Rick Scott filed a suit in a federal district court against Salvatore Carpanzano and others, including Carpanzano’s daughter Carmela, alleging claims relating to Scott’s loss of about $2 million in an escrow account. Carpanzano failed to cooperate with discovery, did not respond to attempts to contact him by certified mail, regular mail, or e-mail, refused to appear as requested and ordered, and did not finalize a settlement negotiated between the parties’ attorneys. Carmela denied that she was involved in her father’s business or the Scott transaction. The court awarded Scott more than $6 million.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the judgment against Carpanzano, but reversed the decision against Carmela—Scott had made no allegations of acts on her part “Even if Scott were able to prove the entirety of the  complaint, we fail to see how it would justify a judgment  against Ms. Carpanzano.”

Questions

Suppose that Carmela had been an active participant in her father’s business. Would the result have been different?