Private Client Fiduciary Corporation v. Chopra
2:22-cv-00436-LK
| W.D. Wash. | Dec 21, 2023Background
- Dr. Joginder Chopra appointed her brother Pham Chopra as attorney-in-fact in 2016 but soon experienced cognitive decline.
- Pham Chopra transferred over $23 million from Dr. Chopra’s accounts to himself and Akal Institute, triggering an Adult Protective Services investigation and his resignation.
- Private Client Fiduciary Corporation was appointed as Dr. Chopra’s guardian and conservator in 2021 and subsequently filed suit against Pham Chopra and Akal Institute for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and conversion.
- The court dismissed the unjust enrichment claim; defendants did not contest liability for conversion and breach of fiduciary duty, leaving damages as the only issue for trial.
- The parties reached a settlement, sought judicial approval through a court-appointed settlement guardian ad litem (Jean Gompf), and asked the court to approve the settlement and related fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff’s Argument | Defendant’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Approval of Settlement | Settlement is fair and reasonable | Settlement is fair and reasonable | Settlement provides fair and reasonable recovery; approved |
| Reasonableness of Guardian ad Litem Fees | Fees are reasonable for the services | No objection to the proposed fees | Fees and hourly rate are reasonable; approved |
| Dismissal of Case | Case should be dismissed with prejudice | No objection | Case to be dismissed with prejudice, no fees/costs to parties |
| Discharge of Guardian ad Litem | Guardian ad litem should be discharged | No objection | Guardian ad litem to be discharged |
Key Cases Cited
- Robidoux v. Rosengren, 638 F.3d 1177 (9th Cir. 2011) (district court has special duty to safeguard interests of minors/incompetents in settlements and must ensure reasonableness of recovery)