When defendant files for summary judgment on the elder abuse count, the most common move is an expert declaration that the facility "did not deprive Decedent of access to medical care" and the relationship was "episodic medical services," not robust custodial caretaking. The cited authority is Winn v. Pioneer Medical Group (2016) 63 Cal.4th 148. The argument has an earlier life at the demurrer and a later life at MSJ. The difference: at MSJ, the court doesn't have to assume the allegations are true. The discovery record has to do the work.
The evidence you need at MSJ
An affirmative showing that the facility assumed continuous responsibility for specific basic-needs care — turning, feeding, hydration, hygiene, medication administration, fall prevention — and that the decedent's dependency was such that the decedent "relied on defendants in a way distinct from an able-bodied and fully competent adult's reliance on the advice and care of his or her medical providers." Build it during discovery. You don't get to introduce it on the eve of the motion.
RFPs to deploy early
- RFP 1: All admission documents, including admission agreements, admission orders, intake assessments, MDS assessments, and any documents identifying the basic care needs the facility agreed to provide to the decedent from the date of admission through discharge or death.
- RFP 2: The complete care plan for the decedent during residency, including every revision, with effective date for each revision.
- RFP 3: All Braden Scale assessments, BWAT (Bates-Jensen Wound Assessment Tool) reports, skin assessments, falls assessments, nutrition assessments, and hydration monitoring records for the decedent.
- RFP 4: All documents describing the facility's policies, procedures, or protocols regarding turning, repositioning, hygiene, hydration, nutrition, medication administration, or fall prevention for residents with mobility limitations, applicable during the decedent's residency.
Interrogatories that lock down the Winn predicate
Form Interrogatory 17.1 should be deployed against every RFA in the set. Beyond that:
- Special Interrogatory 1: Describe in detail each specific element of basic-needs care (including turning, hygiene, hydration, nutrition, medication administration, and fall prevention) that the facility agreed to provide to the decedent at the time of admission.
- Special Interrogatory 2: Identify each person who participated in developing the decedent's care plan, their position and credentials, and the date of each version of the care plan.
- Special Interrogatory 3: State the staffing ratios in effect on the decedent's unit during each shift of the decedent's residency.
Corpus example — pre-admission baseline. Cannon v. Manor Care of Walnut Creek (Contra Costa C24-01854, 3/19/26). Interrogatories asking for the decedent's physical limitations and the decedent's cognitive limitations immediately before admission were ordered answered separately — defendant had given identical responses to both, copying the cognitive-limitation language into the physical-limitation slot. The pre-admission baseline is the Winn predicate: plaintiff must show the decedent "relied on defendants in a way distinct from an able-bodied and fully competent adult." Keep the physical-limitations and cognitive-limitations interrogatories as separate requests; defendants who collapse them are under-answering both.
PMK deposition topics
- The basic-needs care obligations the facility assumed for the decedent at admission.
- The care plan(s) for the decedent and the process for revising them.
- The decedent's level of dependency at admission and through residency.
- Staffing ratios applicable to the decedent's unit during the residency period, and the facility's process for adjusting staffing in response to acuity.
- The facility's policies and protocols on the basic-needs care categories identified in topic 1.
Pre-admission baseline from third parties
Subpoena duces tecum to:
- The decedent's primary care physician for the 24 months preceding admission.
- Any prior facility (hospital, SNF, RCFE) for the 12 months preceding admission.
- Any home health agency that served the decedent.
The point: establish that the decedent was, at admission, a person whose reliance on the defendant was different from a competent adult's reliance on a medical provider. Winn requires this showing.
Why this matters at MSJ
When defense files MSJ arguing "we were just providing medical services," the opposition is the care plan itself (showing the facility identified and accepted specific basic-needs duties), the dependency baseline (showing the decedent could not perform those needs independently), and the policies-and-protocols documents (showing the facility itself characterized the obligations as continuous custodial care). All of that has to be in the record before defense files.
This discovery framework came out of our continuous review of California elder abuse summary judgment rulings. The full discovery plan — pattern-by-pattern requests for each of the recurring MSJ defenses, with RFAs, interrogatories, and deposition topics for each — is in LawSnap Elder Abuse Plaintiff's Guide to Getting Past Summary Judgment, Book 3: Obtaining Discovery to Make Your Case. $97.
This article is for educational purposes only and is not legal advice. All frameworks and sample language should be reviewed by a licensed attorney and adapted to your particular client, case, and situation.