Abstract
Fiduciary betrayal is a serious harm. When the fiduciary is a doctor or a lawyer, and the entrustor is a patient or client, this harm frequently goes unremedied. Betrayals arise out of disloyalty and conflicts of interest where the lawyer or doctor puts his or her interest above that of his or her client or patient. They cause dignitary harm that is different from the harm flowing from negligent malpractice. Nevertheless, courts, concerned with overdeterrence, have for the most part refused to allow a separate claim for betrayal. In this Article, we suggest that betrayal deserves a remedy and propose a new statutory tort with limits on the available money damages. We begin by explaining the importance of trust and the inadequacy of common law remedies such as malpractice, lack of informed consent, and breach of fiduciary duty. We then set out a statutorily limited monetary proposal and illustrate how this remedy would work. We do this by examining a series of cases in which the courts have struggled to address betrayals and then applying our statutory tort to the facts of those cases. Our proposed statutory tort offers a solution to the current failure to hold professionals accountable for disloyalty that will provide justice to those who are injured by exploitive self-dealing while setting clear parameters that address judicial concerns of runaway juries and overlap with other tort claims.
Recommended Citation
Caroline Forell & Anna Sortun,
The Tort of Betrayal of Trust,
42
U. Mich. J. L. Reform
557
(2009).
Available at:
https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjlr/vol42/iss3/3