## Facts

- BankAtlantic acquired MegaBank in 1995 and continued operating an international banking division managing about 1,100 customer accounts.
- An internal audit identified suspicious practices involving uninsured courier “pouches” from Bogotá, Colombia, containing large volumes of negotiable instruments and transfer instructions.
- BankAtlantic informed law enforcement of possible money-laundering activity; multiple federal grand juries investigated.
- In 1996, grand juries issued subpoenas seeking documents and information relating to approximately 1,100 international-division accounts, including Jose Daniel Ruiz Coronado’s account.
- BankAtlantic produced the requested records to the grand juries.
- A federal court later froze the accounts and ordered seizure; BankAtlantic transferred the funds to the DEA, and the government pursued civil forfeiture.
- Coronado’s funds were ultimately returned with interest.
- Coronado sued, alleging unlawful disclosure of financial information under federal privacy statutes (including the Right to Financial Privacy Act and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act) and state-law theories.
- BankAtlantic asserted immunity under the Annunzio-Wylie Anti-Money Laundering Act safe harbor, 31 U.S.C. § 5318(g)(3).
- After discovery disputes (including denied motions to compel grand jury-related materials), the district court granted summary judgment for BankAtlantic on immunity grounds.

## Issues

1. Whether 31 U.S.C. § 5318(g)(3) immunizes a financial institution from civil liability for disclosing customer financial records in response to grand jury subpoenas issued during a money-laundering investigation.
2. Whether the safe-harbor immunity applies even when the customer claims the disclosed information was protected by other federal privacy statutes, including the ECPA.

## Decision

- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for BankAtlantic.
- The court held BankAtlantic’s production of records pursuant to grand jury subpoenas constituted a protected disclosure of possible violations of law to government authorities within the meaning of 31 U.S.C. § 5318(g)(3).
- The court rejected limiting the safe harbor based on potential overlap with other federal privacy statutes.
- The court upheld the disposition without requiring additional discovery into grand jury materials.

## Legal Principles

- 31 U.S.C. § 5318(g)(3) provides broad civil immunity to financial institutions for disclosures to government authorities concerning possible violations of law.
- Disclosures made in cooperation with law-enforcement investigations, including production of records pursuant to grand jury subpoenas, can fall within the safe harbor.
- Safe-harbor immunity is not conditioned on whether other privacy statutes might otherwise restrict disclosure when the disclosure is tied to reporting or investigating possible unlawful activity.
- Grand jury secrecy concerns and the dispositive nature of statutory immunity can justify limiting discovery into grand jury-related materials in civil litigation.

## Conclusion

The Eleventh Circuit held that BankAtlantic was statutorily immune under 31 U.S.C. § 5318(g)(3) from customer claims based on its disclosure of international-account records to federal grand juries pursuant to subpoenas in a money-laundering investigation.


Coronado v. BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc., 222 F.3d 1315 (11th Cir. 2000)