Drawee Bank Liability

21 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Bagby v. Merrill Lynch
  491 F.2d 192· 8th Cir.· 1974-01-15 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a drawer's negligence must contribute to the forgery itself, not merely to the issuance of the instrument, to preclude recovery under UCC § 3-406. The court also affirmed an award of attorney fees to a drawee bank against collecting banks for breach of indorse
• Perini Corp. & Brown Bros. v. The First Nat'l Bank OF Habersham Cnty.
  553 F.2d 398· 5th Cir.· 1977-06-02 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the loss from forged checks with defective indorsements must be viewed as a forged check loss, not a forged indorsement loss, and affirmed the lower court's action.
• The Fla. Nat'l Bank AT ST. Petersburg (Florida) v. Geer
  96 So. 2d 409· Fla.· 1957-07-10 ·cited 18×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a summary judgment against a bank that paid a check without proper endorsement, holding that the bank should be allowed to prove either that the check was payable to a fictitious person or that the intended recipient actually received the procee
• Dixon v. State
  541 So. 2d 637· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-01-18 ·cited 15×
  Dixon appealed his convictions for uttering a forgery and dealing in stolen property after attempting to cash a stolen check at a credit union. The court affirmed his convictions, holding that cashing a stolen check constitutes dealing in stolen property because checks enter the
• Jackson Vitrified China Co. v. People's Am. Nat'l Bank OF N. Miami
  388 So. 2d 1059· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-09-16 ·cited 14×
  Jackson Vitrified China Company sued a collecting bank for liability on approximately $120,000 in checks stolen by an employee, endorsed with forged indorsements and deposited into an account opened in the company's name. The court affirmed judgment for the collecting bank, holdi
• Messeroff v. Kantor
  261 So. 2d 553· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-05-02 ·cited 13×
  Appellants sought recovery from two banks that processed settlement draft proceeds that were misappropriated by their attorney through forged endorsements. The court affirmed summary judgment for the banks, holding that collecting banks bear no liability to the true owner except
• United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. First Nat. Bank in Dallas
  172 F.2d 258· 5th Cir.· 1949-01-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the insurer, as subrogee and assignee, could not recover from the bank because the depositor's election to recover from its surety barred claims against the bank, and the insurer's equities were not superior to the bank's.
• Starcraft Co. v. C.J. Heck Co. OF Tex., Inc.
  748 F.2d 982· 5th Cir.· 1984-12-17 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the Bank is absolutely liable to Starcraft for the face value of the check and that the Johnsons remain liable as guarantors for prior transactions.
• Jan and Myrtle Bloempoort v. Regency Bank OF Fla.
  567 So. 2d 923· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-09-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment for the bank, as the payees of a negotiable instrument bearing a forged endorsement are entitled to sue the drawee bank for conversion under Florida Statute § 673.419(1)(c).
• Commercial Credit Corp. v. Empire Tr. Co.
  260 F.2d 132· 8th Cir.· 1958-10-20 ·cited 6×
  A drawee bank is not liable for paying a check with a forged endorsement if the proceeds reached the person for whom they were intended and the depositor suffered no loss.
• Lawrence v. Cent. Plaza Bank & Tr. Co.
  469 So. 2d 201· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-05-22 ·cited 5×
  Lawrence purchased a cashier's check from County Bank payable to William Morris Agency and gave it to Grogan, who deposited it in an attorney's trust account at Central Plaza Bank using a forged endorsement. The court held that the purchaser of a cashier's check, unlike the drawe
• Wilton Manors Nat'l Bank v. Adobe Brick & Supply Co., Inc.
  232 So. 2d 29· Fla. 4th DCA· 1970-02-20 ·cited 4×
  Two banks are liable to a co-payee for negligently paying a check without the co-payee's endorsement, resulting in a judgment against both banks for the full amount of the check.
• Gen. Fin. Corp. OF Fla. v. Cent. Bank & Tr. Co.
  264 F.2d 869· 5th Cir.· 1959-03-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that under Florida law, a payor bank's retention of a check beyond the end of the business day following its receipt constitutes final payment, unless the amount is charged to the drawer's account.
• Attorney's Title Ins. Fund, Inc. v. Regions Bank
  491 F. Supp. 2d 1087· S.D. Fla.· 2007-04-11 ·cited 3×
  Attorney's Title Insurance Fund sought to recover $180,926.11 from Regions Bank for paying a check over forged endorsements in a fraudulent real estate transaction. The district court held that under Florida Statutes § 673.4201, a payee cannot bring a conversion action for a nego
• Nat'l Credit Union Admin. v. Mich. Nat'l Bank OF Detroit
  771 F.2d 154· 6th Cir.· 1985-08-27 ·cited 2×
  When a check bears both a forged drawer's signature and a missing or forged indorsement, the loss is allocated as if only the drawer's signature was forged, following the Perini rule.
• Lincoln Nat'l Bank & Tr. Co. v. The Bank OF Commerce
  764 F.2d 392· 5th Cir.· 1985-07-01 ·cited 2×
  A payee of checks cashed under a forged endorsement is not a "true owner" for purposes of UCC § 3-419 if the checks never came into the payee's possession or were not constructively delivered.
• Segel v. The First State Bank OF Miami
  432 So. 2d 1378· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-06-21 ·cited 2×
  Irving and Lena Segel purchased a $39,700 cashier's check from First State Bank of Miami payable to ROI, Inc., intending to purchase video games. The check was deposited under an endorsement by Marketing Associates, Inc., d/b/a ROI, Inc., and paid by the bank. The Segels sued, al
• E. AIR Lines, Inc. v. Coral Gables First Nat'l Bank
  240 So. 2d 87· Fla. 3d DCA· 1970-10-20 ·cited 2×
  Eastern Air Lines had no claim to funds held by Florida National Bank because the bank never accepted the checks Eastern presented, and an unaccepted check creates no liability on the drawee bank.
• Exch. Nat'l Bank IN Winter Haven v. Sheffield
  166 So. 2d 807· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-08-14 ·cited 2×
  Exchange National Bank appeals from a summary judgment holding it liable to a customer for charging back a check that had been deposited, after the drawee bank retained the check longer than permitted by Florida law. The court affirmed, holding that when a drawee bank retains a c
• Bank OF Fort Mill v. Lawyers Title Ins. Corp.
  268 F.2d 313· 4th Cir.· 1959-06-15 ·cited 2×
  A paid surety cannot be subrogated to a depositor's rights against an innocent drawee bank that paid a check on a forged endorsement, nor can it acquire rights through assignment, as subrogation requires superior equities and assignment requires an existing claim.
• Atl. Cement Co., Inc. v. S. Shore Bank
  730 F.2d 831· 1st Cir.· 1984-03-28
  A bank is not liable to a check's payee for dishonoring a check unless it has accepted the instrument, as per UCC 3-409(1).