Precedential appellate cases that Bossie, Reilly, & Oh attorneys successfully litigated to further and expand the rights of vulnerable adults

Delgado v. Manor Care of Tucson AZ, LLC, 242 Ariz. 309 (2017)

The Arizona Supreme Court held that all that is necessary for an actionable APSA abuse claim is proof that a vulnerable adult has suffered an injury caused by abuse from a caregiver. In so doing, the court abolished its earlier test for APSA abuse, believing that that test had improperly narrowed the scope of a caregiver’s liability by adding requirements not expressly contained in the APSA statute.

Newman v. Select Specialty Hosp.-Ariz., Inc., 239 Ariz. 558 (Ct. App. 2016)

The Arizona Court of Appeals held that on the evidence before it a jury was entitled to determine whether the Adult Protective Services Act (APSA) plaintiff in that case should be awarded punitive damages. Plaintiff had presented evidence that he had suffered a significant pressure ulcer and that although defendant’s nurses knew the course of treatment required for his pressure sore they failed to uphold those treatment standards, thereby disregarding a known risk of substantial harm. The court therefore remanded for a new trial on punitive damages.

In re Estate of Wyatt, 235 Ariz. 138 (2014)

The Arizona Supreme Court held that APSA’s scope is not limited to nursing facilities but reaches acute care hospitals as well. It reasoned that APSA provides a remedial cause of action against those who abuse, neglect, or exploit the elderly and that remedial statutes are to be construed broadly to effectuate the legislature’s purpose in enacting them. To exempt acute care hospitals when the legislature had not done so would thwart the legislature’s goal of protecting vulnerable adults.

Cornerstone Hosp. of Se. Ariz., LLC v. Marner, 231 Ariz. 67 (Ct. App. 2012)

The Arizona Court of Appeals held that APSA and medical malpractice claims are not mutually exclusive. Accordingly, an APSA claim may be based on acts of medical negligence.

In re Estate of Cortez, 226 Ariz. 207 (Ct. App. 2010)

The Arizona Court of Appeals held that a nursing home owner had waived its right to arbitrate. Owner failed to request arbitration in its answer, waited nearly a year before demanding arbitration, and participated substantially in the litigation. It therefore could not compel arbitration of the claims brought by a nursing home resident’s estate.

Hogan ex rel. Davis v. Duber, No. 2 CA-SA 2007-0037, 2007 WL 5290433 (Ariz. Ct. App. July 26, 2007)

The Arizona Court of Appeals vacated a district judge’s ruling that an APSA plaintiff had to show that a nursing home’s employees acted with criminal or gross negligence in order for plaintiff to recover. The court of appeals, recognizing that the judge had misinterpreted the APSA statute, concluded that plaintiff only needed to show ordinary negligence in order to establish an APSA claim against defendant nursing home.

Other Appellate Cases:

Yazedjian v. ARC Santa Catalina Inc., No. 2 CA-CV 2017-0045, 2018 WL 615106 (Ariz. Ct. App. Jan. 29, 2018)

Hurst v. Silver Creek Inn, LLC, No. 1 CA-CV 14-0338, 2015 WL 3551874 (Ariz. Ct. App. June 4, 2015)

Hurst v. Silver Ridge Mgmt., Inc., No. 1 CA-CV 14-0352, 2015 WL 3544542 (Ariz. Ct. App. June 4, 2015)

Equihua v. Carondelet Health Network, 235 Ariz. 504 (Ct. App. 2014)

In re Estate of Hanscome, No. 1 CA-CV 12-0575, 2013 WL 5519583 (Ariz. Ct. App. Oct. 3, 2013)

Preston v. Kindred Hosps. W., LLC, 226 Ariz. 391 (2011)

Day v. Kindred Hosps. W., LLC, No. 1 CA-CV 10-0574, 2011 WL 6141282 (Ariz. Ct. App. Dec. 8, 2011)

Chavez v. Avalon Care Ctr. Tucson, LLC, No. 2 CA-CV 2008-0018, 2009 WL 1124200 (Ariz. Ct. App. Apr. 27, 2009)

The information on this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for individual advice regarding your own situation because the information may not apply to you or your matter. Viewing the information on this website does not create an attorney-client relationship. Do not send confidential information to this firm unless you are an existing client. Any information emailed to this firm or sent through this site by non-clients will not create an attorney-client relationship and will not necessarily be treated as privileged or confidential. Call to speak with an attorney. This firm provides legal services only in the jurisdictions where it has offices and/or lawyers admitted to practice. Please review our lawyer biographies for further information. This website is regulated by the Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct.