Delong v. Brown CA4/3
Harold J. Brown challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury’s $1.225 million special verdict in favor of John and Judith Delong finding Brown breached his fiduciary duty to them in promoting an investment opportunity. Brown contends the jury could not reasonably conclude he owed the Delongs a fiduciary duty, and he argues the evidence does not show he caused the loss of their funds. As we explain, these contentions are without merit and therefore we affirm the judgment.
Comments on Delong v. Brown CA4/3