UBS, et al v. Lorenzo Esteva, et al
- Case Type:
- Business
- Case Status:
- Reversed and Remanded
- Citation:
- 23-14050 (11th Circuit, Jul 31,2025) Not Published
- Tag(s):
-
- Ruling:
- The Eleventh Circuit concluded that contractual ambiguities in an investment account agreement precluded the entry of summary judgment on claims concerning whether the debtor and his wife granted UBS a lien on the account, as a result of competing arguments over whether the word "you" in the provision granting UBS a lien should be read to mean only the debtor or also include his wife and the interpretation of the joint and several liability clause. The Eleventh Circuit also ruled that factual disputes as to constructive fraudulent transfer claims asserted by UBS, prevented summary judgment.
- Procedural context:
- Esteva and his wife filed a complaint to initiate an adversary proceeding against UBS, seeking declaratory relief that the investment account was exempt as tenancy by the entireties and that UBS did not have security interest, lien, or right of setoff against the account. Esteva and his wife also sought turnover of the account balance and damages on account of unjust enrichment claims. UBS filed counterclaims, seeking declaratory relief, determining that UBS had a valid and perfected security interest in the investment account, asserting actual and constructive fraudulent transfer claims, and alleging setoff. The bankruptcy court granted summary judgment in favor of Esteva on all claims.
- Facts:
- Esteva accepted employment with UBS as a financial advisor. In connection with his employment, UBS loaned him $2 million. Esteva deposited the loan proceeds into a UBS investment account, which he held jointly with his wife. Esteva's employment with UBS was terminated and he was banned from working in the financial industry when an internal UBS investigation showed that Esteva had falsified account statements and transferred funds between client accounts without permission for more than a decade. Esteva did not repay the UBS loan upon termination of employment as required by the promissory notes, and, thereafter, Esteva filed a petition seeking relief under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code, and later converted to chapter 11. Esteva claimed the investment account exempt as tenancy by the entireties property and initiated the adversary proceeding giving rise to this appeal.
- Judge(s):
- Pryor, Chief Judge, and Grant and Luck
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary. Please Sign In using your ABI Member credentials. Not a Member yet? Join ABI now - it is absolutely worth it!
