The complaint fails to allege any contact exists or ever existed between Flores and FHB. Rather, Flores alleges that in 1993 he purchased the time certificate of deposit from Union Bank, not FHB, according to the bank’s memorandum in support of motion to dismiss.
For the same reasons as with respect to the complainant’s first cause of action for breach of contract, Flores’s second cause of action for unjust enrichment is “fatally defective.”
Flores’s third cause of action “lacks a cognizable legal theory or fails to allege facts constituting a cognizable legal theory. As a consequence, the third cause of action should be dismissed as to FHB.”
The fourth cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty should be dismissed as to FHB, the memorandum stated, because “these are all conclusory legal allegations; none are factual in nature.”
The fifth cause of action for fraud should be dismissed because “Flores again resorts to hypothetical allegations.”
First Hawaiian Bank is being represented by attorneys Richard L. Johnson and Thomas E. Clifford.
Flores sued First Hawaiian Bank and Union Bank of California for breach of contract, in connection with his $200,000 time deposit 18 years ago. The Saipan branch of Union Bank issued the certificate, said Flores, who is represented by attorney Juan T. Lizama.
On Nov. 15, 2001, Flores said he learned that Union Bank sold all assets and liabilities of its Saipan branch to First Hawaiian Bank, and that the “defendants were heavily involved in the shredding of bank accounts.”
On Aug. 25, 2009, First Hawaiian Bank responded to Flores’ inquiries, saying “it had not purchased the [certificate of deposit] from…Union Bank.”
