New CA Elder Law Case

 

 

 

I can help. I've been a California civil trial lawyer since 1980, a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates since 1995, and I've been listed in The Best Lawyers in America every year since 2012. I've represented both plaintiffs and defendants in business, insurance bad faith and coverage, personal injury, real property and wrongful death cases, I've recovered over $50 million for plaintiff clients, and obtained numerous defense verdicts and good settlements for defense clients. I've tried over 100 jury, court and administrative trials and arbitrations. For many years, I've provided mentoring to many less experienced lawyers in California.

 

Working with me, you can quickly develop the skills, strategies, and systems necessary to build you dream law practice. How will it feel to be an incredibly successful and highly respected lawyer in your practice areas? Today is the day to start creating your future. 

 

Click the link to learn more about Lawyer Master Mentoring™, or email me at [email protected] or call me at (619) 990-4312.

 

To get my free summaries of the 22 new civil cases published by the California Supreme Court in 2021, click here.

Below is a discussion of a new CA civil case published last month.

Elder Abuse

In a Financial Elder Abuse action, last month the First District Court of Appeal addressed the issues of whether the plaintiff can obtain a pretrial right to attach order, and what amounts can be covered by such an order. A video discussing the case is above and my summary of the case is below.

New Elder Abuse Decision  

Royals v. Lu (2022) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2022 WL 2800956: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's order granting plaintiff's request for a pretrial right to attach order (RTAO) in the sum of $3,440,000 against defendant under section 15657.01 of the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act (the Elder Abuse Act; Welfare & Institutions Code, section 15600 et. seq.) After plaintiff filed her petition, defendant filed a cross-petition. Both made competing claims of Elder Abuse against the other. A financial elder abuse claimant may obtain an attachment for potential compensatory damages and an award of attorney fees and costs associated with those damages, but only if the request for it complies with all applicable provisions of the statutory scheme governing pretrial attachments (the Attachment Law; Code of Civil Procedure, section 481.010 et. seq.). The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court, concluding that defendant's attachment application did not comply with four provisions of the Attachment Law. It was not (i) supported by competent evidence (id., section 482.040), (ii) did not on an attachable "amount" (id., section 484.020(b)), (iii) was not based on a claim upon which an attachment may be issued (id., section 484.020(a)), and (iv) was not measured by the defendant's claimed "indebtedness" to the plaintiff (id., section 483.015(a)(1)). Ruling on an issue of first impression, the Court of Appeal held that potential punitive damages and statutory penalties in a financial elder abuse claim may not be secured by the extraordinary remedy of a pretrial attachment. (C.A. 1st, July 18, 2022.)