Pritsker v. American General Life Insurance Co.
690 F. App'x 770
2d Cir.2017Background
- Plaintiff Robert Pritsker (pro se) invested $500,000 of an AGL annuity into the Strategic Stable Return Fund (SSR) and sued American General Life Insurance Company (AGL) alleging negligence, fraud, professional malpractice, and breach of contract for inadequate due diligence.
- Pritsker conceded that his injury from the SSR investment occurred on January 26, 2008.
- He filed the instant federal complaint on April 30, 2015 — beyond the longest applicable Connecticut statute-of-limitations period.
- Pritsker argued the limitations period was tolled until August 2, 2013, on two theories: (1) AGL fraudulently concealed information (including by acting as a fiduciary), and (2) AGL engaged in a continuing wrongful course of conduct.
- The district court dismissed the claims as time-barred; Pritsker moved for reconsideration and appealed.
- The Second Circuit affirmed, rejecting both tolling theories and concluding Pritsker was aware of his claims well before 2013 (including by a May 2012 arbitration against his broker-dealer).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether statute of limitations was tolled by fraudulent concealment | AGL fraudulently concealed facts and owed Pritsker a fiduciary duty, so accrual did not occur until 2013 | No fiduciary relationship; Pritsker knew or should have known facts earlier; SSR was not run by AGL | Rejected: tolling not plausible; Pritsker decided to invest before contacting AGL and had prior knowledge (e.g., 2012 arbitration) |
| Whether AGL’s ongoing conduct tolled limitations (continuing wrong) | AGL’s continued silence and conduct caused ongoing harm and tolled accrual | Alleged wrongful acts occurred pre-2008; subsequent silence, absent duty to speak, does not toll; later harms caused by SSR managers, not AGL | Rejected: no continuing wrongful course by AGL that would toll limitations; silence not enough without special relationship or subsequent related wrongful act |
| Whether plaintiff plausibly alleged entitlement to equitable tolling via fiduciary duty | Pritsker claimed AGL had superior knowledge and proximity to retirement justified fiduciary status | AGL lacked control of SSR; plaintiff relied on broker and had made investment decision before AGL involvement | Rejected: facts pleaded showed no special fiduciary relationship and undermined tolling claim |
Key Cases Cited
- Deutsche Bank Nat’l Tr. Co. v. Quicken Loans Inc., 810 F.3d 861 (2d Cir. 2015) (standard of review for statute-of-limitations dismissal)
- Martinelli v. Bridgeport Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp., 196 F.3d 409 (2d Cir. 1999) (requirements for pleading ignorance under fraudulent concealment)
- Official Comm. of Unsecured Creditors of Color Tile, Inc. v. Coopers & Lybrand, LLP, 322 F.3d 147 (2d Cir. 2003) (a plaintiff may plead facts that demonstrate the absence of a claim)
- Falls Church Grp., Ltd. v. Tyler, Cooper & Alcorn, LLP, 281 Conn. 84 (Conn. 2007) (elements and scope of fiduciary duty and fraudulent concealment under Connecticut law)
- Flannery v. Singer Asset Fin. Co., LLC, 312 Conn. 286 (Conn. 2014) (doctrine of continuing wrong and when statute of limitations is tolled)