Connect with us

News

Kash Patel’s Loyalty to Trump Raises Doubts Over F.B.I.’s Independence

Published

on

Kash Patel’s Loyalty to Trump Raises Doubts Over F.B.I.’s Independence

Kash Patel spent years ingratiating himself with Donald J. Trump — regularly popping into the Oval Office in the first term, writing a children’s book starring “King Donald” during the interregnum, trailing him to rallies, banquets and bus tours on the bumpy ride back to power.

Few practitioners of the audience-of-one strategy have been quite so successful at translating loyalty and proximity to Mr. Trump into real influence. Fewer still are poised to be rewarded as significantly as Mr. Patel, 44, Mr. Trump’s pick to run the F.B.I., an agency with vast powers that he has vowed to radically overhaul.

What binds Mr. Trump and Mr. Patel is the shared conviction that the bureau has been weaponized against conservatives, including both of them. They argue it is politicized and the only way to fix it is to empower an outsider willing to faithfully execute the Trump agenda — a sharp divergence from the bureau’s historical norms and the decades-long practice of directors’ limiting contact with presidents.

The issue of Mr. Patel’s independence, or lack thereof, will be a flashpoint at a confirmation hearing scheduled for Thursday.

Mr. Patel’s embrace of Jan. 6 conspiracy theories and unflinching fealty are the coin of the realm in Mr. Trump’s orbit. But in the view of his many critics (and even some who publicly sing his praises), Mr. Patel’s oft-stated loyalty to the president poses one of the most significant challenges to the independence of the F.B.I. in the century since J. Edgar Hoover, its founding director, built an investigative citadel whose autonomy created leverage, and abuses of power.

Advertisement

Nominating Mr. Patel as F.B.I. chief is, above all, a defining example of Mr. Trump’s approach to exerting power in his second term. Not content to simply install subordinates to help enact an ideological agenda, the president is pushing hard to expand the post-Watergate limits on presidential authority. During his first term, demanding personal loyalty from appointees did not always work; making sure the top jobs are stocked with loyalists is the strategy now.

At the F.B.I., this entails bucking the bureau’s long institutional history, starting with Mr. Hoover and extending through James B. Comey’s rejection of Mr. Trump’s first-term demands for obeisance, a stance that prevented it from becoming the instrument of presidential whim.

Critics say Mr. Trump’s and Mr. Patel’s grievance that the bureau has been “politicized” against Republicans is an excuse to turn the F.B.I., whose agents have often tilted right, into a political weapon for Mr. Trump.

“Hoover would have been appalled at Patel’s sycophancy of Donald Trump,” said Beverly Gage, a professor at Yale and the author of a biography of Mr. Hoover.

“What’s new and alarming about Patel?” she added. “He’s so close to Donald Trump and is making no secret that he will use the bureau to punish Mr. Trump’s enemies. He’s coming in openly hostile to the institution. At the F.B.I., this is potentially earth-shattering.”

Advertisement

The president and Mr. Patel share not only a worldview, but also an enemies list. In 2022, Mr. Patel published a roster of 60 people he suggested should be investigated, prosecuted or otherwise reviled. It includes Christopher A. Wray, who stepped down this month as F.B.I. director before Mr. Trump could fire him, former Attorney General Merrick B. Garland, former Attorney General William P. Barr and a host of other federal officials and politicians he does not like.

Mr. Patel’s spokesman did not respond to questions.

But his defenders downplay his promises to rain hell as campaign-season fireworks, and say the list he published in his book “Government Gangsters” was just a litany of people he did not like, respect or trust. Behind closed doors, he has sought to reassure senators he intended only to underscore the need to reform the bureau and will run it responsibly if confirmed, according to people briefed on the interactions.

In at least one conversation, he has acknowledged that he amped up the verbiage in his polemical memoir for dramatic effect. In another, he apologized for the book, which served as a pugilistic takedown of government officials at the very institution he is eager to run.

“Like me, Kash Patel uses fiery rhetoric and hyperbole to break through,” said Mike Davis, a former Senate Republican staff member who is close to Mr. Patel. “But don’t let that fool anyone. Kash is a very serious, skilled and effective national security operator.”

Advertisement

The team overseeing Mr. Patel’s confirmation has emphasized his unique experience, particularly his work as a public defender, and varied assignments in national security posts.

Yet some Republicans in the Senate have quietly made it clear they want Mr. Trump to surround Mr. Patel with more conventional officials to offset his shortcomings.

Mr. Patel has given private assurances that his deputy director will be a special agent, with deep experience at the bureau, and not a political appointee, according to a person familiar with the matter.

At least two former F.B.I. veterans have been tapped to advise Mr. Patel, including one who recently served as a staff aide to Representative Jim Jordan. While he is seen as a stabilizing force, his past work for Mr. Jordan’s committee uncovering the so-called weaponization of government is in line with Mr. Patel’s worldview.

Mr. Trump is not likely to abide by norms adopted over the past half-century intended to prevent direct interference into federal law enforcement, regardless of who is on staff.

Advertisement

Case in point: The director Mr. Trump signaled he would replace, Mr. Wray, never met alone with Mr. Trump, according to people familiar with the situation. That did not stop Mr. Trump from trying to contact him anyway, at the exact moment the bureau was embarking on its investigation into his retention of national security documents.

In a handwritten note dated March 26, 2022, Mr. Trump congratulated Mr. Wray, whom he appointed in 2017, for an appearance on “60 Minutes,” according to a copy viewed by The New York Times.

“CHRIS – GREAT JOB ON 60 MINUTES LAST NIGHT. YOU ARE 100 % CORRECT ON CHINA (RUSSIA IS NOT SO WONDERFUL EITHER!).”

Mr. Trump does not need to use stationery to reach Mr. Patel.

As a senior director at the National Security Council during Mr. Trump’s first term, Mr. Patel seemed to always find himself invited to the Oval Office for meetings. He also had a knack for trolling Mr. Trump’s enemies — threatening, among other things, to sue the news media for unflattering stories. The president, over time, began to reach out to him for advice.

Advertisement

One former Trump administration official recalled that during the first term, Mr. Patel would head to lunch only to be interrupted by calls from the president to kibitz.

Mr. Patel loved it, the person recalled.

The F.B.I. has had a checkered relationship with politics that precedes Mr. Patel by 101 years.

The official origins of the F.B.I. date back to 1908, but its true inception came in 1924 when Mr. Hoover, then in his late 20s, was appointed director. From the start, its mission placed it at the hazardous intersection of politics and law enforcement: investigating, prosecuting and deporting left-wing radicals and anarchists after World War I.

Over the decades, Mr. Hoover leveraged his cache of investigative files into raw power. Toward the end of his 48-year tenure, he greenlit dozens of investigations of key figures in the civil rights movement — most infamously Martin Luther King Jr. — and offered political intelligence to presidents and their political adversaries.

Advertisement

Even while presiding over the bureau’s worst excesses, however, Mr. Hoover ensured that the agency remained independent from direct White House control. Directors who served after him sought to maintain that independence by keeping presidents at arm’s length, with the exception of his immediate successor, L. Patrick Gray.

“Integrity and independence make or break an F.B.I. director,” Louis J. Freeh, the bureau director whose relationship with President Bill Clinton turned rancid as he investigated the president and his associates, said in his memoir.

Mr. Clinton groused but did not seek to remove Mr. Freeh. Mr. Trump did both. In private meetings at the White House, Mr. Trump demanded the loyalty of Mr. Comey, a Republican, and suggested he end an investigation into the president’s former national security adviser. Mr. Comey stayed in office for nearly four months without giving it.

Mr. Comey was confident he could undertake investigations into top public figures, including Mr. Trump and Hillary Clinton, while defending the bureau’s integrity. That miscalculation led to a disastrous news conference in July 2016 at which he announced that although Mrs. Clinton had been “extremely careless” in handling classified information, she would not be prosecuted. Many Democrats believe the assertion ultimately contributed to her defeat.

His approach left the F.B.I. reeling, and Mr. Patel and many other Republicans cite Mr. Comey as one of the main reasons the bureau needs to be reshaped and more agents from its headquarters in Washington farmed out to field offices around the country.

Advertisement

Mr. Wray, who was appointed by Mr. Trump in mid-2017 for a 10-year term, took a much more cautious, conventional approach to Mr. Trump. Nonetheless, their relationship soured almost immediately.

Mr. Trump came close to firing Mr. Wray after he refused, among other things, to embrace the president’s lies about the 2020 election being stolen.

Agents who worked for Mr. Wray described him as fundamentally apolitical, focused on the threat posed by China and other foreign adversaries, and fixated on the minutiae of law enforcement — spending time in briefings on firearms testing, audits of secret surveillance warrants and information technology systems. One former F.B.I. official likened the meetings to watching paint dry, yet the director loved them.

But he could not escape politics. And his commitment to investigating Mr. Trump, including the execution of a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago, effectively doomed his directorship.

On a gray, snow-flecked day at the F.B.I.’s headquarters this month, national security leaders from the United States and Britain gathered to thank Mr. Wray, and to issue barely veiled warnings about what the future might hold if Mr. Trump succeeds in asserting control.

Advertisement

Former top F.B.I. officials were in attendance, including William H. Webster, who was appointed by President Jimmy Carter.

So was William J. Burns, the C.I.A. director, who said Mr. Wray’s greatest achievement was fulfilling a promise he made at his 2017 confirmation hearing to adhere to the “impartial pursuit of justice.”

When it came time for Mr. Wray to speak, he exhorted agents to stay and conduct their investigations with impartiality.

“That means following the facts wherever they lead, no matter who likes it, or doesn’t,” Mr. Wray said. “Because there’s always someone who doesn’t like it.”

Mr. Patel’s swift ascent in Mr. Trump’s orbit began in 2018. Then a little-known House Republican aide, Mr. Patel investigated the Justice Department’s efforts to obtain a secret surveillance warrant for a Trump adviser believed to be conspiring with the Russians during the 2016 campaign.

Advertisement

From there, he landed a succession of national security posts in rapid succession, serving his longest stint on the National Security Council (20 months) and the shortest as a top aide at the Pentagon (three months). He often communicated with the president directly, to the chagrin of his nominal superiors.

By the spring of 2020, Mr. Trump was eager to dismiss Mr. Wray, replace him with a senior intelligence official and install Mr. Patel as his top deputy in charge, a post typically reserved for a senior agent in a work force of 38,000.

Mr. Barr, then the attorney general, talked Mr. Trump down during a contentious meeting in the Oval Office. Mr. Barr would later write in his memoir that Mr. Patel was deeply unqualified and that the president “showed a shocking detachment from reality.”

People close to Mr. Barr said he was also concerned that Mr. Patel would have been too compliant to challenge Mr. Trump.

Early on, Mr. Wray concluded that limiting contact with the White House, or communicating through intermediaries, could ensure independence, a policy he maintained with Mr. Trump and President Joseph R. Biden Jr.

Advertisement

After Mr. Trump left office, he tapped Mr. Patel as one of his emissaries to the National Archives, thrusting Mr. Patel into the Trump classified documents investigation.

In August 2022, F.B.I. agents and federal prosecutors obtained a court-authorized warrant to search Mr. Trump’s Florida club and residence, including his bedroom. In his book, Mr. Patel said that the “Mar-a-Lago raid will go down in history as a sign of the destruction of our once great institutions of equal justice and fairness.”

During Mr. Trump’s time out of office, Mr. Patel cultivated relationships with the president’s sons, particularly Donald Trump Jr., and embraced online retail (under the brand “K$H”). He also hawked anti-vaccine diet supplements, pro-Trump T-shirts and a line of children’s books in which he portrayed himself as a wizard, wearing a midnight blue robe. Mr. Trump was depicted with a crown.

Mr. Patel, who is single, likes the nightlife. He was recently spotted posing for poolside photos with bikini-clad conservatives, and his Senate disclosure form revealed that he recently joined the Poodle Room, a members-only club near his residence in Las Vegas that has a $20,000 entry fee.

More than anything, he worked relentlessly to raise his profile in Trump circles, doing nearly 1,000 interviews and podcasts. On his Senate disclosure form, he said he “served as a surrogate” for Mr. Trump’s campaign from November 2022 to November 2024.

Advertisement

Mr. Trump has always been leery of subordinates who market themselves off their association with him. And his support of Mr. Patel has been somewhat tempered by doubts about his gravitas and experience. Mr. Trump’s 2024 campaign manager and the new White House chief of staff, Susie Wiles, told him the selection was too risky, associates of both men said.

But the only serious alternative to Mr. Patel that emerged, Missouri’s Republican attorney general, Andrew Bailey, seemed too laid-back and lackluster in face-to-face meetings.

Mr. Patel, always loyal — and always around — lobbied furiously for the job, and prevailed.

After his selection, Mr. Patel appeared to become more cognizant of his attack-dog reputation. Off camera he was more muted, self-effacing, funny and willing to compromise, which allayed the concerns of Ms. Wiles and other skeptics.

Moreover — despite Mr. Patel’s inflammatory public statements — his vetting did not reveal a knockout scandal comparable to the one that forced out Matt Gaetz, Mr. Trump’s initial pick for attorney general.

Advertisement

Mr. Trump did not consult with senators in his own party before nominating Mr. Patel, according to one senator and several aides. Nor did he apparently seek approval from Pam Bondi, his more conventional second choice for attorney general, according to people in his orbit.

The response to Mr. Patel’s appointment among Senate Republicans has been mixed, with some issuing emphatic endorsements and others taking a wait-and-see tack. To allay some concerns, former Representative Trey Gowdy, a former federal prosecutor from South Carolina who is friendly with Mr. Patel, has been furiously working the phones on his behalf, according to people familiar with the situation.

As he has so often done with top aides, Mr. Trump, a former reality TV star, fretted that Mr. Patel lacked the central-casting look the public had come to expect from an F.B.I. director, without either the imposing G-man appearance of a former director like Robert S. Mueller III or the bulldog mien of the bureau’s founder.

“He’s no J. Edgar Hoover,” Mr. Trump told an adviser.

Devlin Barrett and Jonathan Swan contributed reporting.

Advertisement

News

Real estate investors are buying up long-term care facilities. Residents can suffer

Published

on

Real estate investors are buying up long-term care facilities. Residents can suffer

Leslie Adams holds a photo of his mother, Shirley, who died after developing infected bedsores at a rehabilitation center, according to a lawsuit he filed. A court awarded the family $17 million, but they are still trying to collect it.

Taylor Glascock for KFF Health News


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Taylor Glascock for KFF Health News

By the time she was hospitalized in 2020, Pearlene Darby, a retired teacher, had suffered open sores on both legs, both hips, and both heels, as well as a five-inch-long gash on her tailbone. She died two weeks later at age 81 from infections and bedsores, according to her death certificate. Her daughter sued the nursing home, alleging it had left Darby sitting in her own feces and urine time and again.

The lawsuit, settled on confidential terms last year, blamed not only the managers of City Creek Post-Acute and Assisted Living but also the building’s owner, a real estate investment trust, or REIT. In the year Darby died, City Creek paid CareTrust REIT more than $1 million in rent, while the Sacramento, California, nursing home ran a deficit, court records show.

Federal tax rules ban REITs from running health care facilities, but CareTrust was not an absentee landlord either, according to internal records filed in the case. It chose the nursing home’s management company and required through the lease that the home keep at least 80% of beds occupied. CareTrust granularly tracked how well the home kept to its financial plan, down to the money spent monthly on nurses and food, the records said. And the documents showed that the real estate company kept tabs on government safety inspection findings and Medicare quality ratings.

Advertisement

Both CareTrust and the nursing home operator denied liability for Darby’s death. CareTrust officials said in court papers that it is not involved in day-to-day nursing home decisions or patient care, and that it monitors facilities to ensure nothing jeopardizes rent payments.

In a written statement, CareTrust Corporate Counsel Joseph Layne told KFF Health News: “We are the property owners, not the operators.”

Pearlene Darby is shown in a family photo with her grandson Caleb Darby. She has a big smile and they are both doing a dance move, with an outstretched arm.

Pearlene Darby, pictured here with her grandson Caleb Darby, was a resident of a Sacramento, California, nursing home. She died two weeks after being hospitalized for bedsores and an infection. The home denied liability and the case was settled out of court.

Shirlene Darby


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Shirlene Darby

Landlords with influence

Over the past decade, real estate investment trusts have bought thousands of buildings that house nursing homes, hospitals, assisted living facilities, and medical offices. A KFF Health News examination of court filings and corporate records shows that these landlords have more influence than the health care facilities publicly acknowledge.

The documents reveal REITs often select the management who oversee the operations and leave them in place even when they are aware of threadbare staffing, floundering governance, repeated safety violations, or other problems that hamper quality of care. A California jury in March awarded $92 million in punitive damages against a former REIT over the death of a 100-year-old resident with dementia who froze to death outside her assisted living facility.

Advertisement

“The REITs are in charge,” said Laraclay Parker, one of the lawyers who represent Darby’s daughter.

Absence of oversight

Despite their ubiquity, REITs remain invisible to state and federal health regulators. Hospitals and nursing homes are not required to disclose rent payments or landlord identities in the annual reports they submit to Medicare.

Under President Donald Trump, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services indefinitely suspended a Biden-era requirement that nursing homes disclose REIT involvement. Catherine Howden, a CMS spokesperson, said in a statement that the agency does not regulate facilities based on their tax status or corporate form and instead focuses on the quality of the care they provide.

REITs now own a fifth of the nation’s senior housing, which includes assisted living, memory care, and independent living, according to an industry analysis. REITs also hold investments in 1 in 6 nursing homes. Publicly traded REITs that focus on health care are now worth nearly a quarter of a trillion dollars, according to Nareit, an industry association.

visualization

Advertisement

While one research study found REIT investments were associated with higher spending on nursing wages, another concluded that after being bought by REITs, nursing homes frequently replaced registered nurses with less skilled nurses and aides. A third analysis concluded that health inspection results were worse after REIT investment.

Researchers also found that investor-owned hospital chains that sold buildings to REITs were more likely to close or go bankrupt, as happened in 2024 with Steward Health Care. Often, private equity investors kept the sale proceeds as profits while the hospitals were burdened with new rent costs. “There were no improvements in clinical outcomes,” said Thomas Tsai, an associate professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

REITs are required to distribute most of their income and don’t have to pay the 21% federal corporate income tax on it. There is a catch: A REIT that “directly or indirectly operates or manages” a health care facility loses the tax break for five years. Typically, a REIT leases the property to another company that runs the nursing home or assisted living facility and maintains its tax break. Nareit said health care REITs distributed more than $7 billion in dividends in 2024.

Michael Stroyeck, head of health care analysis at Green Street, a real estate research company, said “there’s definitely a symbiotic relationship” between REITs and facility managers because they have the same goals. He said he has seen REITs replace operators that are having difficulties or go bankrupt.

John Kane, a senior vice president at the American Health Care Association and the National Center for Assisted Living, an industry group that represents nursing homes, said in a statement: “Given government funding often falls short, REITs have been valuable partners in helping to invest in long term care without influencing daily operations.”

Advertisement

Low staffing at a chain

Strawberry Fields REIT, which like CareTrust trades on the New York Stock Exchange, owns or controls the buildings of 131 nursing home facilities. The nursing home operations inside 66 of those facilities are owned by Moishe Gubin, Strawberry Fields’ chief executive, and Michael Blisko, one of its directors, according to Strawberry Fields’ annual report for last year.

Gubin and Blisko also jointly own Infinity Healthcare Management, which manages their nursing homes; Blisko is Infinity’s CEO. On average, Infinity-affiliated nursing homes provided an hour and a quarter less nursing care per resident per day than the national average of four hours, a KFF Health News analysis of federal records found.

Infinity and several of its nursing homes have recently settled 30 death and injury lawsuits in Cook County, Illinois, totaling more than $4 million, said Margaret Battersby Black, a Chicago lawyer. A jury last year awarded $12 million in a lawsuit brought against Infinity and one of its Chicago nursing homes over the 2023 death of Shirley Adams. A retired candy factory worker, Adams died after developing infected bedsores at Lakeview Rehabilitation and Nursing Center, according to the lawsuit.

“She had wounds that no one could explain,” one of her adult children, Leslie Adams, testified at trial. Medicare gives Lakeview its lowest quality rating, one star out of five.

Leslie Adams is shown sitting on a staircase outside a brick building.

Leslie Adams lost his mother, Shirley, who died after developing infected bedsores at Lakeview Rehabilitation and Nursing Center, according to a lawsuit he filed. “She had wounds that no one could explain,” he testified. (Taylor Glascock for KFF Health News)

Taylor Glascock for KFF Health News

Advertisement


hide caption

toggle caption

Taylor Glascock for KFF Health News

Advertisement

Paul Connery, a lawyer for Adams’ family, said they are still trying to collect on the judgment against the nursing home and management company, which now totals $17 million with interest and attorney fees.

“If I get caught speeding and I went to court, they issue me a ticket and I’ve got a fine to pay,” Adams said in an interview. “How are they able to still continue to move on with business like nothing has happened?”

In a phone interview and an email, Gubin said Strawberry Fields, Infinity, and the nursing homes are all legally distinct and that he has not played an active role in Infinity in more than a decade. He said nursing homes get sued all the time but that the verdict against Lakeview is so large that it will force the home to declare bankruptcy or shut down.

A multistory brick building on a city street is show. Two bare trees are visible. The word "Lakeview" appears on an awning, and a large sign says, "Thank you, Staff."

The owners and operators of Lakeview Rehabilitation and Nursing Center in Chicago also are directors of the real estate investment trust that owns the building, a securities filing shows.

Taylor Glascock for KFF Health News


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Taylor Glascock for KFF Health News

“The whole thing is unfortunate,” Gubin said by phone. “For 15 years they were a perfectly good guardian” and “a well-run building,” he said. “You wouldn’t think it was fair to be judged on your worst day.”

Advertisement

Blisko and an Infinity lawyer did not respond to requests for comment.

Strawberry Fields, which owns 10 assisted living facilities and two long-term care hospitals in addition to the nursing homes, earned net income last year of $33 million from $155 million in rent, a 21% profit margin, securities filings show. Gubin said those weren’t excessive returns.

A $110 million verdict

Traditionally, REIT leases make the operating companies responsible for paying property taxes, insurance premiums, and maintenance costs. In 2008, Congress gave health care REITs a new option to make money: On top of collecting rents, they could set up subsidiaries and take profits directly from health care businesses. They still must have independent management overseeing care decisions. Many REITs have embraced the role even though the subsidiaries must pay corporate taxes and risk losing money if the businesses do poorly.

Colony Capital was a REIT that through layers of shell corporations owned both the building and the operation of Greenhaven Estates, a Sacramento assisted living and memory care facility. In 2018 Greenhaven paid Colony $1.4 million in rent, nearly a third of its $4.5 million in revenue that year, according to financial records filed in court.

Greenhaven also was on the verge of losing its license, according to a revocation notice filed in November 2018 by the California Department of Social Services. Greenhaven had racked up years of health violations, including from letting untrained workers administer medications, lacking enough employees to care for people with dementia, and neglecting a resident who smeared feces over his body, bed, floor, and bathroom, the notice said.

Advertisement

In February 2019, a few weeks after celebrating her 100th birthday, Mildred Hernandez, a resident with Alzheimer’s, wandered out of Greenhaven in the middle of the night. Her assisted living wing had no exit door alarms even though it housed several residents with dementia, court records showed. Berta Lepe, one of Greenhaven’s caregivers, found Hernandez under a bush, wearing only a shirt and underwear. The temperature was in the 30s.

Mildred Hernandez is pictured in a midrange photograph. She is smiling broadly and has curly gray hair.

Mildred Hernandez was 100 when she died of hypothermia after wandering out of her assisted living facility in the middle of the night. A jury awarded $92 million in punitive damages against the owner of the home.

Ric Tapia


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Ric Tapia

“She was talking, but I couldn’t understand what she was saying,” Lepe testified at trial over a lawsuit from Hernandez’s family. Hernandez died of hypothermia a few hours later, according to her death certificate.
Frontier Management, the company that Colony had hired to manage Greenhaven, denied liability and settled the lawsuit on undisclosed terms.

Since the lawsuit, Colony has changed its name to DigitalBridge, which no longer owns Greenhaven and gave up its REIT status. At trial earlier this year, DigitalBridge said resident care was the responsibility of Frontier and that Colony “encouraged” Frontier to address problems. Richard Welch, a former Colony executive, testified that replacing management is disruptive. “I viewed it as a last resort,” he said.

In March, a jury awarded Hernandez’s family a total of $110 million: $10 million in compensatory damages, $92 million in punitive damages against DigitalBridge, and $8 million in punitive damages against Formation Capital, an asset management company.

Advertisement

“REIT money is very detached from knowing about or caring about patient or resident outcomes, because it’s not in their business model,” Ed Dudensing, a lawyer for the family, said in an interview. “Their allegiance is to their investors.”

DigitalBridge has asked the judge to delay finalizing the judgment while its legal challenges to the lawsuit and the verdict are evaluated. A DigitalBridge attorney and a corporate spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment, a Formation attorney declined comment, and a Frontier attorney and a spokesman did not respond to a request for comment.

‘Wet from head to toe’

When CareTrust bought City Creek Post-Acute and Assisted Living in 2019, the Sacramento nursing home where Pearlene Darby lived had a one-star Medicare rating and was losing money. CareTrust leased the building to a management company called Kalesta Healthcare Group based on the business plan Kalesta submitted.

While CareTrust was not the operator, it held periodic phone calls with Kalesta, which provided “a full update of what’s happening at the facility,” including changes in leadership, financial progress, and health inspection survey results, according to deposition testimony by Ryan Williams, a Kalesta co-founder.

According to a state inspection report, in 2020, the year Darby died, City Creek left a resident in soiled linens “wet from head to toe lying in bed” for more than eight hours. During a different visit, a health inspector cited the home after watching a nurse put a dirty diaper back onto a resident after caring for a wound. “It was just a small stool and it is far from where the wound is,” the nurse told the inspector, according to the report.

Advertisement

James Callister, CareTrust’s chief investment officer, said in his deposition that CareTrust officials “review results of regulatory surveys provided to us by the tenant. We review the five-star rating.” He said, “We evaluate results of care, but we do not evaluate types of care given or how or when, no.”

Darby had been living in City Creek since 2011 after a stroke left her in a wheelchair. She needed help getting in and out of bed. From September through November 2020, Darby lost 30 pounds, her family’s lawsuit alleged. During those months, employees dropped her three times as one worker rather than the required two operated the mechanical lift, the lawsuit said.

The suit alleged City Creek failed to reposition her every two hours in bed or her wheelchair, which is the clinical standard for people at risk of bedsores, and to promptly order devices to protect her skin.

In November, the nursing home sent Darby to the hospital. A blood test found bacteria had entered her bloodstream from her feces’ touching open skin wounds, according to the lawsuit. The hospital diagnosed her with sepsis. A surgeon said she needed an operation to redirect fecal waste from her intestines but concluded she wasn’t medically stable enough for surgery, the suit said.

Darby began receiving comfort care measures and was sent back to City Creek. She died two weeks later. In court filings, CareTrust and Kalesta denied the allegations.

Advertisement

In a phone interview, Williams, the Kalesta co-founder, said Darby’s death occurred during the most challenging point of the covid pandemic, when California rules required any nurses testing positive for the virus to be sent home and nurses were quitting out of fear for their health. “It was the most herculean of professional efforts to secure enough staff,” he said.
While expressing sympathy for Darby and her family, he said it was “unconscionable” that personal injury lawyers sued nursing homes over care failures during “the worst of times.”

In court, CareTrust petitioned Judge Richard Miadich to dismiss it from the lawsuit before trial. “This case does not concern a property condition,” CareTrust’s lawyers wrote. “CareTrust is simply a landlord.” But the judge ruled last year a jury should decide whether CareTrust “exercised actual control over City Creek.”

The case was settled out of court a few months later. All parties declined to reveal the settlement terms.

A 67% Profit

As recently as November 2023 — four years after its acquisition — City Creek earned one star from Medicare. It was cited for failing to have the minimum nursing home staffing required by California law during five of 24 randomly selected days in 2022, according to an inspection report. Williams said in the interview that Kalesta had increased spending on nursing over the course of its ownership, including boosting wages, but that it takes a year or two to turn around a troubled nursing home. He said the home’s star rating in 2023 was dragged down by its poor inspection history from before Kalesta took over.

City Creek’s rating has climbed in the past two years, and it now has the top overall rating of five, according to Medicare. Medicare rates City Creek’s current staffing levels as average. That’s better than most nursing homes in more than 200 buildings CareTrust bought before 2025, according to a KFF Health News analysis of federal data. On average, CareTrust nursing homes provided a half hour less nursing care per resident per day than the national average of four hours.

Advertisement

In its statement to KFF Health News, CareTrust’s counsel Layne said the REIT worked to “identify quality operators as tenants,” and that the homes the REIT rents out have more nurses and aides than the minimum required for nursing homes by their state governments. “The operators are licensed by state regulators and retain sole responsibility for operations,” the statement said.

CareTrust, which now owns more than 500 senior housing and nursing home buildings, reported net income last year of $320 million from $476 million in rents and other revenue — a 67% profit margin. As one point of comparison, HCA Healthcare, one of the nation’s largest for-profit hospital and health care chains, reported a 10% profit margin for last year.  

Lesley Ann Clement, one of Darby’s lawyers, said cases like hers show the nursing home industry is wrong to complain it lacks financial resources for more staffing.

“There’s plenty of money,” Clement said. “They’re just not spending it on patient care.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

US planning to seize Iran-linked ships in coming days, WSJ says | The Jerusalem Post

Published

on

US planning to seize Iran-linked ships in coming days, WSJ says | The Jerusalem Post

The US is planning to board and seize Iran-linked oil tankers and commercial ships in the coming days, according to a Saturday report by The Wall Street Journal.

The report noted that these actions would take place in international waters, potentially outside of the Middle East.

The US “will actively pursue any Iranian-flagged vessel or any vessel attempting to provide material support to Iran,” US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine said. “This includes dark fleet vessels carrying Iranian oil.”

“As most of you know, dark fleet vessels are those illicit or illegal ships evading international regulations, sanctions, or insurance requirements,” Caine continued.

Caine was further quoted as saying that the new campaign, which would be operated in part by the US Indo-Pacific Command, would be part of a broader US President Donald Trump-led campaign against Iran, known as “Economic Fury.”

Advertisement

 White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly told the WSJ that Trump was “optimistic” that the new measures would lead to a peace deal.

The potential US military action comes as Iran tightens its grip on the Strait of Hormuz, including attacking several ships earlier on Saturday, the WSJ reported.

The report cited CENTCOM as saying that the US has already turned back 23 ships trying to leave Iranian ports since the start of its blockade on the Strait.

The expansion of naval action beyond the Middle East will provide the US with further leverage against Iran by allowing it to take control of a greater number of ships loaded with oil or weapons bound for Iran, the report noted.

“It’s a maximalist approach,” said associate professor of law at Emory University Law School Mark Nevitt. “If you want to put the screws down on Iran, you want to use every single legal authority you have to do that.”

Advertisement

Iran claimed earlier on Saturday that it had regained military control over the Strait, intending to hold it until the US guarantees full freedom of movement for ships traveling to and from Iran.

“As long as the United States does not ensure full freedom of navigation for vessels traveling to and from Iran, the situation in the Strait of Hormuz will remain tightly controlled,” the Iranian military stated.

In addition, Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei declared on Saturday in an apparent message on his Telegram channel that the Iranian navy is prepared to inflict “new bitter defeats” on its enemies.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Video: The Origins of the Supreme Court’s Shadow Docket

Published

on

Video: The Origins of the Supreme Court’s Shadow Docket

new video loaded: The Origins of the Supreme Court’s Shadow Docket

Secret memos obtained by The New York Times illuminate the origins of the Supreme Court’s shadow docket. Our reporter Jodi Kantor explains what these documents reveal about the court.

By Jodi Kantor, Alexandra Ostasiewicz, June Kim and Luke Piotrowski

April 18, 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending