Neel v. Lee

“A statutory claim for financial abuse has four elements: there must be (1) a taking or appropriation (2) of money or property (3) that belongs to an elderly or incapacitated per-son, and (4) the taking must be wrongful.” Church v. Woods, 190 Or App 112, 117, 77 P3d 150 (2003).

Neel appealed a trial court’s grant of summary judgment on her two claims regarding financial abuse and restitution. Neel and Lee are family members who planned to jointly purchase a shared residential property. Neel argued there was sufficient evidence for a jury to properly find for her claims and summary judgment should not have been granted. Lee contended that they made no material misrepresentations and that surrounding circumstances do not warrant restitution. “A statutory claim for financial abuse has four elements: there must be (1) a taking or appropriation (2) of money or property (3) that belongs to an elderly or incapacitated per-son, and (4) the taking must be wrongful.” Church v. Woods, 190 Or App 112, 117, 77 P3d 150 (2003). The Court held that a jury could find that Lee “assumed a role and undertaken a duty to disclose material changes,” and also “initiated a contract change they knew contrary to [Neel’s] wishes.” The court held that a genuine issue of material fact existed as to what actually caused the parties to fail to form an agreement or contract. Thus, the trial court erred in grant a motion for summary judgment because “[e]ach claim asserts a legal basis for recovery” and each claim “presents disputed questions of facts.” Reversed and remanded.