IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
TWENYTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF
LEE
Warren Thomas Patriot, and Sheri Patriot, )
Plaintiffs ) Docket No._____________
vs. )
AmSouth Bancorporation, ) NOTICE OF COMPLAINT
and Regions Financial Corp., ) (Jury Trial Demanded)
as successor to AmSouth Bancorporation, )
Defendants )
COME NOW Plaintiffs, Warren Thomas Patriot and Sheri Patriot, and for their complaint state and allege as follows:
1. A Fort Meyers , Florida IRS Revenue Agent issued a IRC 7609 summons for Plaintiff Sheri Patriot Patriot’s confidential financial records which was served on Defendant, AmSouth Bank, on May 2, 2005.
2. No subpoena was ever issued or served to Defendant for Plaintiff, Sheri Patriot Patriot’s, confidential financial records.
3. No summons nor subpoena was ever issued or served on Defendant for Plaintiff Warren Thomas Patriot’s records.
4. Plaintiff Sheri Patriot Patriot’s Petition to Quash Summons was timely filed with the District Court in
5. Defendant disclosed the confidential financial records of both Plaintiffs to the IRS a few months later without any subpoena or court order having been issued to Defendant.
6. Plaintiff Sheri Patriot’s Petition to Quash Summons was denied by the District Court Judge on June 13, 2006, but the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated that denial of the Petition to Quash Summons in an unpublished opinion, Docket #06-14066-EE, dated Feb. 22, 2007. (A copy of said opinion is attached hereto and made a part of this Complaint as Exhibit “A”).
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
7. Jurisdiction and venue are proper in this Court.
8. Plaintiffs are residents of
9. Defendant, AmSouth Bancorporation, is a corporation incorporated in the State of
10. Plaintiff requests a jury trial.
COUNT I – BREACH OF CONTRACT
11. Plaintiffs incorporate all other parts of the complaint to the extent legally and ethically appropriate.
12. As account holders with Defendant AmSouth Bank, Plaintiffs had a contractual relationship with Defendant.
13. Defendant’s compliance with the summons prior to a ‘final order’ from the district court was in violation of Defendant’s privacy policy.
14. Defendant breached its contract with Plaintiffs by disclosing confidential bank records without legal justification.
15. Plaintiffs were damaged and continue to be damaged by Defendant’s breach of contract. Plaintiff’s credit rating and the cost of credit have been seriously damaged as a result of Defendant’s actions, causing financial and other losses to Plaintiffs.
COUNT II – BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY
16. Plaintiffs incorporate all other parts of the complaint to the extent legally and ethically appropriate.
17. Defendant owed a fiduciary duty to Plaintiffs as account holders.
18. Defendant breached that fiduciary duty by disclosing confidential information and financial records to a third-party without legal justification.
19. Plaintiffs were damaged and continue to be damaged by Defendant’s breach of fiduciary duty.
COUNT III – NEGLIGENCE
20. Plaintiffs incorporate all other parts of the complaint to the extent legally and ethically appropriate.
21. Defendant, as a fiduciary, owed Plaintiffs a high duty of diligent care in protecting their confidential financial and personal information.
22. The protection of Plaintiff’s personal and confidential financial records was under Defendant’s power and control.
23. Defendant released Plaintiff’s confidential financial records in violation of Florida Statute 655.059, which specifically requires any release shall occur only in response to a valid subpoena.
24. Defendant having been served with Plaintiff Sheri Patriot’s objection to said summons, had reason to know the validity of the summons was in question.
25. Defendant negligently released Plaintiff Sheri Patriot’s personal and confidential financial records prior to receiving notice of the resolution of her Petition to Quash.
26 Defendant negligently released Plaintiff Warren Patriot’s personal and confidential financial records without any type of request from any entity for his records.
27. Plaintiffs were damaged and continue to be damaged by Defendant’s negligence.
COUNT IV – NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION
28. Plaintiffs incorporate all other parts of the complaint to the extent legally and ethically appropriate.
29. Defendant’s privacy policy states that it “will comply with customer information requests through properly executed court orders, such as garnishments, levies, summons, and subpoenas”. (Emphasis added) Defendant misrepresented a material fact when it did not disclose in its privacy policy that it would provide information requested in an IRS summons.
30. Defendant knew, or should have known, that said misrepresentation was deceptive and misleading, because Defendant would, and did, comply with a summons that was not court ordered.
31. Defendant made its privacy policy available to its customers and the general public by posting said policy on Defendant’s website; where Defendant knew it would be read and relied upon by customers and potential customers.
32. Plaintiff opened an account with Defendant in justifiable reliance on Defendant’s privacy policy and has suffered injury due to that reliance.
CONCLUSION
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs, Warren Thomas Patriot and Sheri Patriot, pray this Court find in their favor on the counts of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligence, for an award of damages in the amount of $4,000,000.00 for fees and costs, and for any other punitive relief to which they show themselves entitle, whether specifically prayed for or not.
By:________________________________
Warren Thomas Patriot, Plaintiff pro se
By:__________________________________
Sheri Patriot, Plaintiff pro se