A Sacramento Superior Court jury verdict awarding $110 million to the family of Mildred Hernandez has focused renewed attention on elopement risks in assisted living and memory care settings, particularly for residents with dementia. Hernandez, age 100, lived at Greenhaven Estates in Sacramento’s Pocket area and had an Alzheimer’s diagnosis with a known nighttime wandering risk. After leaving the facility during the early morning hours of Feb. 12, 2019, she was later found outside near an exit door that had locked behind her, according to the allegations. The lawsuit asserted that an autopsy determined she died of hypothermia, and the family pursued wrongful death claims against corporate entities tied to the facility’s ownership and management.
Hernandez’s Death and the Facility’s Alleged Safety Failures
According to the complaint, Hernandez resided at Greenhaven Estates, located at 7548 Greenhaven Drive, and was identified as a resident at risk for wandering. The allegations state that she exited the building during the early morning hours and, at approximately 6 a.m., a staff member found her outside near an exit door that had automatically locked behind her, preventing reentry. The lawsuit further alleged that her death was caused by hypothermia, a risk that can be heightened for older adults during overnight temperature drops, even in regions known for hot daytime conditions.
The family’s theory of liability centered on lapses in assessment, care planning, and supervision for a resident with known elopement risk. As stated in the complaint, “Mildred Hernandez’s known wandering was not stated in written assessments or reappraisals of her condition, nor was this risk of harm identified or addressed in Mildred Hernandez’s individualized care plan with meaningful interventions to prevent her from harm.” The pleadings also described systemic shortcomings—understaffing and inadequate protections—framed as profit-driven operational choices that allegedly left vulnerable residents without appropriate safeguards.
Wrongful Death Claims Against DigitalBridge Group and Formation Capital
The family filed suit in Sacramento Superior Court in 2020 against asset manager DigitalBridge Group, formerly Colony Capital, and private equity firm Formation Capital, identified in the pleadings as owners connected to the facility at the time of Hernandez’s death. The complaint alleged that the companies prioritized financial performance over resident safety, resulting in staffing and training deficiencies and insufficient resident supervision. The case posture placed institutional oversight and corporate accountability at issue, rather than focusing solely on on-the-ground caregiving decisions.
Regulatory material was also incorporated into the family’s narrative of negligence. State inspection reports from the California Department of Social Services cited the community for deficiencies relating to staffing, training, and resident supervision, according to the allegations. Those citations, as described in the litigation, were used to support the claim that the risk of harm was foreseeable and that the facility’s operational practices did not meet required standards. The plaintiff was represented by Dudensing Law, according to court filings.
The $110 Million Judgment and Post-Verdict Disputes
Sacramento Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Galvin entered judgment in the amount of $110 million, with the award to be received by Hernandez’s four adult daughters, according to statements attributed to the family’s counsel. In a public statement, the family characterized the death as preventable and tied responsibility to facility operations and corporate oversight. The defense entities did not provide a public response in the record summarized here, and they were described as not responding to requests for comment at the time of reporting.
Despite the size of the verdict, the legal and practical pathway to collection remains subject to post-judgment procedures. Commentary from Sacramento attorney Mark Merin outlined potential obstacles, including motions that could reduce the award, a possible order granting a new trial, or bankruptcy-related complications. Merin also noted that long-term care operations may be structured through multiple entities, which can affect enforcement of judgments and available insurance coverage. Court records indicate the next hearing is scheduled for March 19 on the companies’ request to stay the judgment, underscoring that the verdict is not necessarily the final step in the litigation’s financial outcome.
Ownership Changes and the Broader Compliance Picture
The facility’s ownership has changed since the events at issue. In 2024, an LLC identified as 7548 Greenhaven Drive Holdings LLC, in care of CW Capital Asset Management, acquired the property, according to the Sacramento County Assessor’s Office. The community is now known as Spanish Vines Assisted Living and Memory Care, reflecting a rebranding and transition separate from the claims tied to the prior ownership period.
From a compliance perspective, the case highlights how elopement risk in dementia care can implicate multiple layers of duty: accurate assessments, individualized care plans, adequate staffing, staff training, and reliable building security measures that do not unintentionally trap residents outdoors. The litigation also illustrates how plaintiffs may rely on state inspection findings to support allegations that shortcomings were not isolated events but part of broader operational deficiencies. Beyond the immediate parties, the dispute underscores that corporate ownership structures and post-judgment motions can materially shape accountability outcomes in long-term care wrongful death cases.
