Bayview Loan Servicing LLC v. Bias

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Washington
DecidedJanuary 28, 2022
Docket2:20-cv-01822
StatusUnknown

This text of Bayview Loan Servicing LLC v. Bias (Bayview Loan Servicing LLC v. Bias) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bayview Loan Servicing LLC v. Bias, (W.D. Wash. 2022).

Opinion

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 6 7 BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Cause No. C20-1822RSL 8 Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant, ORDER GRANTING IN 9 v. PART BIAS’ MOTION TO 10 REOPEN EUNICE BIAS, 11 Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff. 12 13 This matter comes before the Court on “Counter-Claim Plaintiff Bias[‘] Motion to 14 15 Reopen Case, to Enforce Settlement Agreement & Impose Sanctions.” Dkt. #19. Having 16 reviewed the parties’ submissions, the Court finds as follows: 17 1. The request for an order compelling payment of the settlement proceeds is DENIED as 18 19 moot. The settlement amount has been paid. 20 2. The request for an order compelling the reissuance of the checks for reimbursement of 21 escrow funds is GRANTED. The Uniform Commercial Code, as adopted in Washington, clearly 22 23 provides that if there is an ambiguity as to whether a check is made out to two persons 24 alternatively or together, it shall be payable to whichever payee possesses the instrument. RCW 25 62A.3-110(d). Depository banks may be liable for conversion if they incorrectly pay the 26 27 instrument with the endorsement of only a single payee, however, and the Assistant Branch 28 1 Manager at Bias’ branch could not confirm that Bank of America would negotiate the check 2 with only her signature: if the check were returned, Bias would have to pay additional fees and 3 charges. See J.R. Simplot, Inc. v. Knight, 139 Wn. 2d 534 (1999); Dkt. #24 at ¶ 3. Bayview 4 5 offers no justification for requiring Bias to run that risk. It shall reissue the escrow 6 reimbursement checks. 7 3. Bias’ request for an award of attorney’s fees is DENIED. 8 9 10 For all of the foregoing reasons, the motion to reopen, enforce the settlement, and award 11 attorney’s fees is GRANTED in part. Bias shall return the escrow reimbursement checks to 12 13 Bayview’s counsel or file a declaration stating that the checks have been destroyed. Bayview 14 shall, within seven days of receipt of the checks or the filing of the declaration, reissue the 15 checks with “Eunice Bias,” and only “Eunice Bias,” as the designated payee. 16 17 18 Dated this 28th day of January, 2022. 19 20 21 22 Robert S. Lasnik United States District Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

J.R. Simplot, Inc. v. Knight
139 Wash. 2d 534 (Washington Supreme Court, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Bayview Loan Servicing LLC v. Bias, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bayview-loan-servicing-llc-v-bias-wawd-2022.