Skip to main content
· 6/5/1968

Twomey v. Mitchum, Jones & Templeton, Inc.

Citations

  • 262 Cal. App. 2d 690
  • 69 Cal. Rptr. 222
  • 1968 Cal. App. LEXIS 2361

How courts have described this case

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

  • finding that a broker providing investment advice owed a fiduciary duty to advisee
  • explaining that if a financial adviser is “for all practical purposes the controlling factor in the transactions” then “there should be an obligation to determine the customer’s actual financial situation and needs”
  • finding that a stockbroker owed a fiduciary duty to a widow-customer with no securities or stocks experience and who, at the broker’s advice, sold her entire portfolio at a loss to turn the proceeds over to the broker to independently invest
  • discussing the nature of the relationship between the individual adviser and the plaintiff
  • “The relationship between a 12 broker and principal is fiduciary in nature and imposes on the broker the duty of acting in 13 the highest good faith toward the principal.”
  • “The post-transaction confirmation which is not understood or brought to the customer’s attention cannot excuse the failure to fully advise the customer before the transaction, where as here, the agent for all practical purposes controls the purchases and sales in the account”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Sims

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.