In this appeal, T. Gordon Lamb challenges the denial of his motion for summary judgment and the grant of the same to First Union Brokerage Services, Inc. First Union Brokerage and First Union National Bank First Union. Lamb contends that the trial court overlooked the law applicable to revocable agencies and failed to consider the legal duties that an agent owes an owner of a brokerage account. This case resulted from two garnishment proceedings. On June 29, 2000, First Union was served with a summons of garnishment in PRL USA Holdings, Inc. f/k/a Polo Ralph Lauren Corporation v. Bang Sung Kang a/k/a Ki Taek Kang, First Union National Bank, Garnishee . About two weeks later, on July 12, 2000, First Union Brokerage was likewise served with a summons of garnishment in PRL USA Holdings, Inc, f/k/a Polo Ralph Lauren Corporation v. Bang Sung Kang a/k/a Ki Taek Kang, First Union Brokerage Services, Inc., Garnishee . According to its garnishment affidavit, PRL USA Holdings, Inc. PRL had obtained a judgment against Kang in federal district court and recorded a writ of execution for $1,302,477.94 in the general execution docket and lien docket in Gwinnett County. PRL sought to recover its judgment from Kang.
Kang testified that after receiving a copy of the first garnishment, he had met the next day with Don Purviance, a First Union vice president. After learning from Purviance that First Union and First Union Brokerage were separate corporate entities, “I requested that my brokerage accounts, which had not been garnished, be immediately cashed out or closed. I also advised him that First Union Brokerage Services, Inc. was not authorized to act in any further capacity as my broker agent.” According to Kang, when Purviance telephoned First Union Brokerage, Purviance “was advised that they would not honor my instructions on the two brokerage accounts, as they indicated that there was a loan for which one of the accounts was being held as collateral and that the other account was used as collateral or security for any CAP account overdrafts and thereby might be considered to be connected to a part of the CAP account.”1
