- Criminal Judge Asks Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy to Weigh in on PG&E's Safety Record
- Defrauded Investors May Lose Their Right to Recovery: Trump Administration Pushes for Regulatory Changes that Would Allow Companies to Avoid Securities Class Actions Through the Use of Mandatory Arbitration Agreements
- Finra Enacts Important Rule to Protect Seniors Against Fraudulent Activity
- The CPFB Remains Under Attack: Consumers Should Care About an Agency that has Recovered More than $11.9 Billion for Everyday Workers
- Supreme Court Upholds Right to Bring Securities Act Class Actions in State Court
- Cracking Down on the “Rehab Riviera”
- Protecting Our Seniors—Stating a Cause of Action for Elder Abuse is Not as Difficult as Defendants Often Claim
- “Smart” toys raise privacy and safety concerns for kids
- Strict new privacy and data protections soon take effect in European countries
- Is your cell phone tracking every move you make?
Showing 1 post by Emanuel B. Townsend.
Protecting Our Seniors—Stating a Cause of Action for Elder Abuse is Not as Difficult as Defendants Often Claim
Defendants often cite Carter v. Prime Healthcare Paradise Valley LLC (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 396 in support of their argument that the plaintiff’s complaint pleads a cause of action for professional negligence rather than elder abuse. Defendants often argue that Carter, in effect, altered the law and heightened the pleading requirements for an elder abuse cause of action. In making this argument, however, defendants misinterpret the Carter holding. The Carter court did not modify the elements or the pleading requirements for elder abuse under California’s Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act. In fact, the Carter court stated that it “distill[s]” the requirements of an elder abuse case. The Carter decision did not, however, increase or enhance Plaintiff’s pleading requirements. Id. at 406. Read More ›