July, 2026
Washington — As a quick follow-up to Part I in this series on litigation and advocacy, it's worth asking for Gemini AI's take (below) on how Maryland now compares to other states' efforts to protect the elderly from financial abuse. The answers provide valuable context.
Is Maryland a leader or follower compared to other states on this issue?
Maryland is considered a leader and a pioneer when it comes to combating elder financial abuse, particularly due to the specific civil remedies it introduced.
While it was a "follower" in the chronological sense—enacting its SAFE Act in October 2021 after states like California, Florida, and Illinois had already established strong elder protection laws—Maryland has jumped to the forefront by enacting a uniquely robust framework.The state stands out as a national leader in several key ways:
- Pioneering Civil Remedies: Unlike states that rely solely on slow-moving criminal prosecutions, Maryland's SAFE Act empowers victims, guardians, trustees, and heirs to take immediate, direct civil action against abusers.
- Lower Evidentiary Hurdles: Maryland intentionally lowered the burden of proof required to demonstrate financial exploitation in court, making it far easier for families to hold wrongdoers accountable than in many other jurisdictions. [1]
- Comprehensive Penalties: Maryland allows for treble damages (up to three times the amount stolen), mandatory attorney fee recovery, and the ability to freeze or rescind illicit asset transfers.
- The Project SAFE Coalition: Maryland is recognized for its unique public-private partnership called Project SAFE (Stop Adult Financial Exploitation). This coalition unites 16 different legal, financial, and government organizations—including the Maryland Attorney General and the Maryland Bankers Association—to actively train law enforcement and bank tellers to spot and report fraud in real-time. [1]
How much of this is attributable to those who requested a legislative remedy to the decision in Vess v. Price?
The passage of Maryland's SAFE Act is directly and heavily attributable to the advocacy surrounding Vess v. Price. The case served as the primary catalyst and case study that exposed the severe gaps in Maryland’s legal framework for handling elder financial exploitation.
The legislative remedy requested by the advocates in Vess v. Price shaped the SAFE Act in several key ways:
1. The Catalyst for Senate Bill 702
The push for a statutory crackdown began directly as a reaction to Vess v. Price. Claudia Vess (the niece of the victim, Howard Vess) alongside legal researcher George Garner actively petitioned the Maryland General Assembly. Their formal written testimony for Senate Bill 702 explicitly cited Vess v. Price to demand an "overdue statutory crackdown" modeled after other states. This advocacy laid the groundwork for what eventually became the Maryland SAFE Act. [1]
2. Eliminating the "Procedural Standoff"
In Vess v. Price, an opportunistic individual allegedly used undue influence to make himself the sole beneficiary of an elderly man's estate. Because Maryland lacked direct civil remedies for financial exploitation at the time, the family was trapped in a six-year "procedural standoff" across three different courts.
- The Remedy: The advocates demanded a law that allowed families to bypass grueling estate battles. The SAFE Act directly answered this by establishing a cause of action that allows victims, guardians, and heirs to sue perpetrators directly in civil court for exploitation.
3. Lowering the Evidentiary Hurdles
The legal team in Vess v. Price faced immense difficulty navigating the rigid procedural motions required to prove fraud and fiduciary violations. The courts spent years looking at "time stamps and courthouse drop boxes" rather than the actual exploitation. [1]
- The Remedy: The advocates successfully argued that the burden of proof was too high for grieving families. The SAFE Act explicitly lowered these evidentiary hurdles so that courts could focus on the merits of the financial abuse rather than getting bogged down in procedural technicalities.
4. Stopping the "Jarndyce v. Jarndyce" Problem
During the legislative hearings, advocates compared Maryland’s elder abuse laws to Charles Dickens' fictional estate that was entirely depleted by its own legal bills. In Vess v. Price, the perpetrator used the estate's own funds to fight the family for years.
- The Remedy: To prevent abusers from out-spending their victims, the legislative remedy included mandatory attorney fee shifting and treble damages (triple the stolen amount). This ensured that families could afford to seek justice without seeing the entire estate consumed by legal fees.
