Martin v. Heinold Commodities

Plaintiff, John R. Martin, on his own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated, sought certification of his cause as a class action, declaratory and injunctive relief, an accounting and damages resulting from the payment of foreign service fees in connection with London commodity options purchased through defendant, Heinold Commodities, Inc., subsequent to September 12, 1977. 1 The court granted plaintiff's motion for class certification. Subsequently, the court granted the class' motion for partial summary judgment on counts I and II of the complaint, which were based on breach of fiduciary duty. The court ordered that ""[t]he Plaintiff class will recover from defendant the entire amount of its investment in London Commodity Options, the amount to be determined by stipulation of the parties."" Defendant appealed. During the pendency of the appeal, the trial court continued to exercise jurisdiction of the remainder of the case, i.e., the issue of the amount of damages. Without a trial or evidentiary hearing, the trial court granted the plaintiff class' request for damages in its entirety and entered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff class for $1,728,948.27 in damages, and $458,219.05 for prejudgment interest. Defendant filed a second appeal. We consolidated the appeals, and we are treating the entire matter as a single appeal. We reverse both judgments and remand. In counts I and II of his complaint, plaintiff alleged that defendant breached fiduciary duties owed to plaintiff and the class. 2 Specifically, plaintiff alleged that he signed a customer agreement with defendant for the purpose of engaging in London commodity option transactions and that he received from defendant a ""Summary Disclosure Statement Concerning London Commodity Options."" The summary disclosure statement, which is attached to the complaint as an exhibit, recites, in pertinent part: