Meisner

Meisner v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 30, 20202:20-cv-01766California766 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 1] Jeffrey Meisner, Esq., No. 2:20-cv-01766-KJM-CKD Plaintiff, ORDER v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Defendant. 16 Plaintiff Jeffrey Meisner, an attorney, alleges Chase wrongfully led him to believe that a $135,000 check he deposited in a client trust account was “valid” when in fact it was a fraud. He 19 was forced to use his own retirement savings to fund the trust account after Chase discovered the 20 fraud and debited the $135,000. He asserts claims under California law for negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of contract. Chase moves to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), and the 22 matter was submitted without argument. The motion is granted with leave to amend. The applicable legal standard is well known to the parties and need not be reiterated here. See Mot. at 4-5, ECF No. 5-1 (citing Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), and Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.