California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Verotel Merch. Servs. B.V. v. Rizal Commercial Bank, B276120, c/w B281869 (Cal. App. 2021):
Taking the evidence in the light most favorable to plaintiffs, the court found there was "no evidence at trial that a corporate officer or director knew of, authorized, or ratified Conway's fraud. Thus, the question appears to be whether Conway was a 'managing agent' for purposes of" section 3294(b). The court relied on White v. Ultramar, Inc. (1999) 21 Cal.4th 563, 577 (White), for the proposition that a managing agent for punitive damages purposes requires a showing that "the employee exercised substantial discretionary authority over significant aspects of a corporation's business." The court concluded the evidence was insufficient to meet that burden as to
Page 57
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.