960 F. Supp. 2d 1363
S.D. Fla.2013Background
- Plaintiff Industrial Park Development Corporation is a Florida corporation; Defendant American Express Bank, FSB is a federally chartered savings bank.
- Plaintiff maintained SunTrust Bank account 0215252008441 and alleges unauthorized ACH withdrawals from 7/7/2006 to 10/22/2009 totaling $1,711,403.96.
- On 1/13/2010, Plaintiff demanded return of funds via a letter to Defendant.
- Amount returned: $288,488.40; remaining unreturned funds amount to $1,422,942.43.
- Plaintiff filed a complaint in Florida state court in 2012; Defendant removed, and Plaintiff later filed an Amended Complaint asserting a single common law conversion claim.
- Court granted Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint with prejudice at a May 16, 2013 hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Amended Complaint states a plausible conversion claim. | Industrial Park asserts it had ownership/rights to the funds. | Plaintiff lacks ownership in specific funds and cannot sue a third party; no identifiable funds. | Dismissed; no plausible conversion claim. |
Key Cases Cited
- Fogade v. ENB Revocable Trust, 263 F.3d 1274 (11th Cir. 2001) (conversion requires ownership and wrongful dominion over property)
- Carl v. Republic Security Bank, 282 F.Supp.2d 1358 (S.D. Fla. 2003) (money in general deposit cannot support conversion)
- In re Tomasevic, 273 B.R. 682 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2002) (bankruptcy context; funds deposited become bank's property)
- Wachovia Bank v. Tien, 534 F.Supp.2d 1267 (S.D. Fla. 2007) (requirements for when money can be subject of conversion)
- Cheese & Grill Restaurant, Inc. v. Wachovia Bank, 970 So.2d 372 (Fla.3d DCA 2007) (drawer cannot sue against other banks for conversion of checks)
- Groom v. Bank of America, 2012 WL 50250 (N.D. Fla. 2012) (cited for interpretation of § 673.4201(1) (official reporter cited below))
- Edwards v. Landsman, 51 So.3d 1208 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (ownership/possession required to state conversion claim)
- Senfeld v. Bank of Nova Scotia Trust Co., 450 So.2d 1157 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (illustrates lack of remedy against third party in some contexts)
- Allen v. Gordon, 429 So.2d 369 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (identifiable money in a joint or specific context may support conversion)
- Belford Trucking Co. v. Zagar, 243 So.2d 646 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971) (money can be subject to conversion only when specially identifiable)