Bandy v. Fifth Third Bank

Summarized by Thomas DeCarlo , John Steinberger & Associates, PC
12 years 11 months ago

Citation:

Case Number 11-4184

Tag(s):

Ruling:

Complaint fails to state cause of action for conversion where no single count contained a sufficent statement of facts that, if accepted as true, would state a claim for conversion.

Procedural context:

Plaintiffs filed a complaint against a group of financial institutions that held and disbursed funds that were part of a ponzi scheme. Defendants moved to dismiss for failure to state cause of action. Trial court graned motion to dismiss conversion claims and denied Motions for Rehearing. Plaintiffs appealed dismissal to Sixth Circuit.

Facts:

Plaintiffs were victims of ponzi scheme. Plaintiffs sued various financial institutions that held and disbursed funds associated with the scheme. Plaintiffs alleged various acts of fraud, fraudulent concealment, and conspiracy, as well as various state law causes of action, but did not overtly state a cause of action for UCC conversion claims. On a Motion to Dismiss the court concluded that defendants' failure to plead a coherent count for conversion required dismissal. Court would not cobble together several disparte lines from various places in complaint to construct cause of action. Complaint did not contain short and concise statement of claim nor allege sufficient facts to create even a suspicion of a cause of action for conversion. Further, even if complaint did state cause of action for conversion, complaint would be barred by statute of limitations. Statute of limitations ran when actions constituting conversion occurred, notwithstanding the plaintiffs did not discover the conversion until later. Discovery rule for statute of limitations does not apply under Ohio law.

Judge(s):

Martin, Norris and Siler

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!