Lesti v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 960 F. Supp. 2d 1311

This matter involves SunTrust Bank and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. moving to dismiss an Amended Class Action Complaint; plaintiffs oppose and request oral arguments.
The Amended Complaint asserts ten state-law claims against SunTrust and Wells Fargo arising from Engler’s Ponzi scheme through two sets of accounts (SunTrust and Wells Fargo) and includes a Bankruptcy Trustee as a plaintiff.
Engler’s scheme used SunTrust accounts (two opened Jan 2006) and Wells Fargo accounts (PCOM) opened May 2007; both banks allegedly knew of Engler’s fraud by mid-2007 and continued processing transfers.
SunTrust allegedly closed its accounts by July 30, 2007, after which Engler allegedly siphoned remaining funds; Wells Fargo’s accounts were to be closed by August 21, 2007, but remained open until around January 2008.
The Bankruptcy Court entered relief under Chapter 7 for Engler, PCO, and PCOM on March 31–April 30, 2008, with substantive consolidation later; the Trustee asserts standing to bring some claims.
The Amended Complaint alleges accrual of all claims on April 29, 2008, when the bankruptcy relief orders were entered.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Are Counts I and VI time-barred by SOL?	Accrual delayed; continued conduct after 2007.	Accrual occurred by July 30, 2007 (SunTrust) and June/July 2007 (Wells Fargo), filing in 2012/2011.	Counts I barred; Count VI survives (as pleaded).
Are Counts II and VII time-barred or properly pled?	Delayed discovery applies; November 22, 2006 notice.	Last element timing undisclosed; accrual limitations apply differently.	Count II barred for SunTrust; Count VII denied (not time-barred).
Are Counts III and VIII time-barred or properly pled?	Breaches of fiduciary duties by Engler/PCOM via SunTrust/Wells Fargo.	Same accrual logic as I/II; timeliness challenged.	Count III barred against SunTrust; Count VIII dismissed for lack of fiduciary relationship.
Are Counts IV and IX time-barred or properly pled?	Unjust enrichment from collected fees; ongoing conduct.	SunTrust accounts closed; Wells Fargo uncertain.	Count IV barred against SunTrust; Count IX survives (not time-barred at this stage).
Do Counts V and X lack standing or plead viable negligence/wire-transfer claims?	Trustee stands in for debtors and asserts negligence/wire-transfer liability.	Trustee lacks standing to assert investors’ claims; limits on relief.	Count V dismissed for SunTrust; Count X dismissed for Trustee.

Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court 2007) (pleading requires plausibility, not mere conduct or conclusory facts)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (Supreme Court 2009) (two-step plausibility standard for Rule 12(b)(6))
Hearndon v. Graham, 767 So.2d 1179 (Fla. 2000) (accrual timing and exceptions under Florida law)
La Grasta v. First Union Sec., Inc., 358 F.3d 840 (11th Cir. 2004) (affirmative defense of statute of limitations; pleading not required to anticipate)
Davis v. Monahan, 832 So.2d 708 (Fla. 2002) (delayed discovery applicable to fraud claims)
Masvidal v. Ochoa, 505 So.2d 555 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) (emphasizes classic embezzlement theory in conversion context)
Walker v. Figarola, 59 So.3d 188 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (monetary debt generally not basis for conversion; exception where money must be retained as identifiable)
Gasparini v. Pordomingo, 972 So.2d 1053 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (recognizes conversion independent from contract when money involved)
O’Halloran v. First Union Nat’l Bank of Fla., 350 F.3d 1197 (11th Cir. 2003) (standing/claims for bank liability in trusteeship context)
Caplin v. Marine Midland Grace Trust Co., 406 U.S. 416 (Supreme Court 1972) (trustee standing in bankruptcy matters)