chief executive of Healthmaster would occur if she had accepted a bribe from a party negotiating with Healthmaster to Healthmaster’s detriment. In contrast, she contends that “false statements on the cost reports submitted to a fiscal intermediary for the Government do not implicate such a trust relationship.” Appellant’s Brief at 26. Significantly, when an arm’s length relationship existed between the defendant and the victim such that the discretionary authority entrusted to the defendant was not directly from the victim, a section 3B1.3 enhancement was held to be improper. See, e.g., Jolly, 102 F.3d at 48-50 (concluding that president of corporation did not stand in a position of trust relative to creditors of the corporation); United States v. West, 56 F.3d 216, 221 (D.C.Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>); Brunson, 54 F.3d at 675-78 (determining that
holding that plaintiffs failure to mention vice president of thirdparty company in initial disclosures was harmless because plaintiffs mentioned president of company and defendants conducted no discovery of company holding that the applicable rule of procedure vests a successor judge with judicial discretion to review the jury verdict on a motion for new trial on the ground that such verdict was contrary to the weight of the evidence where the record clearly discloses that no question of the credibility of the witnesses or the weight to be given to their testimony will require resolution by him holding that an insurance company may have assumed a duty to defend a customer against a tort claim falling outside the scope of the customers insurance contract where a claims person  told the customer over the telephone that the insurer would take care of it and the insurer shortly thereafter hired a lawyer to represent the customer holding that dnrs exercise of task assigned to it by legislature invariably involved exercise of agency discretion and did not constitute regulation under apa nor abuse of discretion holding that title of president carried no special weight because it was not the position in the company but the exercise of managerial and professional discretion with re spect to the task hired by a customer to perform that determined eligibility for abuseoftrust enhancement