- 16 -
We also think it significant that petitioner had actual
knowledge of the Dupont settlement with BGE. Petitioner's
husband informed petitioner of the damage claim prior to his
departure for the Atlanta settlement negotiations. At trial,
petitioner admitted knowledge of the settlement. Thomas George,
the other shareholder of BGE, testified that he informed
petitioner of the Dupont settlement negotiations between BGE and
Dupont on several occasions. Although the amount may not have
been determined by that point, we believe there is little doubt
that petitioner knew that there was going to be a substantial
settlement. We fail to believe that petitioner's husband would
negotiate a settlement that would allow him to walk away from the
financial misery of the nursery with money left over without
telling his wife at least minimal facts about its nature and
scope. Petitioner testified that she never approved of his
involvement in the nursery business. Their discussions on the
subject were almost always argumentative. If there was anything
that petitioner's husband would likely discuss about the nursery
with petitioner, we believe it would be the good news that the
settlement was finally going to bail out petitioner's husband
from the financial woes of his involvement in the nursery
business. At a minimum, the foregoing was sufficient to trigger
petitioner's duty of inquiry.
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011