Posted by Kathy Bazoian Phelps
A group of investors in the Madoff case suffered a loss when the jury verdict was announced in favor of Westport National bank and its parent, Connecticut Community Bank. Read the following article for more information about the jury verdict and the related settlement with some of the investors: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/07/18/jury-largely-sides-with-bank-in-madoff-related-case/?ref=business\
This result is in contrast to the large jury verdict of $67 million last year against TD Bank in the Coquina v. TD Bank case. The contrasting results in the jury verdicts in these two bank liability cases may have much to do with the way the juries responded to the facts and legal theories involved. The Connecticut Community Bank case involved complex issues of contract interpretation and fiduciary duties relating to custodial agreements, while the TD Bank involved aiding and abetting fraud allegations with a bank officer who asserted his Fifth Amendment privilege and refused to testify in response to questions about his allegedly fraudulent conduct. If a bank liability case gets to a jury, practitioners on both sides of fight should keep in mind that fraud may be easier for a jury to understand than contract interpretation or fiduciary duties.
No comments:
Post a Comment