Skip to content
  • CAREERS
  • CONTACT US
Search
Close
anthony ostlund logo
  • PEOPLE
  • LITIGATION
    • APPEALS
    • COMPLEX COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
    • EMPLOYMENT LITIGATION
    • FRAUD AND FIDUCIARY DUTY
    • FINANCIAL LITIGATION
    • OWNER/SHAREHOLDER DISPUTES
    • PLAINTIFF CONTINGENCY CASES
    • PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE
    • REAL ESTATE LITIGATION
    • TRUSTS AND ESTATES LAW
  • SUCCESSES
  • NEWS
  • ABOUT
  • FEE ARRANGEMENTS
Menu
  • PEOPLE
  • LITIGATION
    • APPEALS
    • COMPLEX COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
    • EMPLOYMENT LITIGATION
    • FRAUD AND FIDUCIARY DUTY
    • FINANCIAL LITIGATION
    • OWNER/SHAREHOLDER DISPUTES
    • PLAINTIFF CONTINGENCY CASES
    • PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE
    • REAL ESTATE LITIGATION
    • TRUSTS AND ESTATES LAW
  • SUCCESSES
  • NEWS
  • ABOUT
  • FEE ARRANGEMENTS

Common Law Fiduciary Relationships: Making Sure You’ve “TICKED” Off The Right Boxes

  • December 6, 2021

Minnesota Lawyer and Finance & Commerce – Partner Content

Author: Joseph T. Janochoski

 

Our lives are filled with changing sets of relationships (familial, friendship, communal, romantic, and business) that constantly evolve and mature over time.  Many of these relationships carry the potential to become what the law calls “fiduciary” in nature, a special status that requires those in the relationship to—as one oft-cited jurist eloquently noted—maintain “undivided loyalty” to one another, and act with a certain “standard of behavior” that includes “[n]ot honesty alone, but the punctilio of an honor the most sensitive[.]”  Meinhard v. Salmon, 164 N.E. 545, 547 (N.Y. 1928) (Cardozo, C.J.).  Fiduciary relationships are characterized by a “fiduciary” who enjoys a superior position in terms of knowledge and authority and in whom the other party to the relationship places a high level of trust and confidence.  The fiduciary in the relationship must act for the benefit of the other party on all matters within the scope of their relationship.  When a fiduciary fails to do so, it often results in hotly-contested litigation involving claims for breach of fiduciary duty, through which a beneficiary may seek a variety of remedies designed to address an unfaithful or disloyal fiduciary’s conduct.  These disputes arise in a variety of areas of law, including business arrangements and ownership disputes, disputes regarding trusts and estates, employment disputes, and guardianship issues, to name a few.

 

Minnesota law recognizes several categories of per se fiduciary relationships, which include attorney/client, partners in a partnership (including both general and limited partnerships), principal/agent, real estate broker/client, insurer/insured, spouses, guardian/ward, and trustee/beneficiary.  In the corporate context, Minnesota law also recognizes fiduciary relationships between directors and officers to a corporation’s shareholders, as well as between shareholders, particularly in closely-held corporations.

 

Outside of the per se categories, the existence of a fiduciary relationship—and accompanying fiduciary duties—is a question of fact in Minnesota.  As a result, common-law fiduciary relationships can also arise in other contexts, even if the relationship at issue has not been categorized by Minnesota law as a per se fiduciary relationship.  Whether a relationship rises to a fiduciary level depends on whether it exhibits several “special circumstances” under Minnesota law.  Using the acronym “TICKED”—and making sure you’ve “TICKED” off all the right boxes—serves as a helpful guide to remembering these “special circumstances” and evaluating whether a particular relationship should be considered fiduciary in nature:

 

  • T – Trust: One party placing their trust in another party is required for a fiduciary relationship to exist.  However, the level of trust must be more than what would be found in a normal business relationship; it must rise to a higher degree or level, characterized by good faith and loyalty beyond what might be found in typical relationships.

 

  • I – Influence: Another hallmark of a potential fiduciary relationship exists where one party enjoys superior or excessive levels of influence over the other party.  Influence goes hand in hand with trust, knowledge, experience; the more the alleged fiduciary has of each of those characteristics, the more influence they may have over the beneficiary.

 

  • C – Confidence and/or Control: Extensive confidence placed by a beneficiary in a fiduciary—particularly where the fiduciary has invited or requested the confidence—is another trait of a fiduciary relationship.  Similarly, an alleged fiduciary’s ability to control the beneficiary (directly or indirectly) bears on whether a fiduciary relationship exists.

 

  • K – Knowledge: Another sign that a relationship may be fiduciary is present when the alleged fiduciary has superior knowledge compared to the alleged beneficiary, particularly where the beneficiary has placed their trust and confidence in the fiduciary to act on their behalf or with their interests in mind.

 

  • E – Experience: Often present in fiduciary relationships (but not necessarily required) is a disparity in experience.  Minnesota courts have explicitly recognized—particularly in the business context—that disparity in business experience and invited confidence can be a basis for finding the existence of a fiduciary relationship.

 

  • D – Disparity in bargaining power: Unequal or disparate bargaining power may also be a sign that a relationship is fiduciary in nature, particularly in the insurance context.  When paired with other factors, such as a disparity in experience, knowledge, and influence, an inordinate amount of bargaining power can support the presence of a fiduciary relationship.

 

Besides trust and confidence, not every factor needs to be present for a common-law fiduciary relationship to exist.  Varied combinations of the “special circumstances” may be enough.  And it is important to remember that there are other caveats that may impact the analysis as well.  For example, a long history (such as a decade-long business arrangement) between two parties, while relevant, is usually not enough on its own to establish a fiduciary relationship, but may support a fiduciary relationship when present with other factors.  Similarly, if a person claiming that a fiduciary relationship existed knew that the alleged fiduciary had adverse or competing interests, that may undercut the creation or the existence of a fiduciary relationship, unless the person can show that the alleged fiduciary was aware that the person was placing their trust and confidence in them.  In essence, because every relationship is different, the application of the “special circumstances” noted above will necessarily vary based on the unique facts of each relationship.  There is no magic combination of factors; a case-by-case analysis is required.

 

Ultimately, in a world built on a wide variety of multifaceted relationships, only some of those relationships will rise to the fiduciary level and carry with them the obligations of “undivided loyalty” and “the punctilio of an honor the most sensitive[.]”  Meinhard, 164 N.E. at 547.  Every relationship defined by significant and heightened levels of trust and confidence has the potential to become fiduciary in nature.  Using the acronym “TICKED”, and making sure you have “TICKED” off all the right boxes, serves as useful framework for evaluating whether a particular relationship may constitute a common-law fiduciary relationship subject to heightened requirements of good faith, honesty, and loyalty, and help in deciding whether pursuing litigation for breach of fiduciary duty is an appropriate path.

related attorneys

Loading...

Joseph T. Janochoski

related practice areas

Loading...

Complex Commercial Litigation

Banking Litigation

Internal Investigations

Fraud and Fiduciary Duty

Financial Litigation

Securities Litigation and Arbitration

1 2 Next »
AO-logo-initials

90 SOUTH 7TH STREET, SUITE 3600
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402
P 612.349.6969       F 612.349.6996

 

© 2021 ANTHONY OSTLUND LOUWAGIE DRESSEN BOYLAN P.A.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  • 651•312•6500
  • 651•312•6618
  • People
  • Litigation
  • Successes
  • News
  • About
  • Fee Arrangements
  • Careers
  • Contact
Menu
  • People
  • Litigation
  • Successes
  • News
  • About
  • Fee Arrangements
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • PEOPLE
  • LITIGATION
    • APPEALS
    • COMPLEX COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
    • EMPLOYMENT LITIGATION
    • FRAUD AND FIDUCIARY DUTY
    • FINANCIAL LITIGATION
    • OWNER/SHAREHOLDER DISPUTES
    • PLAINTIFF CONTINGENCY CASES
    • PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE
    • REAL ESTATE LITIGATION
    • TRUSTS AND ESTATES LAW
  • SUCCESSES
  • NEWS
  • ABOUT
  • FEE ARRANGEMENTS
Menu
  • PEOPLE
  • LITIGATION
    • APPEALS
    • COMPLEX COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
    • EMPLOYMENT LITIGATION
    • FRAUD AND FIDUCIARY DUTY
    • FINANCIAL LITIGATION
    • OWNER/SHAREHOLDER DISPUTES
    • PLAINTIFF CONTINGENCY CASES
    • PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE
    • REAL ESTATE LITIGATION
    • TRUSTS AND ESTATES LAW
  • SUCCESSES
  • NEWS
  • ABOUT
  • FEE ARRANGEMENTS
search
disclaimer
Linkedin
Join Our Email List

© 2021 ANTHONY OSTLUND LOUWAGIE DRESSEN BOYLAN P.A. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Non-necessary
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
SAVE & ACCEPT