Opinion ID: 4540688
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: holding, as fiduciary for [Fast Trak], any

Text: Proceeds (as defined in the Agreement), together with any permitted fees and costs as set forth in the Agreement; (b) promptly notifying [Fast Trak] that I [Sax] have become possessed of any Proceeds and (c) providing information to [Fast Trak] about the Claims and any related litigation.” In the Primary Contracts, each client represents that he or she “intends this transaction to be and agrees that this transaction is a purchase and sale and is not a loan,” and acknowledges that Fast Trak has “no influence, power or control over any matter relating to the Litigation.” Further, both the Primary and Secondary Contracts contain clauses by which Sax and his clients agreed to “waive[] any and all defenses to the enforcement of this Agreement . . . and specifically and unconditionally waive[] any claims that . . . any . . . provision of this Agreement . . . is invalid or unenforceable in any respect.” Fast Trak ultimately sued Sax for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty. 4 In response to Fast Trak’s motion for summary judgment, Sax’s primary arguments were that the contracts are not enforceable because they are usurious 4 Fast Trak also sued to compel arbitration and for a writ of attachment, neither of which are at issue on appeal. After filing a motion for summary judgment, Fast Trak acknowledged that the arbitration claim was moot. 10 FAST TRAK INVESTMENT V. SAX and because they violate laws against champerty. 5 The district court rejected both arguments and entered summary judgment on both claims for Fast Trak. The district court requested supplemental briefing on the amount of damages, and, in response to Fast Trak’s briefing, Sax stated he took “no position regarding the damages claimed by Plaintiff.” The district court reviewed Fast Trak’s calculations and awarded it $323,611.21 in damages.