# Brown v. Slenker

> Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · August 3, 2000 · 220 F.3d 411

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9413973

## Case

- **Full name:** James H. BROWN, Commissioner of Insurance for the State of Louisiana as Liquidator of Physician’s National Risk Retention Group, Inc., Plaintiff-Counter Defendant-Appellee-Appellant, v. Norman F. SLENKER; Slenker, Brandt, Jennings, & Johnston, Defendants-Counter Claimants-Appellants-Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- **Decided:** August 3, 2000
- **Citations:** 220 F.3d 411; 2000 WL 992116
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Reavley
- **Judges:** Reavley, Smith, Garza
- **Cited by:** 33 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9413973

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that the “same showing of proximate cause” was required with regard to the plaintiffs claim that the attorney breached the parties’ contract by “failing entirely to represent the [plaintiff],” as was required with regard to the plaintiffs claim for legal malpractice
- holding that because the personal jurisdiction issue erroneously decided as a matter of law by the district court was intertwined with the merits, "on remand both [had to be] decided at a new trial, based on valid jury findings”
- noting that “[o]nly one case has found compelling considerations of remedial justice,” and in that case, “Louisiana was the only forum in which suit could be maintained, because it was the only forum in which jurisdiction could be obtained over all the defendants”

## Opinion text

REAVLEY, Circuit Judge,
specially concurring:
I agree that a fact issue exists whether Slenker, by breach of his fiduciary duty, caused the Commissioner to lose the $700,-000. The record establishes a lawyer-client relationship between Slenker’s law *427 firm and the Commissioner, but there is a material conflict between the parties about the conversation between them on October 15, 1992. Slenker’s testimony is that he made it clear that he would not protect the Commissioner or oppose release of the money.
There is no issue on jurisdiction. See Wien Air Alaska, Inc. v. Brandt, 195 F.3d 208, 213 (5th Cir.1999)(“However, when the claim arises from a breach of fiduciary duty based on a failure to disclose material information, the fact that the lawyer continually communicated with the forum while steadfastly failing to disclose material information shows the purposeful direction of material omissions to the forum state.”)
Finally, there is no prescription issue. The one-year prescription period of LSA-R.S. 9:5605 only applies to claims against attorneys licensed to practice in Louisiana. A breach of fiduciary duty action is governed by a ten-year prescription period under L.S.A.-C.C. 3499. Gerdes v. Estate of Cush, 953 F.2d 201 (5th Cir.1992).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9413973. Public record. Not legal advice.