Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Heflin v. Iberiabank Corp.

Court of Appeals of Tennessee, Jackson

January 23, 2018

JAMES HEFLIN ET AL.
v.
IBERIABANK CORPORATION

         Session September 18, 2017

         Appeal from the Circuit Court for Shelby County No. CT-001537-10 Felicia Corbin Johnson, Judge

         Plaintiffs, an elderly man and his wife, sued their bank and affiliated entities and others, alleging various theories of liability. The elderly man, upon making two separate withdrawals of a large amount of cash from the bank, was robbed on two separate occasions following the withdrawals. Plaintiffs alleged that the robberies occurred because a bank employee informed her husband of the elderly couple's address and of the large cash withdrawals. The bank filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and the trial court granted the motion. We affirm the dismissal of several claims because the Appellants' brief does not comply with the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure. We affirm the dismissal of the remaining claims because Appellants have not stated a claim for which relief may be granted.

         Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed and Remanded

          Larry E. Parrish, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellants, James Heflin, and Janie Heflin.

          Todd B. Murrah and Lewis W. Lyons, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellees, Iberiabank, FSB, Iberiabank Corporation, and Iberia Financial Services, LLC.

          Lakesha Thomas and Rodricko Thomas, Appellees. [1]

          Arnold B. Goldin, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Brandon O. Gibson and Kenny Armstrong, JJ., joined.

          OPINION

          ARNOLD B. GOLDIN, JUDGE

         BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         This case involves a complaint filed by James and Janie Heflin ("Appellants") against Iberiabank Corporation, Iberiabank, FSB fka Pulaski Bank and Trust Company, Iberiabank Financial Services, LLC ("Appellees"), and Rodricko and Lakesha Thomas, [2]alleging various claims and theories of liability arising out of a series of robberies where the Heflins were victims. Because this appeal arises from the trial court's grant of a motion to dismiss, we take the facts from the Appellants' complaint as true and restate them as follows.

         The Heflins were clients of Iberiabank, and the couple had substantial funds on deposit with the bank. On March 14, 2009, Mr. Heflin traveled to a branch of Iberiabank and withdrew $205, 478.48 in cash from his account. The teller tendered Mr. Heflin his money in public view of other bank customers and bank employees. On March 25, 2009, Mr. Heflin traveled to another branch of Iberiabank and withdrew an additional $82, 928 in cash. On the day of the second withdrawal, Lakesha Thomas, a teller for Iberiabank at the second bank branch, witnessed the elderly Mr. Heflin place the $82, 928 in one or more plastic grocery bags. Ms. Thomas then accessed Mr. Heflin's address through the bank's computer, and informed her husband, Rodricko Thomas, [3] that Mr. Heflin had withdrawn a substantial amount of cash from the bank branch. Mr. Heflin was robbed by Mr. Thomas in his driveway of the $82, 928 later the same day as the second withdrawal.

         Mr. Heflin reported the first robbery to the police, and the police notified Iberiabank. At some point after the first robbery, Ms. Thomas used the bank's computer to learn that Mr. Heflin had earlier withdrawn the $205, 478.48 on March 14, 2009, from the other Iberiabank branch. Ms. Thomas also shared this information with Mr. Thomas, and on July 21, 2009, Mr. Thomas robbed the Heflins a second time at their home.

         On March 24, 2010, the Heflins filed suit against Iberiabank, Mr. and Ms. Thomas, and others. On December 1, 2010, Appellees filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 12.02(6) and a memorandum of law in support of the motion. On March 23, 2011, Appellants filed a motion opposing Appellees' motion to dismiss. On April 10, 2012, the trial court entered an order granting Iberiabank's motion to dismiss as to all claims. The trial court based its conclusion in part on its finding that Appellants had failed to establish that the bank owed them a duty because the robberies were not foreseeable.[4] On January 15, 2015, Appellants filed a motion "To Rescind Interlocutory Order, Entered April 10, 2012, Granting Motion to Dismiss Claims" against Iberiabank and other named defendants, but the motion was denied. On October 21, 2016, the trial court entered a final order. Appellants timely appealed.

         ISSUES PRESENTED

         Although somewhat unclear as written, [5] we observe that Appellants' brief presents the following ten issues for our review:

         Issue One

         (Misjudged Forseeability)

         Did the trial court commit reversible error by dismissing the Heflin's complaint on the assumption that, for Iberia to be liable to the Heflins, Iberia reasonably would have had to foresee that Iberia's On-Duty Rogue Employee would go rouge as she did?

         Issue Two

         (Iberia's Non-Vicarious Direct Tortfeasor Liability)

         Did the trial court commit a reversible error by dismissing the Heflins' claims for relief against Iberia even though Tennessee's controlling precedent adjudges Iberia as standing in the shoes of Iberia's On-Duty Rogue Employee (Lakesha Thomas) whose act/ omissions, though not delegated or assigned by Iberia to Iberia's On-Duty Rogue Employee, are the acts/ omissions of Iberia?

         Issue Three

         (Iberia's Vicarious Liability: Torts Of Iberia's On-Duty Rogue Employee)

         Did the trial court commit reversible error by holding that the Heflins' complaint failed to state a vicarious liability claim against Iberia for all of the tortious acts/omissions of Iberia's On-Duty Rogue Employee (Lakesha Thomas) and other negligent acts/omissions on-duty employees of Iberia participating in the disbursement of the subject cash to Mr. Heflin and the misuse of confidential information held in confidence by Iberia?

         Issue Four

         (Non-Vicarious Liability: Breach of Confidence/Confidential Relationship)

         Did the trial court commit reversible error by holding that the Heflins' complaint failed to state a non-vicarious liability claim against Iberia for breach of the Heflin's confidence/confidential relationship?

         Issue Five

         (Vicarious Liability Breach of Confidence/Confidential Relationship)

         Did the trial court commit reversible error by holding that the Heflins' complaint failed to state a vicarious liability claim against Iberia for breach of the Heflin's confidence/confidential relationship?

         Issue ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.