The account holder discovered it could not access its commercial bank account with the bank. The account holder contacted the bank and spoke to multiple bank employees about the issue, but none of them could give the account holder access to its account. Next, the account holder contacted another bank employee, who informed the account holder of a pending wire transfer. The account holder stated that this transfer was fraudulent and requested its cancellation. However, the bank employee took no action. Additionally, it was the bank's practice to call and clear wire transfers with the account holder. Despite this practice, the bank did not call the account holder before initiating the transfer. Following the transfer, the account holder filed a complaint against the bank and later moved to amend its complaint, alleging that the bank violated Article 4A of the Tennessee UCC, the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), negligence, and breach of contract. The bank moved to dismiss, alleging the “proposed amendments are futile.”
In Zen-Bio, Inc. v. Regions Bank, No. 2:23-cv-02475, 2024 WL 1053337, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42273 (W.D. Tenn. Mar. 11, 2024) (unpublished opinion), the court granted the bank’s motion in part and denied its motion in part. First, the court held that the account holder’s Article 4A claim under T.C.A. § 47-4A-202 and § 47-4A-203 could not be dismissed as futile because the account holder’s allegations, if true, would not be futile, and the bank’s argument for dismissal hinged on factual issues that must be decided during trial. Second, the court dismissed the account holder’s negligence and breach of contract claims as futile because Article 4A preempted them. Third, the account holder’s TCPA claim was dismissed because the account holder did not allege any of the fifty-two acts that would constitute a violation of the statute; therefore, the court found that the account holder’s TCPA claim had not been pleaded with sufficient particularity. Fourth, the court dismissed the account holder’s “good faith” claim under T.C.A. § 47-4A-105(a)(6) because that section references definitions and does not create a cause of action. Finally, because not all of the account holder’s substantive claims were dismissed, the court granted the account holder leave to amend its complaint for punitive damages and attorney’s fees.
By Cole Palmer [email protected]
Edited By Hayden Mariott [email protected]
Edited By Ashley Boyce [email protected]