Probate judge hits back over reprimand

She once said she broke court rules ‘every day’

by Robert Anglen

A probate judge bragged about how she violated court rules “every day” just before she hugged a felon in open court.

She was caught on court cameras joking about turning off the microphones. She laughed.

The Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct did not.

It found Maricopa County Superior Court Commissioner Vanessa Smith didn’t violate one rule that day but three of them.

The commission reprimanded her in January for eroding public confidence in the court, failing to act impartially and showing bias or prejudice.

The only thing that stopped it from issuing formal charges and meting out more severe discipline was Smith’s willingness to admit what she did was “inappropriate,” court records show.

“The commissioner’s contrition and acknowledgement of the violations prompted the decision to issue a reprimand,” Commission Chair Christopher Staring wrote in a Jan. 28 order.

But Smith appears to be having second thoughts and is pushing back on the discipline. A court spokesperson said Smith was challenging the order.

“She filed a Motion for Reconsideration that we understand is pending with the Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct. This means that the Commission’s order is not final,” Tasya Peterson, the court’s communications director, said in a Feb. 18 email to The Republic.

Smith declined comment. She would not say if she remains contrite or disagrees her conduct was inappropriate.

The reprimand came after The Republic reported on Smith’s conduct at a court hearing during which she befriended a man fresh out of prison who was convicted of financially exploiting his 97-year-old mother.

In the span of a nearly hour, Smith told the man how young and wonderful he looked. She offered career advice and personal growth tips. She talked favorite concerts, weight gain, bucket lists and the quality of In-N-Out french fries. She also coached him on ways to secure visits with his mother.

Then Smith asked if she could step down from the bench and give him a hug.

Lawyers and legal scholars described the April 25 hearing as a troubling and clear violation of ethical standards.

William Black, a white-collar criminologist who served as a visiting scholar at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, said Smith’s hearing appeared to subvert fundamental judicial training and etiquette.

He called Smith’s conduct “completely unethical”

Commissioners in probate court have many of the same powers as judges. Among other duties, they monitor cases of people ruled to be incapacitated, whose bank accounts, property, possessions and continued care are turned over to third parties known as legal guardians.

Smith’s conduct illustrates the insular nature of probate court, where a tight-knit group of judges and lawyers hold sway over the health and wealth of people unable to care for themselves.

Hearings regularly take place in near-empty courtrooms without the public scrutiny or attention given to criminal prosecutions. Nevertheless, decisions on individual freedom and finances can be as consequential as a life sentence, with or without parole.

The Commission on Judicial Conduct filed its own complaint against Smith over the April 25 hearing.

“The Commission considered the public nature of the conduct, the damage to the reputation of the judiciary, and that the Commission had previously issued a public reprimand to another judicial officer for similar conduct,” it said in its order.

The commission has held wide sway over Arizona judges and justices since its creation in 1970. It has the authority to investigate complaints leveled against members of the Arizona Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, Superior Court, justice of the peace courts and municipal courts.

In its order against Smith, the commission recounted her stepping down from the bench when she was recorded as saying: “I realize I probably violate judicial behavior code every day.”

Smith, in her response to the complaint, indicated empathy for Karl Edmark III. She said the 70-year-old felon suffered from “cognitive function issues” but allowed she should not have hugged him in a courtroom setting, according to the commission’s order.

“Commissioner Smith stated that while this was well intentioned, it created an appearance inconsistent with the expectations of judicial demeanor and impartiality,” the order stated.

Phoenix probate lawyer Tom Asimou said the Judicial Conduct Commission did not go far enough in punishing Smith. “To maintain the integrity of our court system, she needs to be terminated immediately,” he said in a Feb. 18 interview. “She just doesn’t get it.”

Asimou was not in the courtroom when Smith hugged Edmark. He represented the company charged with overseeing the physical and financial wellbeing of Edmark’s mother and had fought to prevent him from visiting without strict supervision.

Edmark’s mother, Mary Miller, was the former wife of Karl William Edmark, a cardiovascular surgeon who gained international fame — and enormous wealth — for developing the modern defibrillator. He died in 1994.

Edmark III in 2021 took a plea deal

William Black, a white-collar criminologist who served as a visiting scholar at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, said Smith’s hearing appeared to subvert fundamental judicial training and etiquette.

and admitted to stealing more than $150,000 from Miller while acting as her guardian. While incarcerated, Edmark reported that he was suffering from seizures and petitioned the court to appoint a guardian, saying he was unable to care for himself.

When Edmark got out of prison in March, he immediately sought to see his mother in person. Enter Smith. Her role was limited to making sure Edmark’s health and finances were being managed. She lacked the authority to grant Edmark rights to visit his mother.

That didn’t stop her from trying to help him — and using her position on the bench to give Edmark pointers on how to legally make it happen.

Smith during the April 25 hearing referred to Edmark’s conviction as “allegations of theft from a vulnerable adult” and announced in court her desire to “reach some sort of agreement so Karl could see his mom.”

Judges and commissioners don’t typically address people appearing before them by first name. But Smith said during the hearing she felt as if she could relate to Edmark and told him: “I always refer to you in my head as Karl.”

Two of Edmark’s siblings called the hearing “bizarre” and “appalling.” They said Smith seemed to abandon objectivity and professionalism, becoming personally invested in their brother’s case — and his cause. They questioned why a judge would take an active role in helping an abuser get access to his victim.

Miller lapsed into a coma and died Oct. 1 before Edmark was able to visit.

Smith became a commissioner in 2022. Her time on the bench has included earlier public controversies.

Commissioners in Maricopa County are chosen by a committee of judges and lawyers and appointed by the court’s presiding judge. Their roles are limited compared with judges. But probate court commissioners have wide latitude to oversee cases.

Smith graduated from law school in 2004 and worked for most of her career in the Maricopa County Office of the Public Defender, according to her biography on the court’s website.

She got high marks in her 2024 performance review, with litigants and court staff giving her 100% in surveys on a range of categories.

Her highest scores among attorneys were for maintaining control of the courtroom. knowledge of evidence rules and clearly written legal decisions.

Her lowest score was for “judicial temperament” and being respectful to all individuals.

Asimou in March 2025 accused Smith in a judicial conduct complaint of using a racial slur to describe a man seeking to become his adult son’s guardian. He also accused her of retaliating against the man in subsequent hearings.

The commission dismissed the complaint. And Smith was vigorously defended by the former Maricopa County Superior Court presiding judge.

Judge Joseph Welty told The Republic in a March statement that he didn’t even need to read the complaint to know it was without merit. He said it was clear Smith’s comments were not racially motivated.

“My office takes such accusations seriously,” Welty said. “But this is a frivolous accusation against a court commissioner who was recently awarded for her integrity.”

Full Article & Source:
Probate judge hits back over reprimand

Charlotte County man accused of elder abuse after 911 call

by Madison Monroe Adams

CHARLOTTE COUNTY, Fla. —  An affidavit from the Charlotte County Sheriff's Office said William Hartin was arrested after he was accused of elder abuse following a call to 911 Tuesday night, where he was reportedly crying hysterically and asking for resources to help care for his 92-year-old mother with dementia.

An affidavit said Hartin told the operator that caring for his mother was too much and that he needed help or he would reportedly put her on the street, leaving her homeless.

Charlotte County deputies arrived at his home at Maple Leaf Golf and Country Club on Kings Highway and found the older woman outside in a wheelchair. It was less than 50 degrees, and she was cold. The woman told deputies she was freezing and began to cry.

Sarah Gualco from the Area Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida emphasized the importance of avoiding burnout and stress to prevent cases of elder abuse.

"We want to avoid burnout. We want to avoid stress and ultimately prevent cases of elder abuse," Gualco said.

She noted that over 80% of the calls they receive are from individuals seeking funded long-term care services.

"I would say over 80% of calls we receive are individuals looking for funded long-term care services," Gualco said.

She added that their help is free and available through a hotline. HELPLINE: 866-413-5337

"We can do what is available to help, create, basically, a safety net for this family so that, you know, it doesn't result in a crisis or tragedy like this," Gualco said.

Gualco explained that the agency acts as a coordinated entry for state and federal services, including long-term care services available through funded programs.

"We're kind of like coordinated entry for some state and federal services, long-term care services that are available through funded programs," she said.

She stressed the importance of knowing about their services before a crisis occurs.

"The message we try to push out is know us before you need us. Because often when individuals are in the midst of crisis, and they reach out, we might not be able to respond as immediately as a crisis would require," Gualco said. 

Full Article & Source:
Charlotte County man accused of elder abuse after 911 call

Judge questions former Sullivan County public guardian about multiple guardianship cases

Former Sullivan County public administrator Joan Brummitt answered for her oversight as guardian

by Matt Flener

MILAN, Mo. —  A former Sullivan County elected public official faced pointed questions from a judge on Tuesday for how she handled the estates of 13 people whom she oversaw as guardian or conservator.

The judge ordered former longtime Sullivan County Public Administrator Joan Brummitt to appear before him on Tuesday — in one case asking why she did not transfer more than $400,000 from a ward’s estate to the new public administrator in the county after Brummitt resigned from office.

Sullivan County Associate Circuit Judge Adam Warren on Tuesday, after hearing an explanation from Brummitt’s attorney, gave Brummitt more time to transfer ownership of that specific ward’s bank and brokerage accounts to the new county public administrator before holding her in contempt.

In 12 other probate cases of former wards, Warren cited Brummitt for failing to file various reports. Brummitt cleared most of those cases by filing the reports in the court record and before Warren on Tuesday.

Brummitt declined to comment to KMBC 9 News about the cases.

Brummitt’s court appearance marks the latest questions from a judge.

In a separate criminal case, she is facing four felony counts of financial exploitation of an older/disabled person and four felony counts of stealing $750 or more.

She has pleaded not guilty.

Brummitt, in her role as Sullivan County Public Administrator, had the responsibility to care for wards of the state.

Public administrators are elected in Missouri to take care of financial and medical decisions for elderly or mentally ill patients when a judge decides family or friends can no longer care for them.

Court documents in Brummitt's criminal case

Previous court documents allege Brummitt moved money last October from an elderly ward’s bank account to her personal bank account on four separate occasions.

A Missouri State Highway Patrol investigator said on Oct. 14, 2025, Brummitt used her personal cell phone and online banking app to send money from the ward’s account through three separate transactions, totaling $999, $1,900 and $1,980.

She made another online $999 transfer on Oct. 16, the MSHP investigator said in court documents.

The total amount came to $5,878.

Brummitt is charged with four felony counts of financial exploitation of an older/disabled person and four felony counts of stealing $750 or more.

A Missouri State Highway Patrol investigator testified last month that Brummitt admitted to the highway patrol that she moved money from the ward’s account to hers.

The investigator told the court that Brummitt admitted to highway patrol investigators that hackers told her to move the money.

Brummitt’s criminal attorney, Mark Williams, has previously told KMBC 9 News that Brummitt is innocent until proven guilty.

In a series called "Paper Prisons," KMBC 9 News is investigating ways to systemically improve the care of those under guardianship by highlighting stories of people struggling to navigate a tangled system of legal paperwork, medical records and court orders.

If you have a tip about a Missouri guardianship case, email investigates@kmbc.com. 

Full Article & Source:
Judge questions former Sullivan County public guardian about multiple guardianship cases 

See Also:
Sullivan County elected official accused of stealing thousands from disabled person

Missouri elected guardian charged with 8 felonies for stealing from ward

Missouri public guardian pleads not guilty to eight felony counts

Judge: Missouri public guardian’s felony financial crime case can move forward   

You May Also Be Interested In: 

Paper Prisons: Missouri woman details struggle to leave public guardianship after husband's death

Paper Prisons: Missouri man continues fight to free his mother from public guardianship 

The Ventura Probate Machine: A Pattern of Isolation, Financial Control, and Medical Decline

by Cece Woods

When families enter probate court, they expect protection. They expect oversight. They expect a system designed to safeguard vulnerable adults who cannot protect themselves.

What many families say they do not expect, according to sworn filings now before California courts, is isolation, financial consolidation, rapid medical deterioration, and a wall of administrative opacity.

For some, the moment is unforgettable. A judge speaks. A ruling is made. And in an instant, a mother, a father, a son, or a daughter, a human being who has fought to survive, becomes a ward of the county. Families who reorganized their entire lives around caregiving are suddenly reduced to observers. The people who knew the conservatee’s medical triggers, emergency thresholds, daily rhythms, and hard won progress are deemed unfit, often without a meaningful opportunity to be heard.

Decision making authority over health care, living arrangements, doctors, and treatment shifts to court appointed professionals previously unknown to the family. Introductions are not required. Approval is not sought. Oversight is assumed. Families walk out of court stunned, disoriented, and often traumatized, grappling with how years of intimate, hands on care could be erased in minutes by a procedural ruling.

That experience forms the backdrop of what is now before the courts in Ventura County in the matter of Joshua Saeta, a medically fragile, wholly dependent adult.

Joshua did not enter the probate system because of age, dementia, or gradual decline. According to sworn filings and medical records submitted to the court, he became wholly dependent after suffering a catastrophic cardiac arrest in 2017 that resulted in a severe anoxic brain injury. His brain was deprived of oxygen long enough to cause permanent neurological impairment. He survived, but survival came at a cost.

From that point forward, Joshua required round the clock care, complex medical management, and constant monitoring to remain alive. He could not advocate for himself. He could not manage his medical needs independently. His survival depended entirely on the consistency, precision, and continuity of the care surrounding him.

In the years that followed, Joshua did not languish. According to physician letters and court filings, he achieved relative medical stability under a physician directed, home based care model. That model emphasized continuity, familiar caregivers, specialized nutrition protocols, carefully monitored therapies, and immediate response to subtle changes that could signal medical emergency.

Central to that care was his sister, Jennifer Saeta, who became his primary caregiver and medical advocate. For more than eight years, she lived beside him, learning his baseline condition, emergency warning signs, and recovery thresholds. Treating clinicians relied on her longitudinal knowledge to prevent life threatening decline. The stability Joshua achieved, according to the record, was not accidental. It was built deliberately, over years, through constant hands on care.

Left: Josh Saeta in August 2025 under his sister’s care. 
Right: Josh’s condition has significantly deteriorated under Ventura County Probate Care.

This is not a social media dispute or a family disagreement reframed as legal drama. What has been filed in Ventura County Superior Court under Case No. 201700495761PRCE, and in related appellate proceedings, is an extensive emergency record alleging a repeatable pattern within probate administration, one that according to the filings begins with caregiver removal and culminates in severe medical decline.

The allegations are not informal. They are sworn, structured, and supported by documentary exhibits.

According to Jennifer Saeta’s sworn filings, Joshua’s stability deteriorated after conservatorship authority shifted. The care structure was altered. Placement changed. Family access was restricted. She asserts that this sequence functioned as a divide and conquer process, first removing the individuals most knowledgeable about Joshua’s daily medical management, then isolating him from the continuity of care that had sustained him for years.

Jennifer further alleges that no meaningful investigation preceded her removal and that she was denied a full opportunity to advocate for her brother before decisions affecting his life and care were finalized. These assertions are presented as allegations, not adjudicated findings.

Families caught in this process often describe the same refrain. You may visit, but you may not intervene. Advocacy is reframed as obstruction. Objection is characterized as noncompliance. While families are told to support court appointed conservators, they allege they are instead forced to watch as quality of life diminishes under the control of strangers with no prior relationship to the conservatee.

The emergency petition in the Saeta matter does not accuse criminal conspiracy. It documents patterns.

On February 10, 2026, Andrew Rose submitted a sworn declaration in support of emergency appellate review. Under penalty of perjury, he describes recurring similarities he states he has observed across unrelated Ventura County probate matters. Long standing caregivers characterized as uncooperative. Sudden exclusion from medical decision making. Institutional placement. Rapid medical decline. Restricted communication. Difficulty obtaining records.

Attached to that declaration is a Unified Pattern Summary, which explicitly states that it does not allege criminal conduct or reach legal conclusions. It consolidates recurring factual similarities across cases and leaves questions of culpability to judicial or investigative review.

In the Saeta matter specifically, Jennifer Saeta alleges that a court appointed professional charged with safeguarding Joshua’s interests failed to function as an independent advocate. She does not allege explicit collusion or criminal coordination. Instead, she asserts that the professional’s actions and billing records reflected conduct inconsistent with independent advocacy, leading her to conclude that Joshua’s interests were not being meaningfully advanced. That distinction is central to the filings, which frame the issue as systemic misalignment rather than overt misconduct.

The financial dimension of the case is significant, though partially shielded by confidentiality provisions. Court exhibits confirm that Joshua is associated with a high value trust governed by a nondisclosure agreement. Jennifer Saeta alleges that while Joshua’s physical condition declined, substantial administrative and professional fees were drawn from the trust. She argues that the pattern reflects incentive rather than coincidence. These claims remain allegations and have not been adjudicated.

Additional exhibits include a certified Ventura County Clerk Recorder search documenting numerous estate related filings associated with a recurring fiduciary name. The filings themselves are not alleged to be unlawful. They are presented to demonstrate frequency, volume, and concentration of fiduciary activity within a limited professional ecosystem.

As the legal record expanded, the medical situation intensified.

While declarations were being prepared and exhibits compiled, Joshua’s medical condition deteriorated. According to physician letters submitted to the court, based on photographic review, longitudinal treatment history, and clinical assessment, he now exhibits extensive muscle wasting, depleted subcutaneous fat stores, and findings consistent with severe malnutrition.

The filings state that Joshua has declined to the point of requiring total parenteral nutrition, an intravenous intervention typically reserved for cases in which the gastrointestinal system can no longer sustain life through enteral feeding. The reviewing clinician characterized his condition as an imminent threat to life, citing aspiration risk, pressure ulcer risk, and medical instability associated with prolonged bed confinement.

Jennifer Saeta attributes this decline to the sequence of legal and medical decisions she is challenging. That attribution is presented as her allegation.

The filings cite statutory frameworks governing elder and dependent adult protection in California. Those statutes impose affirmative duties to prevent neglect, broadly defined, and to investigate when a dependent adult experiences unexplained decline. The filings do not assert that Ventura County or its officials have been criminally charged. They ask whether statutory obligations were fulfilled when a wholly dependent adult declined precipitously under court supervised care.

What began as a dispute over authority within a complex probate structure has, according to the petitioner, evolved into an urgent life safety matter. Jennifer Saeta states that after she sought independent legal counsel and challenged decisions affecting Joshua’s care, she was removed from participation in his daily medical oversight. She argues that what appears procedurally administrative on paper has, in practice, resulted in prolonged separation from the person most familiar with Joshua’s medical baseline.

One of the most consequential aspects of the emergency petition is procedural rather than financial. The Unified Pattern Summary notes that in multiple probate matters, conservatees allegedly declined beyond recovery before appellate review could occur. By the time higher courts addressed the issues, the medical outcomes rendered the legal questions effectively moot.

That is the urgency now before the courts.

Review the legal docs HERE.

DISCLAIMER: Investigative reporting in high-profile litigation cases published by The Current Report is non-commercial, fact-based journalism; any project fees compensate research and reporting labor only, sources participate solely in accuracy verification, and final publication is approved exclusively by The Current Report after fact-checking is confirmed. 

Full Article & Source:
The Ventura Probate Machine: A Pattern of Isolation, Financial Control, and Medical Decline 

Harrisburg's Dhyshamier Holmes Charged In Enola Elder Abuse

A caregiver is accused of yelling at and slamming a 90-year-old dementia patient during a late-night incident inside a Pennsylvania home, according to court documents obtained by Daily Voice. 

by Jillian Pikora

Dhyshamier Lamar Holmes, 27, of Harrisburg, was charged with Misdemeanor Abuse of a Care-Dependent Person, court records show.

East Pennsboro Police were dispatched to the 100 block of Center Street in Enola at 8 a.m. on Jan. 20 for a reported non-active assault, according to a release issued Monday, Feb. 23.

The elderly victim told officers she had been assaulted by her caregiver, police said.

According to the affidavit of probable cause, officers later learned the alleged abuse involved a 90-year-old woman identified as A.S., who is deemed a “care dependent person”.

On Feb. 5, police were contacted by Aging and Community Protective Service Investigator Kyndra Strait regarding the case, the affidavit states.

Strait provided three videos of the incident, and advised that between Jan. 30 and Jan. 31, the caregiver was “yelling and cursing” at A.S., the affidavit details.

The videos allegedly show Holmes “picking up A.S. and slamming her on the couch,” and “yelling profanities at A.S.,” according to the affidavit.

Holmes was later identified as the suspect and charged under state law prohibiting a caregiver from striking, shoving, kicking, or otherwise subjecting a care-dependent person to physical contact.

His preliminary hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, April 1, at 2:15 p.m. before Magisterial District Judge Michael Sanderson, court records show. 

Full Article & Source:
Harrisburg's Dhyshamier Holmes Charged In Enola Elder Abuse 

Experts warn elder financial abuse often goes unreported until savings are gone

by Kara Daniel

COLUMBIA S.C. (WACH) — Families often don’t notice financial abuse until significant money is gone, and experts say it frequently goes unreported, leaving many victims without help.

“It is one of the most common types of abuse that goes unreported. In fact, it is under reported,” said Dr. Macie Smith, an elder care professional.

Smith said financial abuse is one of the most common forms of elder abuse and is often committed by someone the victim knows and trusts.

She said victims may not acknowledge what’s happening because they still trust the person involved, or they may stay silent out of fear.

In a situation like that when they don’t accept the fact that they haven’t abused because they still really do trust this person and sometimes they don’t say anything because of fear. Fear of losing this person because they think they’ve helped them all the time,” Smith said.

Smith also warned that people with power of attorney can misuse their authority.

Sometimes people feel like when they have the power of attorney, that they can do whatever they want to do on behalf of the other person. That is false. Even though there is a power of attorney, they can still make their own decisions,” she said.

Experts say warning signs of elder financial abuse can include an older adult seeming confused about recent transactions, showing changes in behavior, becoming more isolated than usual, or expressing fear about money.

Smith recommended families take steps early to help protect loved ones, including regularly reviewing bank statements, considering a trusted third party to oversee finances, and keeping open lines of communication about money.

She said South Carolina nursing homes are also required to help where they can.

They are required to post flyers about financial exploitation, and they are required to provide training to their residence about financial exploitation,” Smith said.

For elders or vulnerable people on Medicaid, families are encouraged to look at the Medicaid exclusion list online, which includes many criminals who have abused Medicaid along with their crimes.

Smith said anyone who suspects abuse should report it immediately to Adult Protective Services so the situation can be investigated before losses grow. 

Full Article & Source:
Experts warn elder financial abuse often goes unreported until savings are gone 

Florida Probate Rules Committee proposes amendments to Florida Probate Rules 5.696, 5.700, 5.901, 5.902, 5.903, 5.904, 5.905, 5.906, and 5.910

 

Source:
Florida Probate Rules Committee proposes amendments to Florida Probate Rules 5.696, 5.700, 5.901, 5.902, 5.903, 5.904, 5.905, 5.906, and 5.910 

Lee County man arrested on elder abuse charges

Sheriff’s office investigation leads to arrest of Keith Michael McEvoy

By Na'Khalia Frazier

LEE COUNTY, Ga. (WALB) - The Lee County Sheriff’s Office arrested Keith Michael McEvoy Thursday, Feb. 19, on charges of exploitation and intimidation of disabled adults, elder persons and residents.

The investigation began when Adult Protective Services notified police about allegations involving elder abuse in Lee County, according to the sheriff’s office.

The sheriff’s office Criminal Investigation Division completed an investigation into the accusations and secured an arrest warrant for McEvoy. 

Full Article & Source:
Lee County man arrested on elder abuse charges 

New calls for elder abuse accountability after Mesa assisted living settlement

Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes announced the settlement last month with the California-based company following allegations of elder abuse and fraud.

By Jason Barry

MESA, AZ (AZFamily) — The owners of Heritage Village Assisted Living facility have been permanently banned from operating healthcare facilities in Arizona.

As part of the settlement with the Arizona Attorney Generals’ Office they also must pay a $100,000 fine.

Arizona AG Kris Mayes announced the settlement last month with the California-based company following allegations of elder abuse and fraud at the Mesa facility. The agreement prohibits the owners from providing healthcare services to vulnerable adults in Arizona.

The case began after multiple reports in 2023 and 2024 exposed issues at Heritage Village that led to a state investigation and lawsuit. Families reported incidents of mistreatment and abuse of residents at the facility.

Family says settlement is insufficient

Renee Caruss said her mother, Carol, was among the residents who were mistreated at Heritage Village. In one incident, Carol was reportedly attacked by another patient.

“You expect with all the money they get that she would be taken care of properly - she wasn’t - she wasn’t taken care of,” Caruss said.

She believes the settlement does not provide enough accountability for what happened at the facility.

“The people that were running that facility knew exactly what they were doing the person the director at the time she’s working at another facility right now,” Caruss said.

Attorney General defends actions

The Attorney General’s office said its priority was protecting Heritage Village residents and preventing similar issues at other long-term care centers.

“Protecting Arizona’s most vulnerable residents has been one of my top priorities since taking office,” Mayes said in a statement. “In the Heritage Village case alone, we seized control of the facility, replaced its management, forced the sale to responsible ownership, and removed the prior owners from operating two other Arizona facilities.”

The Attorney General’s office noted that when Heritage Village faced foreclosure and potential license revocation, their intervention prevented mass displacement of elderly residents.

Legislative changes follow case

Dana Kennedy, state director of AARP Arizona, said the Heritage Village case led to important legislation that better protects vulnerable adults.

The changes include stiffer penalties on care facilities, with fines increased from $500 per day to $1,000 per day per resident per infraction. The legislation also increased training for memory care, added hiring restrictions for caregivers accused of abuse or neglect, and expanded oversight.

“One important thing is it closed a licensing loophole so it prevents bad actors from evading oversight and it doesn’t allow DHS they cant transfer license to another person it holds them accountable,” Kennedy said.

Case continues against other defendants

The case remains active against several other defendants despite the state settlement. An attorney for one of the victims said that families are unlikely to receive money in civil cases they have filed.

The former manager of Heritage Village can still work in the industry, but her license has been revoked, and she will never again be able to manage a long-term care center.

Attorney Jennifer Wasserman represents the former owners who reached the settlement.

“This agreement ends strongly-contested claims without any admission of wrongdoing,” Wasserman said. “Regardless of the Attorney General’s self-serving statements in their press release on this topic, the health and safety of the employees and residents at Heritage Village have always been a high priority to the defendants.”

Gary Langendoen, representing the defendants, said they disputed the validity of the Attorney General’s claims.

“We have always disputed the validity of the Attorney General’s claims, particularly after some of the assertions stated in their press releases were proven to be false based on incomplete and inaccurate information from the receiver’s office,” Langendoen said. “Putting this litigation behind us allows these defendants, the dedicated employees and valued residents to move forward.” 

Full Article & Source:
New calls for elder abuse accountability after Mesa assisted living settlement 

San Antonio to examine ways of enhancing fraud and abuse protections for senior citizens

Texas Public Radio | By Joey Palacios

San Antonio’s Department of Human Services is committing to increase its support for senior citizens at risk of scams and neglect after a request by a council member was filed last month.

During a Public Safety Committee meeting this week, city staff told council members the department would beef up its preventative messaging and initiatives and report back regularly to the council about neglect, abuse, and scams.

The Council Consideration Request (CCR) filed by District 5 Councilwoman Teri Castillo calls for creating or enhancing initiatives that could protect seniors from fraud.

A CCR is similar to introducing a bill in the legislature to create new city policies. It requires getting the support of four other council members and going through a committee process before going for a vote in front of the full city council.

Castillo's requests include:

• Auto-enroll seniors in the federal and state do-not-call registries
• Provide access to legal aid which can help seniors assign a trusted guardian, create a living will, and/or other legal mechanisms to protect themselves from fraud and abuse.
• Create and provide seniors with COSA-sponsored No Soliciting yard and door signage for seniors to ward off scammers and unwanted salespeople.
• Create guides for seniors which show them how to use their mobile phone to ward off scam calls.
  

Castillo said her request was born out of a trend of scams in her district where elderly residents had fallen victim to fraudulent door-to-door sales.

“They're going under the guise of being part of CPS energy, or a trustworthy solar company, and essentially were signing on to $95,000 loans, which then would result in a lien on their property, and then, oftentimes, solar panels that were not even connected,” Castillo said.

In Bexar County there’s about 316,000 people over the age of 65 out of more than 2 million residents. The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services said there were 1,120 allegations of exploitation against seniors; there were also 5,558 investigated allegations of neglect and abuse in Bexar County in 2024.

Jessica Dovalina, deputy director of the city’s Department of Human Services told the city council’s public safety committee that of the more than 5,500 investigations, about 92% were identified as self-neglect.

“Of those cases, 81% were physical neglect, and 19% were medical neglect. And so that is something that we continue to see at our senior centers, as well as something that our providers continually lift up as part of the discussions about what's happening in our community, given the high rate of self-neglect as well as poverty in our community, which also has increased, those are important factors,” she said.

Self-neglect is when a person is no longer able to take care of themselves and provide for their basic needs. She said the city’s senior centers serve about 22,000 active residents annually. “There we're addressing things like social isolation, food insecurity, access to preventative screenings for medical care, as well as caregiver training and resources and benefits navigation and financial counseling.”

Later this summer, the department has plans to release a “Status of Older Adults in San Antonio” report that would focus on elder fraud, neglect, abuse and exploitation, housing insecurity and cost burden, food insecurity, social isolation, community, healthcare, and transportation. That’s scheduled for September

Among the initiatives planned by the department, it’s committing to create printable door and yard signs to deter solicitors, develop metrics, cost estimates and resources needed to expand the city’s services beyond senior centers, and create resource guides regarding senior rights and tailored guides for cellphone users. 

Full Article & Source:
San Antonio to examine ways of enhancing fraud and abuse protections for senior citizens