N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
HELEN SC HIRM ER , surviving spouse of de c e de nt C AR L SC HIRM E R , for a nd on he r own be ha lf a

nd on be ha lf of the de c e de nt’ s e s tate and on be ha l f of a ll who m ay have a sta tutory right of re c o ve ry , Pla i ntiff-Appe lla

nt,
v. AVALON HEALTH C A R E, INC ., DB A Ava lon C are C e nte r Sha dow M ounta ins, a Uta h c orporation; UNKNOW N PAR TIES, nam e d a s: John Doe s I-X, Ja

ne Doe s I-X, AB C C orporations I-X, a nd XYZ Pa rtne rships I-X,

De fe nda n ts-Appe lle e s. No. 17-16183 D.C . No. 2:15-c v-01550-GM S
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ariz o na G . M urray

Snow, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Argue d a nd Subm itte d

June 12, 2019 Sa n Fran c isc o , C a lifornia 

# FIL ED
JUN 20 2019 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U

. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public a t ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.B e fore : SC HR OEDER and M . SM ITH, C irc uit Judge s, a nd R AKOFF, ** Distric t Judge
. Pla intiff He le n Sc hirm e r, surviving spouse of C arl Sc h irm e r, a

ppe a ls the distric t c o urt’ s orde r granting sum m ary judgm e nt for de fe nda

n t Ava lon He a lth C are , Inc . (“ A va lon” ). W e a ffirm
. Ava lon, he a dqua

rte re d in Uta

h, is the gre a t gra

nd-pa re nt c orporation to Ava lon C are C e nte r— Sha d ow M ounta in (“ Sha dow M o unta in” ), a nursing hom e in Sc ottsda le , Ariz o na . Pla intiff c la im s tha t be c a use Ava lon c ontrols Sha dow M ounta in’ s budge t, Ava l on should be lia ble for the ne gle c t

an d c are le ssne ss tha

t
c a use d C a rl’ s fa l l a nd his de a th. The distric t c ourt c o rre c tly c onc lude d tha

t Ava lon wa s insuffic ie ntly involve d in C arl’ s c a

re to trigge r lia

bility unde r Ariz ona ’ s Adult Prote c tion Ac t (“ APSA” ). APSA prote c ts vulne ra ble a dults from

a buse an d ne gle c t at the ha

nds of dire c t c are give rs a

nd m ana ge rs of those c are g i ve rs. Se e C orbe tt v . ManorC

are of Am., Inc

. , 146 P.3d 1038 (Ariz . C t . App. 2006) (e xpla ining tha t APSA lia

bility
e xte nds to those

who “ c a use or pe rmit” the a

buse or ne gle c t) (origina l e m pha sis;
c ita tion om itte d ). Pla intiff ha s not ide ntifie d a n Ava lon e m

ploy e e or a g e nt tha

t

* * The Honora

ble Je d S. R a koff, Unite d Stat e s Distric t Judge for the Southe rn Distric t of Ne w York, sitting by de signa tion. 2m ight ha

v e provide d, supe rvise d, or known a bout C a rl’ s c are . Nor ha s pla intiff shown c orporate m ingling tha t c ould trigge r lia

bility unde r an a lte r-e go the ory . For sim i la

r re a sons, pla intiff’ s re m a ining c la im s for ne glige nc e , wrongful de a th, loss of c onsortium

and punitive

dam a ge s c a

nn ot survive . Lia

bility on e a c h
c la im de pe n ds on Ava lon owing C arl a duty of c are . Se e A.R
. S. § 12-563; Fe rguson v . C

a sh, Sulliv

an and C ross Ins. Age nc

y , 831 P.2d 380, 383 (Ariz . C t. App. 1991) (“ [I] n orde r to m a inta in a ne glige nc e a c tion the re m ust be a duty or obliga tion re c ogniz e d by

la w.” ) (c ita tion om i tte d); Ontiv e ros v . Borak , 136 Ariz
. 500, 508 (1983) (e xpla ining tha t the re m u st be a suffic ie nt re lationship be twe e n the pla i ntiff a nd de fe nda

n t or third pa

rty to trigge r suc h a

duty ). Sinc e the re are no
a lle ga tions tha

t a ny Ava l on e m

ploy e e or a ge nt e v e n kne w a bout C a rl’ s c are , the re is no ba sis to c onc lude tha t Ava lon form e d the re quisite c are -providing re lationship with C arl. AFFIRM E D.

3