This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Torts
Failure to Return
Conversion and Fraud

Robert J. Harelson and Ann M. Harelson v. William E. Eck, et al. and William E. Eck v. Robert J. and Ann M. Harelson

Published: Dec. 9, 1995 | Result Date: Nov. 15, 1995 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 735643 –  $494,242

Judge

David H. Brickner

Court

Orange Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Dale R. Larabee


Defendant

Frank A. Conner
(Wordes Wilshin & Conner LLP)


Experts

Plaintiff

Tore Tjersland
(technical)

Defendant

Sandra L. Homewood
(technical)

Jules Burstein
(medical)

Facts

In November, 1993, the Plaintiffs, Ann M. and Robert J. Harelson, age 73 and 74, respectively, were sued over real estate they had sold. At that time, Plaintiff, Ann Harelson's brother, Defendant, William E. Eck, lived with the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs alleged that Eck advised his sister, Ann Harelson, to give him her liquid assets to hold in trust pending the resolution of the lawsuit regarding the real estate sale. Eck recommended that the checks be made out in $10,000 increments payable to Eck's three sons and their families. Between December 1993, and February 1994, Ann Harelson wrote checks totalling $400,000 to Eck's sons and their families. Plaintiff alleged that additional checks were written to fictitious people, then endorsed and given to Eck along with ATM cash and cashiers checks totalling an additional $178,000. Eck and his sons refused to return the moneys to Plaintiffs upon her request made in March, 1994. Plaintiffs filed suit based on a conspiracy to convert money theory of recovery. Eck filed a cross-complaint in which he made a claim for a partnership accounting and alleged that the Plaintiffs owed him money arising out of a prior real estate venture.

Damages

Plaintiffs claimed damages totaled $578,000 plus punitive damages.

Other Information

The jury awarded Plaintiffs $494,242. The Defendants were held jointly and severally liable for Plaintiffs damages. A $70,000 deduction was made for money held by a nephew in Oregon who was not made party to the suit and $14,000 in ATM deposits which the jury determined could not be adequately traced to the Defendants.

Deliberation

5 hours

Poll

10-2

Length

8 days


#109272

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390