Elderly man's trust is looted by prominent woman serving as his trustee. $22.7M. Los Angeles County.

Facts and Background

• Facts and Background:

  In 2020, Arnold Rosenblatt, now a 97-year-old WWII veteran and one of the original Muscle Beach bodybuilders, filed a lawsuit against Melya Kaplan, the founder and executive director of the nonprofit Voice for the Animals (VFTA). He had inherited a $4 million investment portfolio. He owned a  home in Venice. Kaplan befriended the elderly plaintiff and became his power of attorney. As such, she set up meetings to revise his estate plans. As the plans were revised, a larger and larger share was set to go to Kaplan. Over the time that she managed his affairs as a fiduciary, his estate dwindled from millions to nothing.

   

• Plaintiff's Contentions:

  That Kaplan, while serving as Rosenblatt’s trustee and power of attorney, committed financial elder abuse, fraud, and multiple breaches of fiduciary duty. That Kaplan manipulated Rosenblatt’s trust, diverting over $2.7 million for her personal benefit and to fund her nonprofit, defendant VFTA.

  That defendant's actions included using trust funds to purchase properties in her name, covering personal expenses, and even using trust money to finance legal battles against Rosenblatt. At one point, she left Rosenblatt’s accounts with just $0.60, from which she wrote herself the final check.  

  Arnold Rosenblatt’s contentions in the case against Melya Kaplan and Voice for the Animals (VFTA) were based on allegations of financial elder abuse, fraud, and breaches of fiduciary duty. Specifically, Rosenblatt asserted:

  Misappropriation of Trust Funds: Kaplan, acting as Rosenblatt’s trustee and power of attorney, diverted over $2.7 million from his trust for personal gain and to benefit her nonprofit, VFTA. These funds were used to purchase properties in her name, cover her personal expenses, and finance VFTA's operations.

  Breach of Fiduciary Duty: Kaplan violated her fiduciary duty by failing to act in Rosenblatt’s best interest. Instead of managing the trust for his benefit, she enriched herself and her nonprofit, disregarding her obligations as trustee and power of attorney.

  Elder Abuse: Kaplan exploited Rosenblatt’s age, trust, and reliance on her to manage his affairs. She took advantage of his vulnerability to manipulate his estate plans and access his assets.

  Fraudulent Actions: Kaplan orchestrated repeated revisions to Rosenblatt’s estate plans to increase her share of his inheritance, despite already being set to inherit everything. Her actions demonstrated calculated fraud and greed.

  Misuse of Trust Assets for Legal Battles: Kaplan used trust funds to finance legal battles against Rosenblatt, challenging his amendments to the trust and attempting to cloud titles on his properties. These actions compounded the harm and financial strain on Rosenblatt.

  Depletion of Resources: Kaplan’s misconduct left Rosenblatt financially destitute, reducing his bank accounts to just $0.60, from which she wrote herself the final check. Rosenblatt sought compensatory damages for the harm caused by Kaplan’s actions, as well as statutory penalties for financial elder abuse under California Probate Code § 859 and treble damages under Penal Code § 496(c). 

  Fiduciary Duty Compliance: Kaplan falsely portrayed herself as a responsible fiduciary while engaging in blatant self-dealing, including using trust funds to pay personal expenses and purchase properties titled in her own name.

  Use of Trust Funds for Legal Battles: Kaplan denied wrongdoing when using Rosenblatt’s trust funds to finance her legal disputes against him, including attempts to cloud the title to his properties and challenge trust amendments that removed her.

  Alleged Investment Benefits: Kaplan claimed that the property purchases were investments meant to benefit Rosenblatt, but no rental income or financial gains materialized. The court found that these transactions primarily enriched Kaplan.

  Misleading the Court on Financial Management: Kaplan downplayed her financial mismanagement, but evidence showed she drained Rosenblatt’s accounts, leaving him with only $0.60. Her claim that she was helping him was contradicted by her brazen theft.

  Obstruction and Concealment: Kaplan attempted to obscure her actions through misleading accountings, withholding documentation, and presenting false narratives about her intentions and the benefits to Rosenblatt.

  Capacity Arguments: While Kaplan argued that Rosenblatt had consented to her actions, evidence – including medical expert testimony – showed that he was vulnerable and subject to undue influence due to cognitive impairments.

• Defendant's Contentions:

  Kaplan claimed that Rosenblatt gifted her large sums of money. She claimed she acted at all times as a responsible fiduciary. She denied wrongdoing in using the trust's funds to finance her legal costs for the disputes with plaintiff. Kaplan claimed that the property purchases were reasonable investments for the plaintiff. Further, Kaplan claimed that Rosenblatt had mental capacity and consented to all of her actions.