666 F.3d 691
10th Cir.2012Background
- Abbasid, Inc. was the sole officer/shareholder of Abbasid and operated Azhar’s Oriental Rugs in Santa Fe starting August 2004.
- Azhar Shahani moved to Santa Fe and married Mr. Said in December; she worked at the rug store, though the extent was disputed.
- Shahani deposited store receipts (checks and cash) into Dina Advani’s bank account and used some funds for personal expenses.
- Abbasid sued the Bank in May 2008 for conversion and negligence relating to deposits; case was removed to NM federal court from Texas state court.
- The district court dismissed the negligence claim as preempted and lacking a duty; a jury found no converts by the Bank.
- Abbasid appealed and the district court’s orders and the jury verdict were consolidated; the court affirming the judgment and orders.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether denial of new-trial motion was proper | Abbasid argued verdict against weight of evidence. | Bank contends argument not preserved; court properly denied. | Affirmed denial on preserved ground; weight-of-evidence issue not properly raised. |
| Whether excluding check-handling policy evidence was error | Policies show authority to enforce deposits. | Policies irrelevant to strict-liability conversion; no duty issue. | No abuse of discretion; evidence properly excluded. |
| Whether mitigation instruction affected liability | Mitigation guidance could prejudice liability finding. | Mitigation instruction harmless since Bank not liable. | Harmless error; evidence admissible for authority and other purposes. |
| Whether proposed jury instruction on authority was required | Instruction correctly stated law on corporate authority to deposit checks. | Existing instructions sufficiently informed the jury; extra instruction unnecessary. | District court did not abuse discretion; instruction was not essential. |
| Whether summary judgment on negligence was proper | Negligence claim independent of conversion claim; no duty recognized. | Negligence preempted by NM UCC § 55-3-420; review unnecessary given verdict. | Harmless error; verdict on conversion mooted negligence issue; judgment affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Escue v. N. Okla. Coll., 450 F.3d 1146 (10th Cir. 2006) (weight-of-evidence standard for new trials)
- Tanberg v. Sholtis, 401 F.3d 1151 (10th Cir. 2005) (evidentiary rulings reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Smith v. Diffee Ford-Lincoln-Mercury, Inc., 298 F.3d 955 (10th Cir. 2002) (instructions de novo; not per se required)
- Hertz v. Luzenac America, Inc., 370 F.3d 1014 (10th Cir. 2004) (avoid overspecification of jury instructions)
- Nolan v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 973 F.2d 843 (10th Cir. 1992) (notice of appeal timing and post-judgment orders)
- Ysais v. Richardson, 603 F.3d 1175 (10th Cir. 2010) (second motion for reconsideration extends appeal time)