Estate of Yevgenyi Scherban v. Suntrust Bank
223 F. Supp. 3d 71
| D.D.C. | 2016Background
- In 1996 Ukrainian businessman Yevgenyi Scherban and his wife were murdered; Scherban had substantial assets and U.S. bank accounts at SunTrust (notably Account ending 5216).
- After the murders, an unauthorized $282,000 wire was sent from Account 5216 to Gwynfe Holding Ltd.; the account later showed $771,129.03 and was closed for inactivity in January 2003; Plaintiffs allege SunTrust retained or failed properly to remit those funds.
- The sons and estate representatives only began uncovering relevant U.S. records in 2014–2016; the present suit was filed November 6, 2015, naming estates and three sons (later reduced by court order).
- Plaintiffs pleaded multiple common-law and equitable counts (conversion, breach of contract, negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, unjust enrichment, money had and received, accounting, declaratory relief, fraudulent concealment, civil conspiracy, constructive trust).
- SunTrust moved to dismiss, arguing (inter alia) statutes of limitations/repose bar most claims, Article 4A (UCC) governs the wire-transfer claim, no private right exists to enforce BSA/Patriot Act duties, and many counts lack plausible factual support.
- The court applied Florida law, dismissed most counts as time-barred or legally unavailable, and allowed claims for accounting and fraudulent concealment to proceed; civil-conspiracy claim against SunTrust was dismissed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper plaintiffs (who may sue) | All three sons and estates may pursue claims, including late-added fraudulent-concealment claims by individual sons | Court had directed only estates' representative and Ruslan be plaintiffs; SunTrust sought dismissal of other sons | Only Deborah Trudel (personal representative) and Ruslan may proceed; Evgenyi and Yevgen dismissed |
| Choice of law | Florida law governs because accounts were opened/managed at SunTrust's Boca Raton branch | SunTrust primarily briefed D.C. law but conceded Florida law would not change result | Court applied Florida law |
| Timeliness of wire-transfer claims (Article 4A/UCC) | Claims framed in common law; repose should not bar where notification not received due to deaths/agents | Article 4A displaces common-law and contains 1-year statute of repose triggered by bank’s reasonable notice | Article 4A governs the transfer; repose bars claims because notice was effectively delivered to agent/address held out; 1-year limit expired |
| Timeliness of claims re: remaining account funds (common-law counts) | Discovery delayed until ~2014; equitable tolling and delayed-discovery doctrines save claims | Statutes of limitations (4–5 years) and 12-year repose for fraud bar the claims; no applicable statutory delayed-discovery beyond fraud; equitable tolling not warranted | Conversion, contract, negligence, fiduciary, unjust enrichment, money had and received, constructive trust, and fraud claims dismissed as time-barred; fraud also defeated by 12-year repose |
| Private right to enforce BSA/Patriot Act (declaratory relief) | Plaintiffs seek declaratory relief that bank violated anti-money-laundering statutes | Those statutes do not create a private cause of action enforceable by customers | Declaratory-relief claim dismissed for lack of private right |
| Merits: accounting, fraudulent concealment, civil conspiracy | Plaintiffs seek an accounting and allege SunTrust concealed use of offsite archives and misrepresented record searches; allege conspiratorial scheme | SunTrust argued accounting is merely discovery, fraudulent-concealment inadequately pleaded, conspiracy lacks agreement allegations | Accounting and fraudulent-concealment survive; civil-conspiracy claim dismissed as plaintiffs failed to plead an agreement |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (plausibility pleading standard governs Rule 12(b)(6))
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (courts need not accept legal conclusions; pleading must contain sufficient factual matter)
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Elec. Mfg. Co., 313 U.S. 487 (federal courts in diversity apply forum state choice-of-law rules)
- Regions Bank v. Provident Bank, Inc., 345 F.3d 1267 (11th Cir. 2003) (UCC displacement principles for fund-transfer disputes)
- Davis v. Monahan, 832 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 2002) (limits judicially created delayed-discovery tolling; courts should not extend statutory limitations beyond legislature’s design)
- Corfan Banco Asuncion Paraguay v. Ocean Bank, 715 So. 2d 967 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998) (UCC displacement of common-law claims in banking/fund-transfer contexts)