Robert A. Sullivan C. Co. v. Wilton Manors Nat. Bk.

290 So. 2d 561, 14 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 745, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 8040
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 15, 1974
Docket73-155
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 290 So. 2d 561 (Robert A. Sullivan C. Co. v. Wilton Manors Nat. Bk.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Robert A. Sullivan C. Co. v. Wilton Manors Nat. Bk., 290 So. 2d 561, 14 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 745, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 8040 (Fla. Ct. App. 1974).

Opinion

290 So.2d 561 (1974)

ROBERT A. SULLIVAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., Appellant,
v.
WILTON MANORS NATIONAL BANK et al., Appellees.

No. 73-155.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

February 15, 1974.

*562 Vincent Meade, Jr., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

J. Patrick Dyal of Rogers, Morris & Ziegler, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee Wilton Manors Nat. Bank.

POULTON, TIMOTHY P., Associate Judge.

This is an appeal from a summary final judgment in favor of the bank. The bank had been sued by appellant upon the theory that the bank had allowed a collection of a check payable to the appellant upon a forged endorsement. Based upon Florida Statute 673.3-419(3) F.S.A. and the ruling in Messeroff v. Kantor, Fla.App. 1972, 261 So.2d 553, the trial court entered its judgment.

As we read that statute, it acts to eliminate liability when it might otherwise exist. Hence, it was necessary upon motion for summary judgment for the bank to file appropriate proofs that it had (in the language of the statute) "... in good faith and in accordance with the reasonable commercial standards applicable to the business of such representative dealt with an instrument or its proceeds on behalf of one who was not the true owner... ." The affidavit of the bank's employee that it paid the forged check "in the usual course of business" was in our view insufficient.

Reversed and remanded.

WALDEN and CROSS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Larkin Gen. Hosp. v. Bank of Fla.
464 So. 2d 635 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Ickes v. Bache Halsey Stuart Shields, Inc.
650 P.2d 1282 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, 1982)
Travelers Ins. Co. v. Jefferson Nat. Bank
404 So. 2d 1131 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Jackson Vitrified v. People's Am.
388 So. 2d 1059 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
Siegel Trading Co., Inc. v. Coral Ridge National Bank
328 So. 2d 476 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1976)
Tubin v. Rabin
389 F. Supp. 787 (N.D. Texas, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
290 So. 2d 561, 14 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 745, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 8040, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-a-sullivan-c-co-v-wilton-manors-nat-bk-fladistctapp-1974.