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.

CONFIDENTIAL

Dec. 4, 1999

Banking
Conservatorship
Negligence

Confidential

Settlement –  $25,000

Judge

Donald E. Shaver

Court

Stanislaus Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Clinton P. Walker


Defendant

Lawrence T. Stevens


Facts

The plaintiff depositor, an 85-year-old woman with over $1 million dollars in assets, was a depositor with the defendant bank. On Feb. 27, 1998, the bank was notified that the Superior Court had ordered plaintiff depositor's assets and person to be placed under a temporary conservatorship, with the plaintiff depositor's son, also a plaintiff, acting as conservator. On May 14, 1998, the plaintiff depositor withdrew $113,000 from a World Savings account in the form of a cashier's check payable to herself. The plaintiff depositor then signed over the $113,000 cashier's check for deposit in a new account at the defendant bank in the name of her other son. The plaintiff depositor claimed she did so, that she believed she was setting up the account in her own name, with the non-party son as a beneficiary. According to the defendant, the plaintiff depositor testified she withdrew the money of her own volition, and was aware she was turning the money over to the non-party son; and the bank had no knowledge that the non-party son was a convicted felon. Within 10 weeks, the non-party son had spent nearly half of the $113,000. The plaintiffs claimed they learned of the non-party son's spending spree when they received the monthly statements and saw numerous withdrawals. The defendant claimed that she opened the account in the name of the non-party son on her own volition. The plaintiffs claimed they demanded the defendant bank return the money, but it refused to return either the amount spent or the amount remaining in the account. The defendant claimed the amount remaining in the account was the property of the non-party son, and the bank had no legal right to give it to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs brought this action against the defendant based on negligence, common counts, breach of contract of deposit and constructive trust.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiffs made a C.C.P. Section 998 offer to compromise for $37,500, plus return of $61,000 balance. The defendant made a counteroffer of $10,000 prior to the settlement conference.

Damages

The plaintiffs claimed damages of $113,000 ($55,000 spent by the non-party son, plus $61,000 maintained in the account in his name).

Other Information

The settlement was reached approximately 11 months after the case was filed.


#88326

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

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