Emma (80 at the time of trial) and her husband (now deceased) had lived frugally and assembled 24 acres of view property on Whidbey Island. Emma befriended Linda, or maybe it was the other way around. Linda was a real estate agent.
Over four or five years Linda arranged three sweetheart purchases of portions of Emma's property for Linda's family:
In 2001 five acres assessed at $82,236 were sold to Linda's daughter Dina for $52,000.
In 2002 Linda's daughter Samantha bought another five acres assessed at $195,524 for $80,000.
In 2005 still another five acres with a value of $324,000 were sold to Linda herself for $150,000.
The evidence also showed that Emma's neighbor Don found her "wandering along a roadside ditch in the summer of 2003, holding a toothbrush. When he stopped to help her, Emma did not appear to know where she was going..." When asked at trial why she had made the property sales, Emma said "...there was so much junk up there," and "It's just sand."
Emma's children sued over this dismantling of their family's Whidbey holdings. What did the Court do?