X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:In November 1999, the state of Texas sued Ali Yazdchi (Ali), the brother of Abbas and Ahmad Yazdchi (the Yazdchis). The trial court entered a temporary restraining order against Ali after finding that he may have violated the Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA). In that suit (the Ali action), the court first issued a temporary restraining order, ordering numerous financial institutions including TradeStar that were holding money in the name of or for the benefit of Ali to freeze funds held not only under Ali’s name, but also those of any of Ali’s aliases, including the names “Abbas Yazdchi” and “Ahmad Yazdchi.” TradeStar was notified of the temporary restraining order by the attorney general’s office on Nov. 15, 1999, and complied with this order by notifying the attorney general that it had frozen an account held in the names of Abbas and Ahmad (the Yazdchis’ account). After a hearing in the Ali action in which Ali appeared with counsel, the trial court found that he had engaged in several actions that violated the DTPA and had also “sought to conceal and/or dissipate assets . . . used a number of aliases and false addresses to conceal his identity, assets and whereabouts, and . . . sought to avoid paying creditors and judgments filed against him.” The court entered a temporary injunction and appointment of a temporary receiver for Ali and any assets standing in either his name or any of his aliases, specifically requiring TradeStar (among others) to turn over any such assets to the custody of the temporary receiver (the turnover order). The Ali action concluded on April 14, 2000, with the entry of an agreed judgment. On May 8, 2000, the permanent receiver notified TradeStar of his appointment and his intention to liquidate the Yazdchis’ account and provided TradeStar a copy of the temporary injunction (including the turnover order) and agreed judgment. On June 5, 2000, the receiver notified TradeStar that he wished to liquidate the Yazdchis’ account pursuant to the trial court’s orders, and requested disbursement of the funds to him, which TradeStar provided on June 9, 2000. TradeStar mailed a statement to the account address reflecting the reduction and the resulting zero balance within seven business days of June 30, 2000. In November 2001, the Yazdchis brought this breach of contract claim against TradeStar, among others, seeking to recover the $128,347.04 that TradeStar had transferred to the receiver in the Ali action. TradeStar filed a motion for summary judgment, asserting that it was statutorily shielded from liability because it had turned over the funds pursuant to a court order. The Yazdchis filed a response and their own motion for partial summary judgment, alleging various legal bases in support of their claim. TradeStar replied to the Yazdchis’ motion, further arguing, among other things, that the claims asserted in this litigation are the same as those that had been: 1. decided against the Yazdchis in summary judgments granted in this action to former defendants Bank One and Chase 2. thereafter severed; and 3. affirmed on appeal by the 1st Court of Appeals. The trial court granted TradeStar’s motion for summary judgment. HOLDING:Affirmed. Abbas and Ahmad Yazdchi (the Yazdchis) first argued that TradeStar was not indebted to Ali Yazdchi in the underlying DTPA suit and should not have turned over the Yazdchis’ funds to the receiver for Ali. Second, the Yazdchis contended that the temporary injunction in the Ali action was void as to them, because they were not parties or privy to the underlying action, and thus the trial court lacked jurisdiction over them. Finally, the Yazdchis’ third issue asserted that TradeStar has not proved a statutory defense to their breach of contract claim. The court found that the 1st Court of Appeals already addressed those issues in its decision regarding two former defendants in this case, and the Texas Supreme Court has denied the Yazdchis’ petition for review in that proceeding. In that case, the first court determined that the defendants, Bank One and Chase (the banks), as a matter of law, were statutorily immune from liability for transferring funds from the Yazdchis’ accounts to the court-appointed receiver pursuant to the orders entered in the Ali action. The banks received a copy of the order, indicating that the court had found that Ali was using accounts at their institutions, under alias names, to deposit funds from illegal activities. The court commanded the banks to turn over funds held in these accounts. Texas Finance Code �31.010 permitted the banks to rely on the court’s orders without conducting an independent investigation and without fearing that they would be subject to liability for complying with the plain language of the orders. In the present case, the court noted that TradeStar was subject to the same turnover order as the banks. The Yazdchis, the court stated, did not contend that TradeStar took any action that was not specified in the turnover order, and provided no authority that TradeStar could be liable for complying with the order even if it was erroneous or void. In a footnote, the court noted : “It is not apparent from our record what law authorizes such control to be exercised over assets held in the name of a non-named party or an alleged alias, or what safeguards exist or procedures were followed to assure that assets of innocent account holders were not affected.” OPINION:Edelman, J.; Anderson, Edelman, and Seymore, J.J.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.