Helfer v. JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A.

Background

Lewis Helfer, Jennifer Elster-Helfer, and Colleen Helfer jointly leased safe-deposit box number 290 at a Chase branch. The lease stated that the renters agreed not to store money, cash, or coin in the box, except for items of numismatic value. Lewis testified that he placed a black case containing approximately $250,000 in cash—2,500 $100 bills—in the box.

Chase later sent notices about unpaid safe-deposit-box rent. After receiving no payment or response, Chase drilled open the box on April 18, 2018, inventoried its contents, and stored them separately. The plaintiffs recovered personal belongings and $75,580, including cash from the black case and two other bags. They claimed that approximately $250,000 was missing. Before the lawsuit began, they did not formally notify Chase that property or cash was missing, and no police report was filed.

Claims and Arguments

The plaintiffs brought claims for negligence, breach of contract, breach of bailment, breach of fiduciary duty, and conversion. Chase moved for summary judgment, which is a decision without a trial when there is no genuine dispute about a fact that could affect the outcome and the moving party is entitled to judgment under the law.

Chase argued that the lease prohibited the plaintiffs from storing cash and that the plaintiffs lacked admissible evidence proving that they had placed $250,000 in the box. The plaintiffs focused on Chase’s alleged administrative errors involving their addresses and the automatic payments for the box. They argued that those errors led to the improper drilling of the box. They also argued, for the first time in their opposition, that the bills were stored for numismatic purposes and therefore fell within the lease’s exception.

The plaintiffs agreed to dismissal of their negligence and breach-of-bailment claims. They did not address their breach-of-fiduciary-duty claim or punitive-damages claim in their opposition, and the court treated those claims as waived.

Court’s Analysis

The court held that the plaintiffs’ storage of currency breached the lease. It explained that New York courts have upheld safe-deposit-box provisions prohibiting the storage of currency and have dismissed claims based on missing or stolen cash when the lease prohibited storing that cash.

The court did not need to decide whether Chase’s later amended lease was effective because both the original lease and the amended lease led to the same result. The original lease prohibited storing money except for money of numismatic value. The amended lease likewise prohibited storing money, coin, or currency unless it was collectible and stated that the renter assumed the risks of loss.

The court rejected the plaintiffs’ claim that the cash was collectible. It found that Lewis’s new declaration describing the bills as mint-condition bills in consecutively numbered batches conflicted with his earlier deposition testimony. His deposition indicated that he had accumulated and used the money over time, did not record the bill numbers, and viewed the cash as money to keep available rather than as collectible currency. The court also relied on testimony describing the bills as stored in a messy, stuffed case and noted that the plaintiffs’ earlier filings referred only to the cash’s $250,000 face value.

The court concluded that the plaintiffs could not recover for missing cash they were prohibited from storing in the box. It therefore did not reach Chase’s separate argument that the plaintiffs’ evidence was insufficient to prove damages. The court also stated that Chase’s alleged errors involving payments and addresses did not change the result, and that the plaintiffs’ reliance on New York Banking Law section 335 did not create a claim or impose additional safeguarding duties on Chase under the circumstances described.

Disposition

Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald granted Chase’s motion for summary judgment in its entirety. The court granted dismissal of the negligence and breach-of-bailment claims, dismissed the breach-of-fiduciary-duty and punitive-damages claims as waived, and dismissed the remaining breach-of-contract and conversion claims because the lease prohibited storing the cash. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion and close the case.