The appellants appealed a trial judgment ordering them to pay $7,000 to the respondent.
The trial judge found that the respondent and the appellant Tony Chao had an oral agreement wherein Chao would hold $7,000 in trust for the respondent in a dormant corporate account.
The appellants argued that the respondent breached his fiduciary duties as an officer and lawyer for the corporation.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding ample uncontradicted evidence to support the trial judge's conclusion that this was a simple contract and no fiduciary duty was breached.
