Andre M. Kovacs v. J.P. Morgan Securities, LLC, et al.

Summary

A United States magistrate judge recommends dismissing Andre M. Kovacs’s second amended complaint against J.P. Morgan Securities, LLC and Chase Bank without leave to amend. The court concludes that the claims concerning the closure of plaintiff’s accounts are frivolous or time-barred and that the complaint fails to state claims for defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, or violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Holdings

1. The tort claims arising from the 2017 account closure were almost certainly time-barred because California provides a one-year limitations period for defamation and a two-year limitations period for intentional infliction of emotional distress.
2. The complaint failed to state a defamation claim because plaintiff did not adequately allege publication of a false, defamatory, and unprivileged statement.
3. The complaint failed to state an intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress claim because closing commercial accounts, without alleged extenuating circumstances, was not extreme and outrageous conduct.
4. The Fair Credit Reporting Act allegations did not state a claim because the complaint did not indicate that defendants were consumer reporting agencies or users of information furnished by consumer reporting agencies in covered activities.
5. Leave to amend should be denied because plaintiff had already received more than one opportunity to amend and further amendment would be futile.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint stated a cognizable defamation claim based on defendants' alleged implication that plaintiff was involved in criminal activity.
2. Whether the complaint stated a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress based on defendants' closure of plaintiff's commercial accounts.
3. Whether plaintiff's Fair Credit Reporting Act allegations plausibly implicated defendants' covered activities.
4. Whether the claims arising from the 2017 account closure were time-barred.
5. Whether amendment should be permitted after plaintiff had received multiple opportunities to amend.

Disposition

other