Background
This action for elder abuse arises from the alleged involuntary removal of Ellen Van Buskirk (“Ellen”) from a rehabilitation facility in California against the wishes and advice of other family members. This complaint was brought by Walter Van Buskirk (“Walter”), Ellen’s son, against the family members who removed Ellen from California to Idaho.
The complaint alleges that after removing Ellen to Idaho, Walter has been prevented from speaking with his mother. Walter alleges that his sister Joellyn and he received threats and suffered intimidation designed to discourage them from attempting any communication with their mother.
Analysis
Defendant Charles Bluth (“Charles”) now demurs to the sole cause of action of the complaint on the grounds that Walter lacks standing to bring this claim in either an individual or representative capacity, and that Walter has failed to factually allege any damages.
Although the parties did not meet and confer in person or by telephone pursu
Hearing Date
April 02, 2019
Type
Elder/Dependent Adult Abuse Case (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Background
This action for elder abuse arises from the alleged involuntary removal of Ellen Van Buskirk (“Ellen”) from a rehabilitation facility in California against the wishes and advice of other family members. This complaint was brought by Walter Van Buskirk (“Walter”), Ellen’s son, against the family members who removed Ellen from California to Idaho.
The complaint alleges that after removing Ellen to Idaho, Walter has been prevented from speaking with his mother. Walter alleges that his sister Joellyn and he received threats and suffered intimidation designed to discourage them from attempting any communication with their mother.
Analysis
Defendant Charles Bluth (“Charles”) now demurs to the sole cause of action of the complaint on the grounds that Walter lacks standing to bring this claim in either an individual or representative capacity, and that Walter has failed to factually allege any damages.
Although the parties did not meet and confer in person or by telephone pursu