82 results for 'cat:"Fiduciary Duty" AND cat:"Contract"'.
J. Ludwig partially grants motions to dismiss from former employees and business partners of the car dealer claiming they violated multiple state and federal laws during a soured business deal related to the dealer's entry into the market for car financing and insurance products and services. Many of the dealer's "conclusory assertions" and "over-the-top rhetoric" do not fit the facts presented, so its RICO Act claims, Lanham Act claims and unjust enrichment claims against the former employees and one of the businesses it partnered with are dismissed. Surviving, in part, are trade secrets claims against three former employees and the business partner, and identity theft, civil conspiracy and aiding and abetting claims against the former employees.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Ludwig, Filed On: May 10, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv1204, NOS: Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) - Other Suits, Categories: fiduciary Duty, Conversion, contract
J. Wood partially rules in favor of the employee and the executive in a breach of contract and fiduciary duty action brought by the insurance brokerage firm for violating their employment agreements. The employee's motion for summary judgment is granted as to the firm's claims for breach of non-compete covenant and breach of confidentiality and non-disclosure covenants regarding all clients except one. However, the employee's motion is denied with respect to claims for breach of fiduciary duty, breach of non-solicitation, employee non-interference and confidentiality covenants for information on one client. Genuine issues of fact exist as to whether the employee breached his non-solicitation covenant but undisputed evidence shows that the executive did not breach hers. There is a factual dispute as to whether the executive violated her confidentiality and non-disclosure covenants.
Court: USDC Southern District of Georgia, Judge: Wood, Filed On: April 26, 2024, Case #: 4:23cv54, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Employment, fiduciary Duty, contract
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
Vice Chancellor Glasscock declines to dismiss contract claims stemming from a conversion agreement in which shares held by plaintiffs had been diluted because it was reasonably conceivable that plaintiffs had been promised equal shares would be maintained during the company's conversion into a Delaware entity. However, fraud claims should be dismissed for failure to plead the time and place that the representations had been made, and the fiduciary duty claim constitutes improper bootstrapping from the breach of contract claim.
Court: Delaware Chancery Court, Judge: Glasscock, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: 2022-0665-SG, Categories: Fraud, fiduciary Duty, contract
[Consolidated.] J. Wiley finds that the trial court erred in denying a motion to amend filed by a company's managing member who alleged his business partner cheated him out of the proceeds of a real estate sale. He may bring his claims on behalf of member entities and pursue his conspiracy claims against the business partner. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Wiley, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: B314426, Categories: Unfair Competition, fiduciary Duty, contract
J. Guzman finds a company director did not breach her fiduciary duties when she cut off her brother, the company creator’s, access to company accounts. The company creator is not a company shareholder or officer.
Court: USDC Massachusetts, Judge: Guzman, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: 4:21cv40060, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: fiduciary Duty, Defamation, contract
J. Jewell finds that the trial court properly ruled in favor of the attorney and law firm on claims relating to alleged conflicts of interest during their representation for a failed transaction to merge real estate businesses. The allegations involving conflicts of interest involve negligence only and not fiduciary duty, and there was insufficient evidence to establish causation as to the professional negligence claim. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Jewell, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: 14-22-00781-CV, Categories: fiduciary Duty, Legal Malpractice, contract
J. Grimes finds the lower court properly dismissed a special motion to strike filed by a church deacon and his wife after a donor donated over $1 million to an organization run by the wife, after a sermon. The donation was to help purchase a car and a home for a destitute family, with any leftover funds to be returned to the donor. The donor discovered that the house and car were purchased in the organization’s name, not that of the family in need. The donor filed suit alleging he was solicited for the funds which were used fraudulently to benefit the organization, not the family he believed he was helping. The deacon and his wife deny the claim, alleging the conversations with the donor were public in nature and about the family’s needs, and protected as they were part of a sermon and protected speech. The lower court disagreed, as the discussions were specific in nature and the issue was not so much about where the speech or conversation occurred, but rather about the alleged misconduct perpetrated by the deacon and his wife after the sermon. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Grimes, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: B327668, Categories: Fraud, fiduciary Duty, contract
J. Davis partially grants the auditor's motion to dismiss its client's counterclaims in a case arising from the parties' relationship in the years leading up to the client's entry into rehabilitation. Minnesota law governs the motion to dismiss, and the client's claims related to a collection of 2016 investments are time-barred. Other claims, stemming from a 2016 reinsurance transaction and the appointment of an actuary in the same year, are not time-barred. Claims for breach of fiduciary duty are dismissed for failure to state a claim, as are claims alleging fraudulent concealment.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Davis, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 0:22cv3132, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: fiduciary Duty, Choice Of Law, contract
J. Bell denies a class of family members of those buried at one of the largest cemeteries for Black Americans its motion for certification in this suit alleging shocking treatment of human remains and desecration of graves, among others. The class, consisting of 10 people, has failed to specifically identify any other members of the thousands they believe to have been harmed by the owners of the cemetery. Thus, the suit is no longer a federal matter and is remanded to the superior court of the relevant county.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Bell, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv217, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: fiduciary Duty, Class Action, contract
J. Partida-Kipness finds in this interlocutory appeal that the lower court properly denied the defendants' motion to abate the lawsuit asserting breach of fiduciary duty claims. The appellants contend that the dispute is subject to arbitration, but the court disagrees, based on the unambiguous language of the appellee company's operating agreement. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Partida-Kipness, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 05-23-00199-CV, Categories: Arbitration, fiduciary Duty, contract
J. Austin, of the District of South Carolina, grants the real estate investors' motion to transfer their own investors' suit against them to the Southern District of Florida. While this dispute relates to property in South Carolina, both parties do substantial business in Florida and other related suits are already being litigated in Florida.
Court: USDC Southern District of Florida, Judge: Austin, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 1:24cv21147, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: fiduciary Duty, Venue, contract
J. Smith denies the wastepaper company's motion to dismiss breach of contract claims. A wastepaper company acquired 50% ownership of a paper company with the stipulation that the wastepaper company would not import or export paper other than wastepaper. The wastepaper company started selling regular paper, claiming the restrictive covenant was too broad. It would be premature to dismiss it as the paper company has not been able to defend the stipulation's validity.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Virginia, Judge: Smith, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv512, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Jury, fiduciary Duty, contract
J. Bell affirms the lower court’s decision that a machinery producer has plausible evidence that a powder coat and finishing company committed fraud, among other things, when it created two similar companies and fraudulently transferred the producer’s money between them.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Bell, Filed On: March 21, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv59, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Fraud, fiduciary Duty, contract
J. Logue finds the trial court properly dismissed with prejudice the condo owners' lawsuit against their condo association's general counsel in part alleging that the counsel's legal advice caused the association's president to breach his fiduciary duty to them. The counsel's contractual relationship with the association does not mean the counsel has a contractual relationship with the owners, and there is no implied fiduciary relationship between the owners and the counsel as the owners argue. Affirmed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Logue, Filed On: March 20, 2024, Case #: 22-2040, Categories: fiduciary Duty, contract
J. Hodges finds that the trial court properly granted the wholesaling company's motion to dismiss the business partner's derivative action and correctly ruled in favor of the company manager on the partner's breach of fiduciary duty claim. The trial court correctly found that a special litigation committee tasked with reviewing the partner's claims was independent and that an attorney's limited prior professional relationship with a committee member did not affect that independence. The manager had authority to issue the credit memoranda and discounts to the customer. The trial court correctly found his actions were based on reasonable business judgment. However, the trial court partially incorrectly ruled in the manager's favor on the partner's breach of contract claim. Affirmed in part.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Hodges, Filed On: March 12, 2024, Case #: A23A1458, Categories: fiduciary Duty, contract
[Consolidated] J. Stadtmueller orders that the citizen has until March 29, 2024, to either file amended complaints for each of his five pro se lawsuits alleging breaches of fiduciary duty and contract by the financial firms and telecommunications companies or file a singled consolidated complaint combining and more clearly explaining his claims. If he does not amend his pleadings before that deadline, his lawsuits may be dismissed without prejudice.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Stadtmueller, Filed On: March 8, 2024, Case #: 2:24cv201, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: fiduciary Duty, contract
J. Jolivette Brown grants a request by an insurance company, dismissing a homeowner’s contract claims arising from her hurricane-related property damages. The policy was issued to the mortage lender. The homeowner, as mortgagor, has not established she is entitled to any benefits from the policy. She unsuccessfully argues the remaining balance on the mortgage is $695,000 and, because the policy limit of $1 million exceeds the mortgage balance by $387,000, the lower, remaining amount is intended to benefit her. The policy does not contain a provision stating that any excess payment would be given to the mortgagor.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Louisiana , Judge: Jolivette Brown, Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv6691, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, fiduciary Duty, contract
[Consolidated.] J. Clark finds that the lower court properly declined to dismiss fiduciary duty claims brought by 10 car dealerships after their founder unilaterally froze them out of individual bank accounts. The founder failed to accept the role of a management group he established after the group removed his sole authority over the dealerships, which impeded not only their access to bank accounts but to manufacturer accounts and approvals. The dealerships were properly granted a preliminary injunction, but they may not have been assessed an appropriate undertaking. The issue should be remanded to set a sum that accounts for potential damage to the founder. Affirmed in part.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Clark, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: CV-22-1961, Categories: Damages, fiduciary Duty, contract
J. Carnes finds that the district court properly dismissed a breach of contract, fiduciary duty and negligence action brought by the estate and clinic against the insurers stemming from an insurance coverage dispute which arose after a $60 million consent judgement was entered in an underlying wrongful death action in favor of the deceased liposuction patient's estate and against the clinic. The district court correctly found that a four-year statute of limitations applied to the fiduciary duty claim and that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations. The insurance policy unambiguously includes a policy limit of $50,000 for a claim of professional liability. The insurer had already incurred expenses beyond that amount defending the estate claims, therefore the policy limit was exhausted. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Carnes, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 22-10614, Categories: Insurance, fiduciary Duty, contract
[Consolidated.] J. Ledet finds that the trial court properly granted a hotel business' co-owner's derivative action against the manager/co-owner of the business. In this case, the manager violated his fiduciary duty to the business because, based on expert testimony, the manager had a pattern of "making withdrawals from [the business'] accounts to pay personal expenditures.” Further, the expert opined that the manager's account receivable
due to the business was $892,411. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Ledet, Filed On: February 5, 2024, Case #: 2023-CA-0181, Categories: fiduciary Duty, contract
J. Nunley grants, in part, Land O’ Lakes’ partial motion to dismiss an individual’s claims related to the denial of his claim for indemnity under his dairy revenue protection policy. The individual fails to show a fiduciary duty to support his breach of fiduciary duty claim, and also fails to show it had an intent to defraud him to support his intentional misrepresentation claim.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Nunley, Filed On: January 17, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv731, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Insurance, fiduciary Duty, contract