WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
v.
LEWIS GOPHER, JR.

Fla. 4th DCA | 2024-10-30
No. 4D2023-2442
Barnes, Donna M., C.J.
2024 FL 12553 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2024)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

Wells Fargo Bank and its former employees appealed a circuit court order granting plaintiffs partial leave to plead punitive damages claims for alleged breach of fiduciary duty and unauthorized fees. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the grant of punitive damages, holding that a breach of fiduciary duty alone does not support punitive damages without evidence of fraud, malice, or other culpable misconduct.


Holding

A breach of fiduciary duty alone does not create an automatic right to plead punitive damages; the plaintiff must proffer evidence of fraud, malice, or other misconduct justifying punitive damages. Additionally, without evidence that managing agents of Wells Fargo participated in or condoned the improper fee charging, there is no reasonable evidentiary basis for employer or corporate liability for punitive damages.


Headnotes

[1] A breach of fiduciary duty alone does not automatically create a right to plead punitive damages; evidence of fraud, malice, or other misconduct must also be proffered.

[2] To establish employer or corporate liability for punitive damages, a plaintiff must proffer evidence that a managing agent participated in or condoned the misconduct.

Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“a breach of a fiduciary duty, alone, does not create an automatic right to plead punitive damages. Rather, the plaintiff also must proffer evidence of fraud, malice, or other misconduct that would justify punitive damages.”

The court's core holding establishing that breach of fiduciary duty is insufficient for punitive damages without additional culpable misconduct.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Wells Fargo Bank acted as trustee and allegedly charged over $7 million in unauthorized and undisclosed fees not properly disclosed on a fee schedule.…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., DEBRA CHARBONNET, THOMAS JOYCE, TERRI JOHNSON, MELISSA LADER BARNHARDT, KIM SCOTT, MARC SPELANE, MICHAEL S. CARRIS, and MARK LAKE,

Appellants/Cross-Appellees,

v.

LEWIS GOPHER JR., NANCY JIMMIE, PARENT TO MINORS M.J., M.J., and M.J., QUENTIN TOMMIE, and PROVIDENCE FIRST TRUST COMPANY, AS GENERAL TRUSTEE OF THE FOURTH SUCCESSOR SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA MINORS’ PER CAPITA PAYMENT TRUST AGREEMENT DATED JULY 24, 2018,

Appellees/Cross-Appellants.

No. 4D2023-2442

[October 30, 2024]

Appeal and cross-appeal of a nonfinal order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; William W. Haury, Jr., Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE16-000592.

Jonathan Ellis of McGuireWoods LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, Jack Aiello, George LeMieux and Michael W. Marcil of Gunster, Fort Lauderdale, and Joshua Wade of McGuireWoods LLP, Richmond, Virginia, for appellants/cross-appellees.

William R. Scherer, William R. Scherer, III, Steven H. Osber, Irwin R. Gilbert, Janine R. McGuire and Eric Hager of Conrad & Scherer LLP, Fort Lauderdale, for appellees/cross-appellants.

PER CURIAM.

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., and individual defendants who were Wells Fargo’s former employees, appeal the circuit court’s order granting in part the plaintiffs’ motion to plead a claim for punitive damages.1 The circuit

court found a reasonable basis for the plaintiffs to recover punitive damages based on Wells Fargo allegedly breaching its fiduciary duties and charging more than $7 million in unauthorized and undisclosed fees while acting as a trustee. We reverse.

Wells Fargo allegedly violated its fiduciary duties by charging fees not properly disclosed on a fee schedule. However, a breach of a fiduciary duty, alone, does not create an automatic right to plead punitive damages. Rather, the plaintiff also must proffer evidence of fraud, malice, or other misconduct that would justify punitive damages. See Air Ambulance Pros., Inc. v. Thin Air, 809 So. 2d 28, 31 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (reversing punitive damage award because, although the jury found a breach of a fiduciary duty, the plaintiff did not present any evidence of fraud, malice, or other culpable misconduct). Here, the plaintiffs did not proffer any such evidence.

Similarly, the plaintiff did not proffer any evidence that any “managing agent” of Wells Fargo participated in or condoned the improper charging of the fee. Napleton’s N. Palm Auto Park, Inc. v. Agosto, 364 So. 3d 1103, 1106–07 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023). As a result, the plaintiffs did not proffer a reasonable evidentiary basis to find employer or corporate liability for punitive damages. § 768.72(3), Fla. Stat. (2023).

Accordingly, the circuit court’s order allowing the plaintiffs to plead claims for punitive damages is reversed. As mentioned above, on the cross-appeal, the circuit court’s order denying the plaintiffs’ motion for leave to seek punitive damages for their claim that Wells Fargo mismanaged the plaintiff Trust’s investments and violated the prudent investor rule is affirmed.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. GROSS, FORST and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

Footnotes
1 The plaintiffs filed a cross-appeal challenging the portion of the order that denied them leave to seek punitive damages for their claim that Wells Fargo mismanaged the plaintiff Trust’s investments and violated the prudent investor rule. We affirm the cross-appeal without further comment.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw