California officials dismantle $267M hospice fraud network, 21 suspects charged

Story by Iman Palm 

California officials, including Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta, announced charges against 21 suspects and the dismantling of a large‑scale hospice fraud scheme that allegedly stole $267 million from the state’s Medi‑Cal program.

The investigation, known as Operation Skip Trace, resulted in the arrest of five people after searches of 10 locations in Southern California. In addition, two handguns and over $757,000 in cash were seized. 

DOJ filed three criminal complaints charging 21 defendants with conspiracy to commit health care fraud, health care fraud, money laundering, and identity theft. Prosecutors also added aggravated white‑collar crime and aggravated money‑laundering enhancements.

“This isn’t a political game for us. This is about protecting taxpayer dollars, protecting the programs that sick and vulnerable Californians rely on, and protecting our state,” Bonta said in a statement. “Over the life of this fraud scheme, not a single legitimate hospice service was ever provided, yet millions were billed in a brazen, calculated scheme that exploited the Medi-Cal system. This wasn’t a mistake or a loophole; it was deliberate fraud.”

The California Department of Justice launched the investigation after receiving a credible fraud allegation from the Department of Health Care Services.

According to investigators, the suspects purchased personal information for non‑California residents on the dark web and used those stolen identities to enroll individuals in Medi‑Cal through Covered California.

Authorities say 14 hospice companies were then purchased using straw owners, and billers submitted claims for hospice services that were never provided. The fraudulent billing totaled approximately $267 million.

During Bonta’s tenure, the DOJ conducted 294 hospice‑related investigations, filed 119 criminal cases, and secured 51 convictions tied to hospice fraud.

State officials urged families to watch for warning signs.

• The patient isn’t receiving regular visits from nurses, aides or caregivers.
• Medication, equipment or other promised services are missing.
• Scheduled visits are frequently missed or occur at unusual or inconsistent times.
• The hospice team rarely checks in or is difficult to reach.
• The patient does not appear to have a life‑limiting illness.
• The patient can still perform most daily activities without major changes.
• There is no clear diagnosis explaining why hospice was recommended.
• The patient or family never received a clear explanation that hospice is end‑of‑life care.
• Hospice services began without a referral or explanation from the patient’s regular doctor.
• Someone offered gift cards, groceries or cash in exchange for signing up.
• The offer came from someone unfamiliar or seemed “too good to be true.”
• The patient has remained in hospice longer than six months with no updates or discussion.
• There is no clear care plan or communication about next steps.
• Staff appear rushed, unprofessional or poorly trained.
• Bills or Medi‑Cal statements do not match the care being provided.
• The patient or family feels pressured to stay enrolled.

How to protect yourself from hospice fraud

• Know the purpose: Hospice is intended for patients with terminal illnesses nearing end of life.
• Consult your doctor: Always speak with the patient’s regular physician before agreeing to hospice care.
• Watch for red flags: Be cautious of services offered without a referral or providers offering incentives.
• Ask questions: Legitimate hospice agencies will clearly explain services, billing and care plans.
• Verify providers: Use licensed, accredited hospice agencies and review their credentials.
• Understand your benefits: Know what Medi‑Cal or insurance covers to help spot false charges.
• Keep records: Document all care and compare it with insurance statements.
• Report concerns: If something feels wrong, report it immediately.

How to report suspected hospice fraud

• Online: https://oag.ca.gov/dmfea/reporting
• Phone: DOJ Division of Medi‑Cal Fraud & Elder Abuse Complaint Line, (800) 722‑0432
• Mail: California Department of Justice Division of Medi‑Cal Fraud & Elder Abuse P.O. Box 944255 Sacramento, CA 94244‑2550 

Full Article & Source:
California officials dismantle $267M hospice fraud network, 21 suspects charged

Nekoosa woman gets 8 years probation for theft from elderly AZ woman

Wood County Circuit Judge Timothy Gebert also ordered Janice Christiansen to pay $82,438 restitution after stealing from an 82-year-old Tucson, Arizona, woman.

by Karen Madden

Key Points

• A 65-year-old Nekoosa woman was sentenced to eight years of probation for stealing more than $59,000 from an elderly Arizona woman.
• The woman, who had power of attorney, used the funds for personal expenses, including ATM withdrawals at casinos.
• The theft resulted in the 82-year-old victim facing eviction from her assisted-living facility due to unpaid bills.
• As part of her sentence, the woman must pay $82,438 in restitution and is barred from serving as a power of attorney for anyone but her spouse.

WISCONSIN RAPIDS − A 65-year-old Nekoosa woman was sentenced April 10 to eight years of probation and must pay $82,438 restitution for stealing from an elderly Arizona woman's account.

Janice A. Christiansen pleaded guilty April 10 to theft in a business setting. Wood County Circuit Judge Timothy Gebert withheld a prison sentence and placed Christiansen on probation. He ordered her to pay $82,438 restitution, with $5,000 to be paid by May 11 and $500 a month to be paid starting June 1. Gebert also ordered Christiansen to undergo any counseling deemed necessary, have no contact with the victim and not to serve as a guardian or power of attorney for anyone other than her spouse.

According to the criminal complaint, on Nov. 10, an investigator from the state of Arizona contacted the Wood County Sheriff's Office and said she was investigating fraudulent spending from an 82-year-old Tucson, Arizona, woman's bank account. The woman has dementia and is in an assisted-living community, the investigator said.

The investigator said Christiansen had been spending money out of the woman's personal account for about two years, dating back to about June 1, 2023. The investigator said a check for $10,500 was written on the account, as well as ATM withdrawals at machines at the Ho-Chunk Casino and White-Tail Crossing in Nekoosa. The total amount was between $20,000 and $30,000.

Officials learned Christiansen had the woman's "power of attorney," according to the complaint. The automatic payments to the woman's assisted-living center had been turned off and a check written to the facility had bounced. Notice of termination of the 82-year-old woman's patient status with the center was given because she was about $32,000 past due, according to the complaint.

Officials chose a random month, May 2024, to look closely at transactions. During the month, they found 17 cash withdrawals all made in Wood County, according to the complaint. No withdrawals were made in Arizona. 

The total amount of Christiansen's withdrawals from the elderly woman's account minus deposits she made from June 25, 2023, to Feb. 3, 2025, was $59,410, according to the complaint.

Christiansen told investigators she and her husband got to know the older woman when the couple was going down to Arizona during the winter for seven years. Christiansen said she and her husband stopped going to Arizona about three years ago. Christiansen said the woman asked her to become her power of attorney, according to the complaint.

Christiansen said she struggled to pay the elderly woman's rent because the woman received $4,000 a month income and rent was about $3,500, according to the complaint. The investigator went over the woman's monthly expenses and income with Christiansen and she agreed there should be a monthly surplus of about $270, according to the complaint.

Christiansen said the facility had increased the rates. She called them several times to try to verify the rent but she couldn't get the information, she said. Christiansen said she became confused about how much the rent was and how much back pay was owed, according to the complaint.

Investigators learned Christiansen had lost $150,000 gambling at a casino. Christiansen said she didn't believe the whole amount she lost came from the older woman's account. When the investigator asked Christiansen how much she thought she had taken from the woman, Christiansen said she didn't know but she thought it might be between $50,000 and $60,000.

Full Article & Source:
Nekoosa woman gets 8 years probation for theft from elderly AZ woman 

Terri Schiavo Guardianship Records to Remain Confidential, Court Rules - State Affairs

BY JIM SAUNDERS

Key Points

1. State appeals court rejects bid to unseal Terri Schiavo records
2. Schiavo died in 2005 after feeding tube removal
3. The court cited a state law keeping guardianship records confidential

Two decades after Pinellas County resident Terri Schiavo died following high-profile legal, political and ethical battles over removing her feeding tube, a state appeals court has rejected an attempt to unseal records about the case.

A three-judge panel of the 2nd District Court of Appeal on Wednesday denied the attempt by Schiavo’s brother and mother — Bobby and Mary Schindler — and an advocacy group, the Terri Schiavo Life & Hope Network.

Schiavo died March 31, 2005, 15 years after she sustained severe brain damage because of a cardiac arrest at age 26. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, sought permission in 1998 to remove her feeding tube, drawing fierce opposition from her brother and parents.

The case drew national attention and sparked lengthy legal fights and debates in the Florida Legislature and Congress, with Gov. Jeb Bush helping lead efforts to prevent the removal of the feeding tube. Courts allowed the removal, ultimately resulting in Terri Schiavo’s death.

Wednesday’s opinion rejected an attempt by the Schindlers and the advocacy group to open records in a guardianship case. Michael Schiavo was his wife’s guardian after her incapacitation.

The opinion said Bobby Schindler and the group sought to intervene in the long-closed case as a step toward opening the records. It said Mary Schindler did not need to intervene because she had been a party to the case. But it upheld a circuit judge’s decision denying their requests.

In part, the opinion cited a state law aimed at keeping guardianship records confidential. Chief Judge Matthew Lucas wrote that the “fact that Ms. Schiavo passed away many years ago” did not “diminish the importance of the confidentiality the legislature afforded her guardianship records.”

“Finally, and perhaps most glaringly, none of the appellants [the Schindlers and the group] have ever explained why they waited nearly two decades after Ms. Schiavo’s death before filing a motion to unseal her guardianship records,” the opinion, joined by Judges Stevan Northcutt and Craig Villanti, said. “Their failure to address that pertinent question would seem fatal to their argument that good cause justified unsealing these confidential documents.”

Similarly, the opinion said Bobby Schindler and the group did not provide adequate reasons for intervening, saying their only justification “is that they wish to see what is in the sealed guardianship records so that they can, perhaps, use whatever they might find in their public advocacy. We agree with the circuit court that that is an insufficient basis to permit intervention in a case that ended more than twenty years ago.”

In a January news release on the group’s website, Bobby Schindler said the appeal was “about transparency, constitutional rights, and the pursuit of truth.”

“These documents may contain information that could alter the historical understanding of Terri’s case,” he said in a prepared statement. “There is no valid justification for continued secrecy after two decades.”

Bobby Schindler is president of the group, which says on its website that it has “advocated for and assisted thousands of medically vulnerable patients and families” since its founding in 2005.

Full Article & Source:
Terri Schiavo Guardianship Records to Remain Confidential, Court Rules - State Affairs

See Also:
Terri Schiavo 

‘A false front’: The California agency failing to stop conservatorship abuses

by Byrhonda Lyons

When Bruce Knopf needed someone to oversee his brother Vinyasi’s special needs trust in 2012, he said, he turned to Donna Bogdanovich because she was licensed by California. 

As a professional fiduciary, Bogdanovich was paid to manage Vinyasi’s money. 

But over time, she stopped paying the bills, and the consequences piled up. His car broke down. He faced eviction. “There were times I went without food,” said Vinyasi, who legally goes by one name.  

So he turned to the Professional Fiduciaries Bureau, the place Californians are supposed to rely on in situations like these. Vinyasi filed a complaint in June 2019, alleging that Bogdanovich had not paid his rent and was “habitually” late paying his other bills. 

The bureau didn’t take action against her at the time, and Vinyasi said he eventually became homeless. 

It turns out that Vinyasi wasn’t alone. The bureau started getting complaints about Bogdanovich just months after the agency awarded her a license, giving her the authority to control the finances and lives of vulnerable people deemed unable to take care of themselves.

Over the years, the bureau fined her multiple times for not providing records during an investigation and operating with an expired license. In fact, about a year before Vinyasi’s complaint, someone warned the bureau that Bogdanovich was transferring money between client accounts, but the complaint didn’t go far. The bureau closed the complaint because it didn’t have contact information for the alleged victim. Bogdanovich maintained power over Vinyasi’s life. 

Years later, even after police stepped in and arrested her on charges of stealing $2.5 million of her clients’ funds, Bogdanovich maintained total control over Vinyasi’s finances for nearly 10 more months before she resigned.

Two decades ago, the California Legislature designed the Professional Fiduciaries Bureau after a Los Angeles Times investigation showed judges were not preventing abuse and insider dealing. The state gave the bureau the responsibility to license fiduciaries, enforce the law and uphold ethical standards.

An ongoing investigation by CalMatters, based on a review of probate court records, agency documents and interviews with scores of affected families, found that the agency has failed to fulfill its vital promise to protect Californians, even as the state’s population ages.

It hasn’t stopped conflicts prohibited by its own code of conduct or outrageous behavior by California fiduciaries, frustrating desperate families trying to protect their loved ones and hold on to their family wealth. 

The information it maintains on fiduciaries is often kept secret or is sometimes inaccurate, giving the people who rely on the industry little information about who they should — and shouldn’t — trust. The agency operates largely on an honor system, leaving it to fiduciaries to report publicly whether they’ve been removed from a case for misconduct. 

The bureau itself has puttered along with no leader and a few employees. Gov. Gavin Newsom hasn’t filled its open chief position for a year and a half. In fact, it has just one employee at the moment, because two of its other three positions are also vacant, an agency spokesperson told CalMatters. The bureau oversees nearly 900 licensed fiduciaries; it said it also gets support from its parent agency, the Department of Consumer Affairs. 

In 2025, the agency received 174 complaints. The bureau can fine and cite fiduciaries for violations such as late annual statements and inaccurate information relatively quickly. In 2025, the bureau took 58 days, on average, to issue a citation. 

However, seriously punishing a fiduciary usually takes longer. That same year, the bureau took, on average, more than two years from the time of a complaint to suspend, revoke or surrender a license.  

The bureau has revoked the licenses of five fiduciaries since 2022, according to the agency’s annual reports. 

“Why put up a false front that they’re there to serve a purpose? They don’t serve any purpose,” Vinyasi said. “Even if you couldn’t fix the problems, at least erase the lie that they’re there to do something, because they don’t do anything.”

CalMatters tried to speak with someone at the agency for over a year for this series, but the Department of Consumer Affairs would not make anyone available for an interview, citing its open director job. 

Newsom’s spokesperson, Izzy Gardon, said in an email that the governor is “actively recruiting to fill the position.”

Bogdanovich’s scheme didn’t unravel until a victim went to the Los Angeles Police Department in 2022. 

All told, she pleaded no contest to taking more than $160,000 from Vinyasi and over $1 million from her other clients, court records show, continuing to funnel their money to her accounts even after the bureau placed her on probation. 

At the bureau’s request, the court suspended Bogdanovich’s license weeks after she was arrested, while the agency waited for a hearing to revoke her license. The suspension didn’t remove her from any of her appointments. 

The bureau’s records indicated that Bogdanovich was managing 24 open cases and $2.8 million in assets while she sat in jail, a bureau investigator told the court in a March 2024 letter. The state eventually revoked Bogdanovich’s license four months after her arrest.

In response to questions, agency spokesperson Monica Vargas said in an email that “the Bureau must do its due diligence to gather facts and collect evidence to take action against a license.” 

Bogdanovich eventually was sentenced to four years in jail and four under supervision. She did not respond to CalMatters’ request for an interview.

For years, as the bureau investigated Bogdanovich, she avoided serious punishment simply by not cooperating, according to the bureau. 

At the time, the agency didn’t have the authority to revoke a license for refusing to respond to an investigation. 

The Legislature closed that loophole in 2023. At the same time, the bureau got the Legislature to further restrict the information it can share with the public. 

The bureau cannot share publicly:

• Whether the fiduciary has a business or family relationship with companies hired with their clients’ money and any details about that connection.
  
• Whether a court has found that a fiduciary breached their duties.
  
• Case numbers or details when a fiduciary was removed or resigned from a case or agreed to a settlement after a dispute. 

Instead of receiving details that would show a fiduciary’s past issues, the public can only see a document that’s essentially a wall of black ink, with only yes-or-no boxes that may or may not be accurately checked.

The Professional Fiduciaries Bureau redacts most of the information on its members’ annual statements, significantly limiting what it shares with the public. Illustration by Miguel Gutierrez Jr., CalMatters

A 2021 law is supposed to require courts to notify the bureau if judges punish fiduciaries for abusing their license, but it only goes into effect if the lawmakers fund it. They haven’t, according to a spokesperson for the Judicial Council, the policymaking body of California courts.

Carole Herman, an advocate who helped start the bureau, said the Legislature should take a look at it. “They’re insufficiently staffed and funded,” Herman said. “Nobody is really monitoring like they should.”

She thought the bureau would provide strong oversight. “But that’s not how it turned out,” she said.

‘I plead the Fifth’

If you read Leyla Zabih’s annual statements, you’d have no idea she resigned as a conservator after a family objected to her spending and then didn’t follow a court-approved settlement agreement. 

Nancy Encarnacion’s family and Adult Protective Services had worked together to move the 83-year-old to assisted living in 2019 because she and her husband couldn’t afford 24-hour home care.

Later that year, Zabih petitioned the court to be Encarnacion’s conservator, saying that Contra Costa County Adult Protective Services had notified her that Encarnacion wasn’t capable of taking care of herself.  

Zabih told the court that Encarnacion was at risk of being kicked out of the facility if she didn’t have a conservator to manage her care and finances. Probate law requires that family members be notified when someone files for a temporary conservatorship, but Zabih requested an exemption, citing medical and financial emergencies. 

Encarnacion herself wasn’t outright against the conservatorship, but she didn’t want Zabih in charge after finding her to be “rude and bossy,” Encarnacion’s attorney told the court.

A judge approved Zabih’s petitions. Encarnacion’s relatives, on the East Coast, said they were taken aback by how quickly they lost control of Encarnacion’s life. 

After the family complained about Zabih hiring an unlicensed contractor to remodel Encarnacion’s home, court records show Zabih denied it. She portrayed the family as meddling, saying “the steady stream of negative and critical input we receive from Nancy’s extended family has become extremely counterproductive.”

A few months later she conceded the family was correct about the unlicensed contractor, court records show. 

The family grew concerned after learning that Zabih sold Encarnacion’s Chevron stock at a significant loss, paid for 24-hour care while Encarnacion lived in a care home that provided nursing services, and fell behind on paying the rent to the facility, according to an objection that family members filed with the court.

Barreling towards an expensive legal fight, the two sides agreed to a settlement: Zabih would file a final accounting of Encarnacion’s money and resign. The elderly woman’s niece would take over and not report Zabih to the bureau.

Even though the bureau’s rules prohibit licensed fiduciaries from entering into agreements that limit someone’s ability to file a complaint, Judge Susanne M. Fenstermacher approved the settlement in November 2020. Zabih resigned, and Encarnacion died about a month later. 

In 2022, court records show, Zabih was not adhering to the agreement. She had not filed a final ledger of Encarnacion’s money, forcing the case back to court.

The court found that Zabih was “in breach” of the settlement agreement and ordered her to explain why the court shouldn’t report her to the bureau for “failure to account and failure to comply with a Court-approved settlement agreement,” a temporary judge wrote in November 2022.

She filed the final accounting a month later. 

Zabih requested $9,000 in addition to $13,000 she’d already received in compensation. 

The family objected and alleged that Zabih employed one of the registered nurses it used for Encarnacion’s care and didn’t disclose the relationship. The court record does not reflect that Zabih responded to the objection, and she did not respond to CalMatters’ question about it.

Fenstermacher did not approve Zabih’s accounting of Encarnacion’s money and denied Zabih’s request for additional pay, saying in an order that “the compensation requested did not benefit the conservatee or her estate.”

The family also asked Fenstermacher to report Zabih to the bureau for “failure to properly account, provide receipts and invoices, disclose affiliate relationships with caregivers/agents she hired, and comply with the terms of a Court-approved settlement agreement,” according to the order. But Fenstermacher scribbled out that entire paragraph in the final order. 

“I feel like Leyla Zabih should not be a professional fiduciary,” said the family’s attorney, Cara Lankford, in an interview.

As all of this unfolded, Zabih’s annual statements to the bureau made no mention of it. 

When asked on her 2021 annual statement if she’d resigned or settled in a case where a complaint had been filed, she checked “no” in response to both questions.

When CalMatters asked Zabih why she didn’t tell the bureau about her resignation, she said, “I plead the Fifth.”

She stood by the care she gave Encarnacion. “I miss Nancy,” she said.

The agency said it relies on its fiduciaries to be transparent. 

“Licensees attest to the information they’ve submitted is truthful and accurate,” Vargas said. “If the Bureau becomes aware of information provided that was not accurate, it will open an investigation.”

Encarnacion’s family eventually filed two complaints against Zabih, for hiring an unlicensed contractor and not following the court-ordered agreement. 

The bureau cited her in 2023 and 2024 for not filing timely annual statements and operating with an expired license. The citations do not mention her failure to report the settlement or her resignation.

In an interview, Zabih blamed her late annual statement on covid-19, saying she was busy “out holding your parents’ and grandparents’ hands during the pandemic.”

‘I’m not practicing, I’m just finishing’

While late annual statements are often deemed a minor citation, cases reviewed by CalMatters show that fiduciaries who face disciplinary action for more serious offenses often have a previous record of filing late, inaccurate and incomplete annual statements.

Take Iris Hecker, for instance. She had submitted late annual statements to the bureau for nearly a decade.

But the bureau didn’t start investigating until someone complained about how she handled a case in 2022. 

That year, Hecker approached Betty Stagnaro while she was in a nursing home receiving rehabilitation for back pain, according to an account Hecker gave to the bureau. Stagnaro, who was 93, had dementia.

Hecker told the state that the nursing home administrator and a private care manager found the friend whom Stagnaro had designated to make her medical decisions “very difficult to work with” and asked Hecker to take over. She said the home wasn’t being paid for Stagnaro’s stay.

Hecker had Stagnaro sign documents to make the switch from the friend.

Unlike conservatorships, which are public and are overseen by a judge, agreements like these are typically private and don’t automatically have court oversight. 

However, there were multiple issues with the documents that Stagnaro signed, according to the bureau’s investigation. A patient advocate or ombudsman was not present to witness the signature at the nursing home, as they are supposed to be under state law. 

Hecker also didn’t have anyone assess whether Stagnaro was fit enough to sign documents, investigators found. 

But the signature put Hecker in charge of Stagnaro’s finances and health care. 

Within three months, Hecker sold the elderly woman’s condo and got rid of her personal belongings. She also isolated Stagnaro from her friends while hiring people to provide her with companionship. She later admitted to lying to a bank to create a trust account for Stagnaro, even though the woman didn’t have a trust, according to the bureau’s investigation.

In addition, Hecker paid herself $65,000 in advance fees and admitted to the bureau that the amounts she withdrew from Stagnaro’s accounts as advance payments were “excessive,” according to the bureau’s investigation. She also submitted inaccurate invoices, charged Stagnaro for duplicate services, and billed Stagnaro for her time dealing with an investigation the San Mateo Police Department and the county ombudsman were conducting over her handling of Stagnaro’s case, according to the bureau.

Hecker provided “no credible support for the fees she collected against the advance payments,” the bureau found. 

Around the same time, the bureau audited Hecker’s license and discovered that, in addition to her late statements, she had previously worked with an expired license for over a year, according to bureau records. The bureau fined her $5,000.

Hecker told CalMatters that “there was no impropriety.” She said she believes the bureau is important because “there’s a lot of abuse.” Hecker said that she was “too tired to fight” the bureau’s accusations, and she agreed to surrender her license at the end of 2024.

But that didn’t stop her from working as an unlicensed fiduciary, which someone can do under very limited circumstances, according to state law.

Even though the settlement required her to resign from her positions and confirm her resignation with the bureau, it’s unclear whether she ever did. Those records are not public, and the bureau would not answer questions about Hecker.

Last month Hecker signed a document selling her now-deceased client’s San Francisco home for $2.25 million. 

When asked about it, Hecker said, “I’m not practicing, I’m just finishing.” 

Full Article & Source:
‘A false front’: The California agency failing to stop conservatorship abuses 

Man turns himself in to face elder abuse, aggravated assault charges

By WSBTV.com News Staff

LAGRANGE, Ga. — A man has turned himself in to police to face charges in connection with a fight that caused a 67-year-old man to be airlifted to a hospital.

LaGrange PD said they responded at about 8:15 p.m. March 29 to 121 Turner St. and found L.B. Hubbard with serious face and head injuries.

Hubbard was airlifted to a Columbus area hospital.

Witnesses described a man who they said attacked Hubbard, even punching and stomping his head while he was on the ground.

On April 9, Larry Cotton, 42, turned himself in to LaGrange PD without incident.

He faces charges of aggravated assault, aggravated battery and elder abuse. 

Full Article & Source:
Man turns himself in to face elder abuse, aggravated assault charges

Floyd circuit judge to join statewide task force to revise codes for guardianship cases

Indiana's Guardianship Code Revision Task Force will seek to ensure guardianship cases are as easy as possible to navigate.

by Norman Seawright

NEW ALBANY, Ind. —  Indiana’s governor is creating a new task force to revise the state’s codes for cases involving court-appointed guardians for children and adults.

A southern Indiana judge has been chosen for the job, and Floyd Circuit Court Judge Justin Brown said the work is personal.

“My mother has been, you know, she got diagnosed with dementia at 55. So she's been under that, and it's progressed Alzheimer's. So she's one of those people that's in a situation that I would be there to try to help the family with,” Brown said.

Brown said guardianship cases can be traumatic and intimidating to navigate.

“Guardianship cases are inherently traumatic for a lot of people. I mean, think about—you're taking away someone's fundamental right to govern themselves, their own body, because they lack the ability, whether it be from mental condition, from infirmity or from age, when you're talking about a child,” Brown said.

Katie Morgan, executive director of Vulnerable Adult Care Advocates, said a statewide approach is needed.

“I am thrilled to see that we are going to have a statewide task force because uniformity is definitely needed,” Morgan said. “I think it's going to help us, and it will help more of the state be more mission-driven toward guardianship and making sure that people are cared for."

Lauren Broderick, executive director of Court Appointed Special Advocates, said the work matters for children, too.

“The state is recognizing some of the gaps or things that need to be improved upon, or streamlining services for children who have open child welfare cases. And addressing guardianship is all part of that,” Broderick said.

Brown said he wants the process to be less intimidating and ultimately better-suited to serving Hoosiers.

“If you can take away some of that trauma from them, it makes them it makes people more likely to step up to say, 'hey, I've got you,'” Brown said.

The task force was created by a bill Gov. Mike Braun signed into law in March. It passed with bipartisan support in both chambers.

Brown’s term begins in July and runs through December 2027. 

Full Article & Source:
Floyd circuit judge to join statewide task force to revise codes for guardianship cases 

Viral video prompts questions about elder abuse reporting

By Randy Aldridge

WILMINGTON, N.C. (WECT) - A video taken by a Wilmington man has gone viral on social media.

Jonathan Pigford said the video shows his elderly neighbor wandering alone and showing signs of neglect. Many people wondered if the situation had reached the level of abuse or neglect.

Sean Dwyer is program manager for adult services at New Hanover County’s Department of Social Services. While he could not speak directly about the viral video, he said that cases like this are tricky to navigate.

Reporting is key to getting help

Dwyer says that the key to getting someone the help they may need often starts with making a call.

“If it’s just streaming out there for you and other people, and everyone’s talking about it, but no one’s reported it to the entity that needs to be out there to look at it, all it does is delay that person’s care,” Dwyer said.

“I would just encourage them to report. These days, we have lots of different platforms to share information. In the end, we are still the entity that needs that information,” he said.

Understanding the difference between abuse and neglect

Dwyer said that knowing the signs of elder abuse before calling is important. It can help the responding agency determine whether it’s abuse or neglect.

“When someone tells us, oh, they’re being abused, a lot of people use it as kind of a blanket term. For us, it’s a caretaker is abusing someone,” Dwyer said. “When it comes to neglect, there’s actually two versions of neglect. We have caretaker neglect and self-neglect.”

Signs of abuse

• Any type of confinement or restraint as punishment
• Refusing services for somebody (having the ability to put services in place and choosing not to)
• Any type of physical act that violates the individual

Signs of neglect

Self-neglect (most common):

• Not having adequate resources and refusal to seek them out
• Isolation
• Not meeting basic needs such as hygiene and eating

Caretaker neglect:

• Exploitation
• Not meeting basic needs such as hygiene and eating

When in doubt, report

Dwyer stated that regardless of whether the signs are clear, an investigation cannot begin until an official report is filed.

“We’re asking if you see enough concern and you’re worried, please do make a report,” Dwyer said.

If you suspect elder abuse, call 910-798-3500. 

Full Article & Source:
Viral video prompts questions about elder abuse reporting 

CT state-paid attorney under investigation for selling homes to business partner

By Ella Napack

State-contracted attorney Kristan Exner, under scrutiny for selling homes of people she served as a fiduciary for to her business partner, is facing an investigation by a Connecticut grievance panel. The Statewide Bar Counsel's office is reviewing her conduct as a conservator and court-appointed fiduciary, according to an attorney for Exner.

Exner sold two homes to her business partner, Joseph Garin, while serving as a professional fiduciary without disclosing the business relationship to the probate court, records show. Both homes were re-sold by Garin within months, in one case for more than two times what he purchased it for, according to property records. Garin declined to comment for this story.

A judge on one of the cases referred her conduct to the state’s bar committee after the new information came to light regarding Exner's relationship to Garin in the home sale of Milford resident Barbara Tobin. An attorney for Exner confirmed in a probate court hearing last month that a panel was formally investigating the matter as part of the Statewide Bar Counsel's review process.

The judge referred the conduct after an attorney for Robert Tobin, the son of Barbara Tobin, put forward a motion to have Exner disbarred for potentially breaking conflict of interest and perjury rules. The Tobins declined to comment for this story.

“There is no doubt that the very serious nature of the allegations raised in Robert Tobin’s amended motion for permanent disbarment of Kristan Exner need to be addressed,” probate judge Ben Gettinger wrote in a February decree after the hearing on the motion. Instead of adjudicating the issue in his courtroom, Gettinger opted for the bar counsel investigation to run its course, noting that he would then determine if the investigation “adequately addressed the specific allegations in this case.” In his decree, Gettinger noted it was unclear whether he had any jurisdiction to rule on the misconduct, raising a question over how to handle the process.

The matter is currently before a local grievance panel that will investigate the case before either dismissing it or moving it to a public hearing. When asked by a CT Insider reporter about the grievance investigation and Gettinger's decree, Exner provided an email statement. 

"The grievance process in Connecticut is complex, private and self-governing. It is there to ensure that as attorneys, we continue to maintain high standards of practice," said Exner. "Rule 3.6 of the Rules of Professional Responsibility sets limitations on attorneys making extra judicial statements, and addresses any attorney who would attempt to utilize the press to prejudice the process. For anyone to speculate or gossip on the process and procedures is unprofessional and disrespectful to those who give of their time.”

Exner remains working on probate matters across the state as a conservator contracted by the state's probate administration, records show. The probate administration, the state's operational oversight body for the probate courts, has told CT Insider that it does not have disciplinary authority over conservator conduct. Although some conservators, like Exner, are attorneys and remain accountable to the state's bar counsel, there are no overarching oversight structures for the professional conservators that sometimes juggle dozens - or even hundreds - of cases across multiple courts. 

The contract for state-paid conservators, however, allows the probate administration to terminate a conservator's contract if they have broken the state's Conservator Standards of Practice. Even if a professional conservator's contract with the state is terminated, they may still be eligible to be paid hourly by the state for other conservatorships. 

While probate records do not indicate that the administration has terminated Exner’s contract, some probate judges, like Gettinger, have opted not to appoint Exner to future cases until the matter is resolved.

“In addition, given the totality of the circumstances surrounding this case, the Court will not appoint Kristan Exner to any of its files indefinitely,” Gettinger wrote in the February decree.

The probate administration declined to answer questions on the status of Exner's contract with the state or whether it has audited any of her accounts.

Attorney Damon Kirschbaum, who represents the Tobins, first wrote to the probate administration about “rogue conservator Kristan Exner” in June 2024. Exner had been removed as Tobin’s conservator but remained involved as an “interested party" as the Tobins were fighting to regain ownership of the home.

“I am and will be imploring you, the Probate Court Administration, and Judge Gettinger to protect Barbara Tobin from Kristan Exner,” Kirschbaum wrote in the email, which was obtained from a Freedom of Information request to the probate administration. 

The emails show that Kirschbaum and an attorney for the probate administration had a conversation about Exner, subsequently.

Kirschbaum wrote to the administration again in October, informing the administration of a motion he filed requesting the permanent disbarment of Exner in light of the new information on Exner's connection to her business partner Garin to whom she sold the Tobin's home. The business partners owned a limited liability company together, according to secretary of the state records.

“Exner’s conduct demonstrates that she is unfit to serve as a fiduciary. It is my understanding that Exner serves as a probate court-appointed fiduciary in a significant number of probate court cases across the state,” Kirschbaum said in the letter. “I am writing to bring this situation to Your Honor’s attention so that Your Honor can take the appropriate steps to protect other vulnerable people from Exner.”

The administration said in an October meeting that it was reviewing the letter. In statements to CT Insider in the months since, the administration has said it does not have authority to intervene on court matters. 

"Any matter pending before a Probate Court is a judicial proceeding within the exclusive jurisdiction of the court," said attorney Evan Brunetti, director of external affairs for the probate administration. "We cannot intervene or comment on a matter before any court, the adjudicative/decision making process of a Probate Judge, or direct that any court take any particular action."

Mairead Painter, the state's Long Term Care Ombudsman, explained that many professional conservators work across multiple courts and that one probate court may not know about misconduct that occurred in a different court.

"If concerns come up in several courts about the same conservator, a judge isn't going to know that unless they're given the information," said Painter. "We need some way to have that information sharing in an appropriate way between probate courts so there is a higher level of accountability there."

Painter said the state needs to find more accountability structures that can work in tandem with the probate administration. 

“We have good standards, it’s holding people accountable to them,” said Painter. 

Full Article & Source:
CT state-paid attorney under investigation for selling homes to business partner 

Michigan woman arrested for allegedly starving, torturing disabled sister-in-law she locked in basement

'She told officers she was not fed very often and that she didn’t have any access to water,' Saginaw Police Detective Sgt Jeff Doud said

By Landon Mion

A Michigan woman was arrested and hit with felony charges after she allegedly kept her disabled sister-in-law locked in a basement for two years, when she nearly starved the victim to death and blasted a radio nonstop.

Tasha Beamon, 48, was charged with vulnerable adult abuse and unlawful imprisonment.

The victim managed to escape the basement and broke a neighbor’s window on March 15 as she sought to enter the home, alert police and flee captivity, according to MLive.

The neighbor called 911 and the victim told police that Beamon, the wife of the 58-year-old victim's late brother, was holding her captive in the Saginaw home’s basement for two years before she found a way to free herself.

"She told officers she was not fed very often and that she didn’t have any access to water," Saginaw Police Detective Sgt. Jeff Doud told the outlet.

The victim said Beamon had kept her on an old mattress since March 2024 with a nearby radio constantly blaring.

Police went to Beamon’s house and observed a lock on the basement door, a mattress on the floor and a radio playing loudly. Police also said there was a 5-gallon bucket of urine in the basement.

"Usually, somebody was there. She didn’t believe anyone was home at the time, so she was able to force a door open and escape," Doud said.

Police went to the house and observed a lock on the basement door, a mattress on the floor and a radio playing loudly. (Google Maps)

Emergency responders transported the woman to a hospital, where she was treated for severe malnourishment. Hospital staff told police the woman would likely die if she were discharged.

The neighbor told ABC 12 that he was shocked to find the victim suddenly in his living room with a metal pipe "almost as big as she is."

"I don’t even know how she had the power to even break the window," the man said. "I thought she was like 78. She was tall, skin and bones."

"She asks me to call the cops at first, which was weird. But that was the first thing she said to me: Call the cops," he added.

Beamon later admitted to police that she kept the woman in her house without allowing her to leave. She also made 40 calls to the hospital where her sister-in-law was staying.

Investigators suspect that Beamon was keeping the woman captive to collect her disability payments, Doud said.

Beamon was arrested on April 2 and booked into the Saginaw County Jail on $100,000 bond, the amount ordered after prosecutors described her as a danger to the public.

She will appear for a preliminary examination on April 20.  

Full Article & Source:
Michigan woman arrested for allegedly starving, torturing disabled sister-in-law she locked in basement