Court Opinion

ID: 9780949
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 14:08:15.036902+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:09:46.212895
License: Public Domain

Third District Court of Appeal
                               State of Florida

                        Opinion filed August 30, 2023.
       Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                            ________________

                             No. 3D22-1839
                       Lower Tribunal No. 22-10713
                          ________________

                          Suzmar, LLC, et al.,
                                 Appellants,

                                     vs.

               First National Bank of South Miami,
                                  Appellee.

     An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Pedro P.
Echarte, Jr., Judge.

     Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP, and Alvin B. Davis, for appellants.

     Carlton Fields, P.A., and Alan Grunspan; Carlton Fields, P.A., Robert
M. Quinn and Nathaniel G. Foell (Tampa), for appellee.

Before LOGUE, C.J., and EMAS and GORDO, JJ.

     GORDO, J.
     Suzmar, LLC, et al. 1 (“the LLCs”) appeal an order granting First

National Bank of South Miami’s (“First National”) motion to dismiss the

amended complaint. We have jurisdiction. Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(b)(1)(A).

Because the LLCs failed to state a cause of action for negligence and unjust

enrichment, we affirm.

             FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

     This dispute arises as a result of a $5.5 million loan First National made

to Suzanne DeWitt, the manager of the LLCs. DeWitt used the LLCs as

security for the underlying loan and, after she defaulted, First National

assessed the LLCs accounts for repayment.

     The LLCs filed suit against First National for negligence and unjust

enrichment, arguing First National was negligent for improvidently granting

the loan and alleged the following:

           First National, in an attempt to garner more wealthy
           clients, issued a $5.5 million loan to Suzanne
           DeWitt—a Miami attorney who claimed to own the
           LLCs, and used their accounts as collateral as
           security—despite inconsistencies in her loan
           application. First National failed to investigate DeWitt
           contrary to the “know-your-customer” (“KYC”)
           requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”). Upon
           discovery that DeWitt’s claim of ownership of the

1
 This includes IBRB I, LLC; IBRB II, LLC; IBRB III, LLC; IBRB IV, LLC; IBRB
V, LLC; IBRB VI, LLC; Agoraminorca, LLC; Agoraduna, LLC; Agoraschenley,
LLC; Agorasolta, LLC; Agoraportillo, LLC; Agorafairchild, LLC; Mantuagora,
LLC; Agorasistina, LLC; Agoratibidabo, LLC; and Agorandora, LLC.

                                      2
            LLCs was disputed by Agorive NV, a Belgian
            corporation, First National declared the loan in
            default. When DeWitt was unable to return the full
            amount of the loan, First National recouped the
            shortfall from the LLCs accounts.

      First National filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint

asserting the LLCs had failed to state a cause of action because: (1) Florida

law does not recognize a claim for negligent lending absent a fiduciary

relationship; and (2) a claim for unjust enrichment cannot lie without a

windfall benefit. The trial court held a hearing and subsequently granted the

motion to dismiss. 2 This appeal followed.

                             LEGAL ANALYSIS

      “In reviewing an order granting a motion to dismiss for failure to state

a cause of action, the standard of review is de novo.” Morin v. Florida Power

& Light Co., 963 So. 2d 258, 260 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). “To survive a motion

to dismiss, a complaint must allege a prima facie case. In evaluating a

motion to dismiss, the court confines its consideration to the four corners of

the complaint and must accept all well-pleaded allegations as true.” Alvarez

v. E & A Produce Corp., 708 So. 2d 997, 999–1000 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).

2
  The trial court originally granted this motion to dismiss without prejudice to
allow the LLCs to amend their complaint. The LLCs declined to do so and
instead filed this appeal. This Court relinquished jurisdiction for fifteen days
and the trial court subsequently entered an appealable final order of
dismissal with prejudice.

                                       3
“Whether a prima facie case has been pled depends on the sufficiency of the

plaintiff’s allegations of fact, excluding the bare conclusions of the plaintiff.”

Id.

      The LLCs assert First National was negligent because it owed them a

duty to act in good faith, which it failed to do because it failed to comply with

the KYC requirements and negligently lent the money to DeWitt.

      To prove a negligence claim, one must establish the existence of a

legally recognized duty, breach in performance of said duty, and damages

proximately caused from said breach. See Superior Garlic Int’l v. E & A

Produce Corp., 913 So. 2d 645, 648 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005).

      In Florida, however, banks have no duty to customers to prevent

negligent lending absent a fiduciary relationship. See Assad v. Mendell, 511

So. 2d 682, 684 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) (holding that a bank did not owe a duty

to customers to carry out its lending procedures in a “non-negligent

manner”); Boucher v. First Cmty. Bank of Orange City, 626 So. 2d 979, 983

(Fla. 5th DCA 1993) (“Although it may have been poor business practice for

First Community to have closed the loan without first inspecting the

collateral, it had no obligation to do so on the Bouchers’ behalf.”); Watkins v.

NCNB Nat’l Bank of Fla., N.A., 622 So. 2d 1063, 1065 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)

(“In an arms-length transaction . . . there is no duty imposed on either party

                                        4
to act for the benefit or protection of the other party, or to disclose facts that

the other party could, by its own diligence[,] have discovered.”) (quoting Lanz

v. Resolution Trust Corp., 764 F. Supp. 176, 179 (S.D. Fla. 1991).

      Here, the allegations in the complaint clearly establish the LLCs and

First National did not have a fiduciary relationship. “The general rule is that

the relationship between a bank and its borrower is that of a creditor-debtor

and that a bank owes the borrower no fiduciary duty.” Silver v. Countrywide

Home Loans, Inc., 760 F. Supp. 2d 1330, 1338–40 (S.D. Fla. 2011); see also

McCulloch v. PNC Bank Inc., 298 F.3d 1217, 1226 n.13 (11th Cir. 2002) (“As

a general matter, there is no presumed fiduciary relationship between a

lender and a borrower under the common law.”). “Under Florida law, a

fiduciary duty exists where confidence is reposed by one party and a trust

accepted by the other.” Silver, 760 F. Supp. 2d at 1338. “[O]ne may not

unilaterally impose a fiduciary responsibility on another simply by reposing

trust; absent some conscious acceptance of such duties, no fiduciary

relationship is created.” Id. at 1339. The trial court therefore properly

dismissed the LLCs negligence claim against First National because absent

any fiduciary relationship, First National did not owe the LLCs a duty to

refrain from negligent lending.

                                        5
      Additionally, the KYC requirements contained in the federal Bank

Secrecy Act, 31 U.S.C. § 5311, do not create a duty First National owed to

the LLCs because bank consumers do not have a private right of action to

enforce these rules. See Wiand v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 86 F. Supp. 3d

1316, 1322 (M.D. Fla. 2015), aff’d sub nom., 677 Fed. Appx. 573 (11th Cir.

2017) (“To the extent federal banking statutes such as the Bank Secrecy Act

impose duties on banks, those duties extend to the United States, not a

bank’s customers.”); TBTG, LLC v. Fid. Brokerage Servs. LLC, 2016 WL

9383325, at *4 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 17, 2016) (“Because the Bank Secrecy Act

and its implementing Regulations do not create a private right of action,

Fidelity maintains that TBTG may not base a negligence claim on a violation

of [its] . . . requirements.”) (internal citations omitted); Nesbeth v. Wachovia

Bank, 09-62042-CIV, 2010 WL 11601016, at *8 (S.D. Fla. July 19, 2010)

(finding “a review of other district and circuit decisions, combined with an

analysis of congressional intent behind the statute, requires the conclusion

that no private cause of action exists under the Bank Secrecy Act (‘BSA’)”);

SFS Check, LLC v. First Bank of Del., 990 F. Supp. 2d 762, 775 (E.D. Mich.

2013), aff’d, 774 F.3d 351 (6th Cir. 2014) (As the BSA does not create a

private right of action, it also “does not provide a basis for imposing a duty of

care owed by [the bank] to Plaintiff.”); Ferring v. Bank of Am. NA, 2016 WL

                                       6
407315, at *4 (D. Ariz. Feb. 3, 2016) (“[T]he BSA does not authorize a private

right of action for its violation,” and plaintiff therefore “cannot rely on the BSA

. . . to establish a duty.”).

      The LLCs claim for unjust enrichment is similarly insufficient. “Unjust

enrichment ‘cannot exist where payment has been made for the benefit

conferred.’” N.G.L. Travel Assocs. v. Celebrity Cruises, Inc., 764 So. 2d 672,

675 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (quoting Gene B. Glick Co. v. Sunshine Ready

Concrete Co., 651 So. 2d 190, 190 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). Under Florida law,

“[w]hen a defendant has given adequate consideration to someone for the

benefit conferred, a claim of unjust enrichment fails.” Am. Safety Ins. Serv.,

Inc. v. Griggs, 959 So. 2d 322, 331–32 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). Thus, the LLCs

did not sufficiently state a cause of action for unjust enrichment because the

$5.5 million loan was adequate consideration to someone related to the

LLCs for the benefit conferred. See Johnson v. Chase Bankcard Servs.,

Inc., 582 F. Supp. 3d 1230, 1236 (M.D. Fla. 2022) (“Plaintiff provides no

authority for the proposition that the consideration must be paid to the

individual conferring the benefit. Indeed, Plaintiff’s contention appears to be

contrary to Florida law.”).

      Affirmed.

                                        7