Maxx M. Johnson
Associate
Experience
Stradley Ronon Secures Appellate Win for TD Bank on New Jersey Claims Arising from Law Enforcement Involvement
A Stradley Ronon has secured a significant win for TD Bank before the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, which affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in the client’s favor. In Wimbish v. TD Bank, the plaintiff sought to hold TD Bank liable under a negligence theory after criminal charges stemming from an attempted check transaction were later dismissed. The Appellate Division rejected that theory, agreeing that New Jersey does not permit plaintiffs to use negligence as a lower-standard substitute for malicious prosecution.
The decision builds on important New Jersey precedent, including Morris v. TD Bank, another prior TD Bank win, in which the Appellate Division declined to recognize negligence-based claims that would undermine the state’s strong public policy encouraging cooperation with law enforcement. In Wimbish, the court reaffirmed that where a plaintiff’s alleged harm flows from a criminal prosecution, the proper claim, if any, is malicious prosecution, a cause of action requiring a substantially higher showing, including malice and lack of probable cause.
The ruling is an important confirmation for financial institutions and other businesses that New Jersey courts will not expand negligence law to penalize citizens or businesses for contacting or assisting law enforcement. It also reinforces TD Bank’s successful defense strategy in a line of cases addressing attempts to recast malicious-prosecution allegations as ordinary negligence claims.
Andrew I. Hamelsky and Maxx M. JohnsonStradley Ronon Secures Summary Judgment Victory for Bank in Multimillion-Dollar Theft Case
After 10 years of litigation, a Stradley Ronon team has secured summary judgment on behalf of a bank in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in a complex case involving a multimillion-dollar burglary affecting a safe deposit box.
The plaintiff, an LLC formed solely to pursue this lawsuit, filed suit over the theft. Central to the dispute was the ownership of the box’s contents and whether the LLC had standing to bring the claim. During discovery, the individuals who rented the box admitted they did not own the items inside and instead asserted they were holding the items for an unidentified third party.
In response, the bank argued the renters lacked the authority to transfer ownership or title to the contents of the box. Furthermore, the bank contended that the assignment on which the lawsuit was based was invalid, as it failed to convey ownership or title of the stolen contents.
On summary judgment, the bank raised defenses for lack of standing and an invalid assignment. The plaintiff opposed the motion and also sought leave to amend its complaint in an attempt to cure the standing deficiencies. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York ruled in favor of the bank, dismissing the case for lack of standing and denying the plaintiff’s request to amend as untimely, prejudicial and futile.
On appeal, the Second Circuit upheld the district court’s dismissal, bringing this long-running litigation to a close. The victory reinforces the importance of legal precision and the critical need to assert jurisdictional defenses at the inception of any case.
Andrew I. Hamelsky, Jenifer A. Scarcella, Sabina Corrado, Maxx M. Johnson and Steven D. Feldman
