delay and no excusable neglect was present

Requests Court deny motion because: elderly plaintiff is not incompetent; claims are not time barred; fraud cause of action is stated with suffucuent particularity; economic loss doctrine does not apply; negligent training, supervision and retention claim is properly alleged; defendant is subject to punitive damages

Argues Court must reverse order granting petition for writ of mandamus because: statutory authority prevents public disclosure of information ordered; interest in individual privacy outweighs public interest in specifically identifiable information

Argues Court must reverse order because: information is confidential; report is improperly required; statutes provide confidentiality; social security records' confidentiality weigh in favor of nondisclosure

Affirms owner of elder adult home care facility failed to: maintain physical or mental health of disabled adult residents; provide assistance for injured adult residents; maintain accurate documentation of disabled adults' care (2011)

Alleges owner of housing facility caring for older adults neglected to: provide medical attention; enter an accurate incident report; follow medication orders; maintain accurate records after elderly resident was seriously injured (2011)

Requests Court grant relief in the form of mandamus or, alternatively, prohibition because district court: based sanction upon wrong legal standard; dismissed alter ego claim; denied motion for summary judgment; refused to grant motion to amend

Argues Court must reverse order because respondent owes adult ward a duty of care or, in the alternative, reverse order and remand because duty issue warrants discovery

Argues Court must affirm motion because appellant's allegations are insufficient to establish respondent owes adult ward a duty of care to protect against third party financial exploitation following hospital discharge

Recommends Court deny complaint because: one of plaintiffs' expert reports names Healthsouth as provider during treatment, in support of motion to amend; defendant's motion to dismiss does not request dismissal of plaintiff's cause of action for elder abuse

Requests Court dismiss elder abuse action because: cause is barred by applicable statute of limitations; amendment as to existing and known defendants cannot relate back to date of original complaint filing

Requests Court deny motion because: elder abuse action is timely filed; elder abuse cause is not barred by statute of limitations; jury must determine question of fact as to whether statute of limitations bars elder abuse cause of action

Argues Court must enforce arbitration because: contract had valid arbitration provision; respondent's amended complaint does not meet federal or state standards

Alleges: I - Declaratory Action; II - Specific Performance; III - Money Had and Received; IV - Unjust Enrichment; V - Elder Abuse and Exploitation; VI - Consumer Fraud/Deceptive Trade Practice; VII - Fraud and Intentional Misrepresentation; VIII - Breach of Fiduciary Duty; IX - Constructive Fraud; X - Accounting; XI - Civil Conspiracy; XII - Breach of Contract; XIII - Breach of Implied Covenant and Good Faith and Fair Dealing; XIV - Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Requests Court deny motion because: public policy defense was improper; arguments were based on unsupported factual assertions; contract implied convenant existed; plaintiffs used positions of trust to abuse and exploit vulnerable people; plaintiffs had improper purpose; plaintiffs willfully committed improper act during legal proceedings

Alleges: First Cause of Action - Vulnerable and Elder Person Abuse on Behalf of Deceased, Mrs. Bradley, against St. Rose, Dr. Ibraheem, DOES and/or ROES; Second Cause of Action - Wrongful; Death against St. Rose, Dr. Ibraheem, DOES and/or ROES

Affirms: neglect of older person; willful and wanton disregard for safety. Requests Court issue summons for group home owner, administrator, caretaker (2010)

Alleges residential facility caregiver left elderly disabled adults without: competent, qualified supervision; regard for their safety or property (2010)

Affirms: neglect of older person; willful or wanton disregard of safety. Requests Court issue arrest warrant for elder care home administrator (2010)

Alleges licensed administrator of elder housing facility wantonly: failed to maintain medication records; failed to provide safe and clean environment; caused elderly residents physical and mental suffering (2010)

Affirms: failure to maintain physical and mental elderly healthcare services; failure to ensure perpetual qualified elderly caregivers; placing elderly care facility residents in physical and mental distress (2010)

Affirms: neglect of older person; willful or wanton disregard for safety. Requests Court issue summons for group home owner-licensed administrator (2010)