The plaintiff alleged negligence and breach of fiduciary duty against her investment advisor and related entities arising from recommendations to invest retirement assets in long-term growth securities and universal life policies rather than income-focused products.
The court held that the relationship was not fiduciary, applying broker-client fiduciary factors and emphasizing the absence of discretionary authority, the plaintiff's sophistication, and her approval of each trade.
On the negligence claim, the court found the recommended balanced long-term growth strategy was suitable having regard to the plaintiff's objectives, investment knowledge, time horizon, tax planning goals, and need for asset growth, and rejected the plaintiff's expert's hindsight-based benchmarking methodology.
The court further held that the plaintiff's losses were caused by extraordinary and unanticipated withdrawals to fund Jamaican real estate development and other expenditures, not by unsuitable advice.
The plaintiff's late motion to amend her pleadings to recast her objectives as income-focused was denied, and the action was dismissed.
