Supreme Court of Iowa· 1/15/1986

Kurth v. Van Horn

Citations

380 N.W.2d 693
1986 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 1067

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

observing that a breach of fiduciary duty claim requires proof of the existence of a fiduciary duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiffs, breach of that duty by the defendant, and damages to the plaintiffs proximately caused by the breach
finding no evidence the customer “relied upon the bank for advice” or that the bank “ever acted as an investment advisor” for the customer
rejecting a breach of fiduciary duty claim against a bank where -12- a plaintiff failed to show the bank was aware the plaintiff had relied on the bank for advice
“Because the circumstances giving rise to a fiduciary duty are so diverse, any such relationship must be evaluated on the facts and circumstances of each individual ease.”
“Some relationships necessarily give rise to a fiduciary relationship ... [and] would include those between an attorney and client....”
“Some relationships necessarily give rise to a fiduciary relationship . . . [and] would include those between an attorney and client . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Harris, Mc-Giverin, Larson, Carter, Wolle

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

74 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.