Diane Fisher v. PNC Bank, N.A.
2 F.4th 1352
| 11th Cir. | 2021Background
- Fisher alleges she entrusted over $150,000 to her mother, Rose Charlap; the account was co-owned at RBC and then transferred to PNC to secure a loan.
- Charlap instructed PNC to keep Fisher as a co-owner/emergency contact, but PNC removed Fisher from the account without notice.
- Charlap’s son Alan accessed the account, withdrew and misapplied funds (including sales to pay a loan), and Charlap later died; Fisher claims she lost her investments and incurred guardianship costs.
- Fisher sued PNC in federal court (diversity) asserting civil theft, aiding/abetting, negligence, fraudulent concealment, and aiding/abetting fraud; district court sua sponte raised the probate exception and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and standing.
- The Eleventh Circuit accepted the complaint’s allegations as true, held the probate exception did not bar federal jurisdiction, and concluded Fisher is the real party in interest with Article III standing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the probate exception bars federal diversity jurisdiction | Fisher: claims are in personam tort/damage claims against PNC for pre-death conduct; adjudication won't probate a will, administer the estate, or dispose of property in probate custody | PNC: resolving Fisher’s claims requires accounting/valuation of Charlap’s estate and would interfere with probate | Court: probate exception is narrow and inapplicable; plaintiff seeks damages from PNC for pre-death harms, not probate or disposition of estate property, so federal jurisdiction proper |
| Whether Fisher is the real party in interest under Rule 17 | Fisher: she sues in her own right for money she entrusted to Charlap and lost when PNC removed her as co-owner | PNC: the account belongs to the estate now, so Fisher lacks capacity to sue as the estate’s representative | Court: complaint alleges Fisher personally lost funds due to PNC’s removal of her as co-owner; she is the person entitled to enforce the right and is the real party in interest |
| Whether Fisher has Article III standing | Fisher: alleges concrete injury (loss of $150,000), causation (PNC’s removal enabled loss), and redressability (damages payable by PNC) | PNC: Fisher lacks standing because account is now titled solely to Charlap/estate | Court: Fisher alleged injury-in-fact, causation, and redressability; she has Article III standing |
Key Cases Cited
- Ambrosia Coal & Constr. Co. v. Pages Morales, 368 F.3d 1320 (11th Cir.) (federal courts ordinarily must exercise adjudicatory jurisdiction)
- Markham v. Allen, 326 U.S. 490 (Sup. Ct.) (early statement on probate exception and noninterference with probate court custody)
- Marshall v. Marshall, 547 U.S. 293 (Sup. Ct.) (limits probate exception to probating wills, administering estates, disposing of property in probate custody; in personam tort claims against third parties not barred)
- Mich. Tech Fund v. Century Nat’l Bank of Broward, 680 F.2d 736 (11th Cir.) (discussing scope of probate exception)
- Glickstein v. Sun Bank/Miami, N.A., 922 F.2d 666 (11th Cir.) (probate exception to be construed narrowly)
- Breaux v. Dilsaver, 254 F.3d 533 (5th Cir.) (allowing in personam claims against individuals for damages payable from defendant’s own assets rather than estate)