Hutchinson Capital Management

Allegations: PLAINTIFF ALLEGED THAT HUTCHINSON CAPITAL MANAGEMENT FAILED TO SUPERVISE THE ACTIONS OF A COURT-APPOINTED TRUSTEE APPOINTED BY (AND OTHERWISE SUBJECT TO THE OVERSIGHT OF) THE STATE OF UTAH DISTRICT COURT WHICH GRANTED THE TRUSTEE LEGAL AUTHORITY OVER THE ENTIRETY OF CLIENT'S INVESTMENT ASSETS. THE COURT-APPOINTED TRUSTEE EMBEZZLED CLIENT ASSETS FOR WHICH HE WAS CONVICTED AND IMPRISONED. Status: Final Summary: THIS CLAIM WAS SETTLED BY HUTCHINSON CAPITAL MANAGEMENT WITHOUT A FINDING OF LIABILITY ON ITS PART OR ON THE PART OF ITS EMPLOYEES ON THE ADVICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL AND IN COORDINATION WITH HUTCHINSON CAPITAL MANAGEMENT'S INSURANCE CARRIER. IN 2014, HUTCHINSON'S CLIENT WAS MADE THE SUBJECT OF A COURT-APPOINTED GUARDIANSHIP BY THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH. LEGAL AUTHORITY OVER THE ENTIRETY OF CLIENT'S INVESTMENT ASSETS WAS TRANSFERRED BY THE DISTRICT COURT, STATE OF UTAH TO A COURT-APPOINTED TRUSTEE EMPOWERED TO MONITOR, SUPERVISE, AND MAKE ALL NECESSARY PAYMENTS IN THE SUPPORT AND MEDICAL CARE OF CLIENT. THE COURT-SELECTED TRUSTEE WAS TO BE MONITORED BY THE DISTRICT COURT AND WAS REQUIRED TO PERIODICALLY REPORT TO SUCH COURT AS TO THE ASSETS UNDER THE TRUSTEE'S CONTROL AND THEIR DISPOSITION. HUTCHINSON CAPITAL PLAYED NO ROLE IN THE DECISION TO APPOINT EITHER THE COURT-SELECTED GUARDIAN OR THE COURT-SELECTED TRUSTEE. ALL RELEVANT COURT APPOINTMENTS OF THE GUARDIAN AND THE TRUSTEE WERE PROVIDED TO HUTCHINSON ESTABLISHING BOTH THE THEIR AUTHORITY AND CONTROL OVER CLIENT'S ASSETS AND THE DISTRICT COURT'S ONGOING SUPERVISION OF THE TRUSTEE GUARDIAN. UPON COURT-SELECTED TRUSTEE'S LEGAL EMPOWERMENT OVER CLIENT'S ENTIRE RETIREMENT AND INVESTMENT ASSETS, THE COURT-SELECTED TRUSTEE EMBEZZLED CLIENT'S ASSETS. HE WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CONVICTED AND JAILED FOR HIS ACTIONS. HUTCHINSON CAPITAL DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE COURT-SELECTED TRUSTEE'S UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES NOR WAS HUTCHINSON CAPITAL AWARE OF HIS UNLAWFUL ACTIONS. THE COMPLAINT DID NOT ALLEGE THAT HUTCHINSON CAPITAL MANAGEMENT OR MR. HOUSER MISMANAGED CLIENT'S PORTFOLIO OR FAILED TO SUPERVISE CLIENT'S INVESTMENTS. INSTEAD, THE COMPLAINT ALLEGED HUTCHINSON CAPITAL MANAGEMENT AND MR. HOUSER SOMEHOW SHOULD HAVE PREVENTED THE TRUSTEE'S EMBEZZLEMENT, DESPITE THE COURT APPOINTMENT AND THE COURT'S ONGOING OBLIGATION TO SUPERVISE THE TRUSTEE. CLIENT DIED IN 2022. THIS ACTION WAS BROUGHT BY AN ESTATE REPRESENTATIVE.