fact-sensitive inquiry in Pennsylvania

2016“A confidential relationship is marked by such a disparity in position that the inferior party places complete trust in the superior party’s advice and seeks no other counsel, so as to give rise to a potential abuse of power.” -9- J-A34006-15 Lenau v. Co-eXprise Inc., 102 A.3d 423, 443 (Pa. Super. 2014) (citation omitted), appeal denied, 113 A.3d 280 (Pa. 2015). “[T]he existence of a confidential relationship requires a fact-sensitive inquiry not to be disposed rigidly as a matter of law.” Yenchi v. Ameriprise Financial Inc., 123 A.3d 1071, 1079 (Pa. Super. 2015).

2015Thus, the existence of a confidential relationship requires a fact-sensitive inquiry not to be disposed rigidly as a matter of law. -9- J-A28039-15 Yenchi v. Ameriprise Fin., Inc., ___ A.3d ___, ___, 2015 PA Super 195 , *4–5 (Pa. Super. filed September 15, 2015) (some internal citations omitted) (emphasis added).

2014Dr. Wampler stated: “The ‘N word’ has been used by her co-workers and due to the fact that she wants to keep her job she has not done more about the incident than ask for an apology.” To reverse the Board on the grounds that the references in Dr. Dissinger’s report to “harassment,” “problematic male co-workers” and “a stressful and disagreeable work environment” were not specific enough to implicate the gender and race-based incidents at issue goes directly against our Supreme Court’s caution in Payes v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Commonwealth Pa. State Police), 621 Pa. 564 , 79 A.3d

2014Dr. Wampler stated: “The ‘N word’ has been used by her co-workers and due to the fact that she wants to keep her job she has not done more about the incident than ask for an apology.” To reverse the Board on the grounds that the references in Dr. Dissinger’s report to “harassment,” “problematic male co-workers” and “a stressful and disagreeable work environment” were not specific enough to implicate the gender and race-based incidents at issue goes directly against our Supreme Court’s caution in Payes v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Commonwealth Pa. State Police), 621 Pa. 564 , 79 A.3d

2017As such, the Superior Court held that the trial court’s focus on the insurance aspect of the relationship in this case “eliminates wholesale an entire category of commercial relationships without properly accounting for the fact-sensitive inquiry required by our case law.” Id.

2017In addition, the Superior Court held that the trial court’s insistence that a fiduciary relationship may be established only when one party cedes decision-making control to the other was too rigid, as prior cases have recognized fiduciary relationships upon a showing of an “overmastering influence,” and thus the standard for the establishment of a fiduciary relationship “can be met with evidence less absolute than a complete cession of decision-making authority.” Id.

2013Id.

2007See Davis, 561 Pa. at 479, 751 A.2d at 168.

2016A contract that is the product of a confidential relationship is presumptively voidable “unless the party seeking to sustain the validity of the transaction affirmatively demonstrates that it was fair under all of the circumstances and beyond the reach of suspicion.” Frowen v. Blank, 493 Pa. 137, 145 , 425 A.2d 412, 416 (1981).

2016A contract that is the product of a confidential relationship is presumptively voidable “unless the party seeking to sustain the validity of the transaction affirmatively demonstrates that it was fair under all of the circumstances and beyond the reach of suspicion.” Frowen v. Blank, 493 Pa. 137, 145 , 425 A.2d 412, 416 (1981).

2016“A confidential relationship is marked by such a disparity in position that the inferior party places complete trust in the superior party’s advice and seeks no other counsel, so as to give rise to a potential abuse of power.” -9- J-A34006-15 Lenau v. Co-eXprise Inc., 102 A.3d 423, 443 (Pa. Super. 2014) (citation omitted), appeal denied, 113 A.3d 280 (Pa. 2015). “[T]he existence of a confidential relationship requires a fact-sensitive inquiry not to be disposed rigidly as a matter of law.” Yenchi v. Ameriprise Financial Inc., 123 A.3d 1071, 1079 (Pa. Super. 2015).

2016See Washburn, supra. The fact-sensitive inquiry into the existence of a confidential relationship clearly falls outside of this limited scope of review.

2015In re Estate of Mihm, 345 Pa.Super. 1 , 497 A.2d 612, 615 (1985) (internal'citations reformatted; some punctuation modified; footnote omitted); see also Biddle v. Johnsonbaugh, 444 Pa.Super. 450 , 664 A.2d 159, 162 (1995) (“[T]he existence of a confidential relationship is a question of fact to be established by the evidence.”). • Thus, the existence of a confidential relationship requires a fact-sensitive inquiry not to be disposed rigidly as a matter of law.

2015In re Estate of Mihm, 345 Pa.Super. 1 , 497 A.2d 612, 615 (1985) (internal'citations reformatted; some punctuation modified; footnote omitted); see also Biddle v. Johnsonbaugh, 444 Pa.Super. 450 , 664 A.2d 159, 162 (1995) (“[T]he existence of a confidential relationship is a question of fact to be established by the evidence.”). • Thus, the existence of a confidential relationship requires a fact-sensitive inquiry not to be disposed rigidly as a matter of law.

2015See, e.g, Vucinich v. Paine, Webber, Jackson & Curtis, Inc., 803 F.2d 454, 460-61 (9th Cir. 1986) (holding, pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act, that an investment advisor incurred “a duty to explain the nature of short selling” securities); Robinson v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 337 F.Supp. 107, 111-12 (N.D.Ala. 1971) (rejecting any fiduciary duty in the (Footnote Continued Next Page) - 13 - J-A07023-15 of an exclusionary rule as sufficient to account for the fact-sensitive inquiry required.

2015See Basile v. H & R Block, Inc., 777 A.2d 95, 101 (Pa.Super.2001) (“The concept of a confidential relationship cannot be reduced to a catalogue of specific circumstances, invariably falling to the left or right of a definitional line.”) (quoting In re Estate of Scott, 455 Pa. 429 , 316 A.2d 883, 885 (1974)).

2015See Basile v. H & R Block, Inc., 777 A.2d 95, 101 (Pa. Super. 2001) (“The concept of a confidential relationship cannot be reduced to a catalogue of specific circumstances, invariably falling to the left or right of a definitional line.”) (quoting In re Estate of Scott, 316 A.2d 883, 885 (Pa. 1974)).

2015See, e.g, Vucinich v. Paine, Webber, Jackson & Curtis, Inc., 803 F.2d 454, 460-61 (9th Cir. 1986) (holding, pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act, that an investment advisor incurred “a duty to explain the nature of short selling” securities); Robinson v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 337 F.Supp. 107, 111-12 (N.D.Ala. 1971) (rejecting any fiduciary duty in the (Footnote Continued Next Page) - 13 - J-A07023-15 of an exclusionary rule as sufficient to account for the fact-sensitive inquiry required.

2015In re Estate of Mihm, 345 Pa.Super. 1 , 497 A.2d 612, 615 (1985) (internal'citations reformatted; some punctuation modified; footnote omitted); see also Biddle v. Johnsonbaugh, 444 Pa.Super. 450 , 664 A.2d 159, 162 (1995) (“[T]he existence of a confidential relationship is a question of fact to be established by the evidence.”). • Thus, the existence of a confidential relationship requires a fact-sensitive inquiry not to be disposed rigidly as a matter of law.

2015In re Estate of Mihm, 345 Pa.Super. 1 , 497 A.2d 612, 615 (1985) (internal'citations reformatted; some punctuation modified; footnote omitted); see also Biddle v. Johnsonbaugh, 444 Pa.Super. 450 , 664 A.2d 159, 162 (1995) (“[T]he existence of a confidential relationship is a question of fact to be established by the evidence.”). • Thus, the existence of a confidential relationship requires a fact-sensitive inquiry not to be disposed rigidly as a matter of law.

2012See United States v. Saniti, 604 F.2d 603, 604 (9th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 969 , 100 S.Ct. 461 , 62 L.Ed.2d 384 (1979).

2012See United States v. Saniti, 604 F.2d 603, 604 (9th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 969 , 100 S.Ct. 461 , 62 L.Ed.2d 384 (1979).

2012See United States v. Saniti, 604 F.2d 603, 604 (9th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 969 , 100 S.Ct. 461 , 62 L.Ed.2d 384 (1979).

2012See United States v. Saniti, 604 F.2d 603, 604 (9th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 969 , 100 S.Ct. 461 , 62 L.Ed.2d 384 (1979).