Venky Venkatraman v. Bank of America, N.A.

Federal and state regulators require national banks to identify customers, monitor accounts, and report suspicious activity because bank accounts are frequently used to receive and move proceeds of fraud. This case concerns the civil consequence of a categorical no-duty rule applied at the pleading stage. Petitioner alleged that scammers directed him to deposit $94,345 into multiple accounts maintained by Respondent Bank of America, N.A.; that those accounts were used as instruments of fraud; that Bank of America later recovered and returned part of the proceeds; and that Petitioner had been a Bank of America customer for approximately twenty-five years. The court of appeals nevertheless held that Bank of America owed Petitioner no duty because the deposits were made into accounts titled to third parties, and that Petitioner's own customer relationship and the bank's later recovery efforts did not affect the analysis. The question presented is: Whether a national bank may be categorically insulated from any dutyof-care inquiry when fraud proceeds are deposited into accounts titled to third parties, even where the injured person is the bank's own longstanding customer and alleges facts concerning the bank's control of the recipient accounts, warning signs, and subsequent recovery of part of the proceeds. PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI i