This is an update to these blog posts:

Dorothy Helm, Stripped of Possessions by Kristyan Calhoun, Senior Avenues

Recap of Dorothy Helm’s Case as of May

A motion for partial dismissal was heard in Kitsap County on August 9th, 2019.  The meat of the motion was to dismiss the case against Thomas Parker for his role in the purchase of Dorothy Helm’s property for pennies on the dollar.  The Honorable Michelle Adams presided.  (For reference, this is case # 18-2-03124-18)

Thomas Parker’s lawyer argued that while Parker may have some claims against him, it wasn’t the claims in the original lawsuit.

The Judge’s decision sums things up so well, there isn’t much else to say:
“The motion to partially dismiss is DENIED. This Court is concerned there was a plan here, the house had renters in it, paying $800 per month, and the house was sold for $28,000. Ms. Helm purchased the house in 2005 for $117,000. This causes concern as to the disparity. There is appearance of a scheme to unfairly enrich Ms. Calhoun and Mr. Parker, and harm to Ms. Helm. There are also allegations that Mr. Parker has purchased other properties under fair market value, which suggests he should have known. There is enough here to go forward. Court finds there was no fiduciary duty as to Mr. Parker, but there is showing of a possible ongoing scheme between Mr. Parker and Ms. Calhoun to the detriment of Ms. Helm. Mr. Parker should have known when purchasing property for so little. Motion Denied.”

You may recall that in May 2019 Judge McCarthy allowed for the dismissal of Kristyan Calhoun’s petition for guardianship of Dorothy.  In that dismissal he awarded fees to Calhoun’s attorneys of over $50,000.00.  This judgement will likely hang over Dorothy for the rest of her life and haunt her as she attempts to find housing (because her real estate was sold by Calhoun) or even the most basic of needs.  Try getting utilities as an elderly, unemployed renter and with a $50k judgement on your credit record.

But this is the very foundation of the problem — as people like Calhoun and Parker increase their net worth, they do it on the backs of people who’ve spent their lives building up savings to ensure that they don’t become a burden to society.  The Calhouns and Parkers benefit, and the rest of the community picks up the tab.  Should communities support their elderly, those down on their luck?  Absolutely.  However, this impoverishment of the elderly is avoidable by ridding communities of the wolves who capitalize on the vulnerability of its members.

Dorothy didn’t save, scrimp, and go without so that complete strangers could benefit and leave her penniless and discredited.

But that’s what has happened.  For now.

Here is a pdf link to the decision by Judge Adams.