legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Cobaugh v. Reiter
Appellant Peter Reiter was a sole proprietor of a residential landscaping company. In the early 2000’s, he began to do work for Eve Kragneness, an 80-year-old widow who lived with her blind son, Jim Krageness. A personal relationship developed between the appellant and the Kragnesesses and the scope of the work he did for the family increased. This work continued until Eve’s death in 2006. Often Eve paid appellant much more than what he would have otherwise charged for his work. The amount of the checks written to appellant increased throughout 2004 and reached their highest point in May 2005. In total, Reiter cashed checks totaling $544,382. At some point, a bank official, concerned about the frequency and amount of checks to appellant, reported the payments to the authorities. This led to an investigation by Adult Protective Services into the transactions and relationship between the appellant and the Kragnesesses. The investigating officer concluded that the payments were not coerced and were being made voluntarily. After his mother’s death, Jim became the sole administrator of his mother’s estate. Three years after her death, Jim died unexpectedly.
Respondent Sally Cobaugh, Jim’s cousin and the executor of his estate, filed this action for financial abuse of an elder adult and of a dependent adult pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 15610.30. At trial, she argued that the size and frequency of the checks, by themselves, evidenced some sort of mental failing of both Kragenesses and that appellant must have been aware of their feelings of dependence on him; that appellant failed to make any inquiries as to whether the large amounts of money coming to him were financially destructive to the Kragnesesses; and that anything other than refusing such large checks constituted abuse of both Eve and Jim. Respondent prevailed at trial and the trial court awarded compensatory damages to the estate in the amount of $564,576, punitive damages in the amount of $200,000, attorney fees in the amount of $432,777.50 and costs in the amount of $22,315.04. This appeal ensued.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale