## Facts

- Judith Ann Chapman (age 69) transferred title to her mobile home to her adult son, John Kendall Wilkinson Jr., stating it would be his inheritance at her death.
- Chapman continued living in the mobile home and paid taxes on it; her net worth was otherwise reduced after she transferred a duplex to her daughters.
- After a daughter moved into the mobile home, Wilkinson demanded Chapman pay $35,000 to have title transferred back to her; Chapman refused, asserting she was entitled to live there for life.
- Wilkinson posted multiple eviction notices on the mobile home and contacted law enforcement claiming trespass; deputies treated the matter as civil.
- Chapman petitioned under Iowa Code chapter 235F for an elder-abuse protective order, alleging financial exploitation.
- The district court found Chapman retained a life estate in the mobile home and concluded Wilkinson’s conduct constituted financial exploitation; it entered an elder-abuse protective order.
- The court of appeals affirmed; the Iowa Supreme Court granted further review and addressed the “vulnerable elder” issue while allowing other appellate holdings to stand.

## Issues

1. Whether Chapman qualified as a “vulnerable elder” under Iowa Code § 235F.1(17) (2015) where age, without separate proof of a mental or physical condition, allegedly made her unable to protect herself from elder abuse.
2. Whether elder abuse and financial exploitation under Iowa Code §§ 235F.1(8) and (14) require a “caretaker” relationship, or may be committed by a person in a position of trust or confidence with the elder.
3. Whether sufficient evidence supported the finding that Chapman retained a life estate in the mobile home after transferring title to Wilkinson.
4. Whether Wilkinson was properly advised of his right to counsel under Iowa Code § 235F.5(5).

## Decision

- The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s elder-abuse protective order.
- The Court held that, under the then-existing statutory definition, age alone can satisfy the “vulnerable elder” requirement if it makes the person unable to protect herself from elder abuse.
- The Court allowed to stand the appellate holdings that:
  - a respondent need not be an elder’s “caretaker” to commit elder abuse if the respondent is in a position of trust or confidence;
  - sufficient evidence supported that Chapman retained a life estate in the mobile home; and
  - Wilkinson was advised of his right to counsel as required by statute.

## Legal Principles

- Under Iowa Code § 235F.1(17) (2015), a person 60 or older is a “vulnerable elder” if the person is unable to protect herself from elder abuse due to age; a separate mental or physical condition need not be shown when age itself causes the inability to self-protect.
- “Elder abuse” and “financial exploitation” under Iowa Code §§ 235F.1(8) and (14) may be committed by a person standing in a position of trust or confidence with a vulnerable elder, not only by a “caretaker.”
- Conduct that wrongfully interferes with a vulnerable elder’s property interest, including efforts to dispossess the elder of a retained life estate or to extract payment to restore control, can constitute “financial exploitation” under chapter 235F.
- In chapter 235F protective-order proceedings, the respondent must be advised of the right to counsel under Iowa Code § 235F.5(5).

## Conclusion

The court upheld an elder-abuse protective order against an adult son who attempted to evict his mother from a home she retained for life, ruling that age alone may establish “vulnerable elder” status when it prevents self-protection and confirming that liability for financial exploitation can arise from a trusted family relationship rather than a caretaker role.


In re Chapman, 890 N.W.2d 853 (Iowa 2017)