J&Y Law sues Antelope Valley care operators over elder abuse case

J&Y Law says a client suffered severe pressure wounds that required spinal surgery after care at a facility tied to Tatyana and Edvard Krivitsky in the Antelope Valley. The case highlights gaps in California oversight that can let banned operators keep working in other kinds of care homes.

Why it matters: - The case raises a broader question about how California tracks and blocks operators who have been barred from one type of elder care. - Families may not be able to easily check whether a care-home operator has a history of serious violations. - J&Y Law says those gaps can leave vulnerable patients exposed to preventable harm.

What happened: - J&Y Law says it represents a client who received care at a facility connected to Tatyana Krivitsky and Edvard Krivitsky. - The client developed severe pressure wounds, also known as bed sores, and later required spinal surgery. - The lawsuit is pending in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, under case number 26AVCV01433. - The firm says the case involves care homes in the Antelope Valley, including Lancaster and Palmdale.

The details: - J&Y Law says the Krivitskys operated congregate care homes under names including Capri in the Desert, Napoli in the Desert, San Marino in the Desert and Bellagio in the Desert. - The firm says people barred from operating assisted living facilities can still remain in the caregiving business through other licensing channels. - Assisted living homes, known as Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly, are licensed by the California Department of Social Services. - Congregate living health facilities are licensed by the California Department of Public Health. - A bar from one licensing system does not automatically transfer to the other. - A facility renewing an existing license may not be re-screened against individuals banned elsewhere. - The names of people banned from assisted living are not readily available to the public. - Past efforts to require the state to publish that list have failed. - J&Y Law says Tatyana Krivitsky publicly defended the facilities’ record, calling their history of violations “not bad at all” and saying, “We are looking after very difficult patients.” - Stacy Thumsuden, the firm’s elder abuse attorney, said the client’s pressure wounds were largely preventable with proper care. - Thumsuden said the fact that the wounds progressed to the point of requiring spinal surgery raises questions about staffing, supervision and overall quality of care.

Between the lines: - The case points to a regulatory gap: one agency’s ban does not necessarily follow an operator into another part of California’s long-term care system. - That can allow a person with a troubling history to appear qualified again if families only review the current license. - The issue is likely to grow as California’s aging population increases demand for assisted living and long-term care. - J&Y Law argues that the current system shifts too much of the vetting burden onto families.

What’s next: - J&Y Law is urging families who had loved ones in facilities connected to the Krivitskys to come forward. - The firm is also urging California families to research a provider’s licensing history before placing a loved one in care. - Thumsuden said families should be able to access the information needed to evaluate the people responsible for a loved one’s care.

The bottom line: - The lawsuit is not just about one alleged neglect case. It also spotlights how California’s fragmented oversight can let banned operators keep working around the edges of the system.