S. & V. Corp. v. Miami Beach First National Bank

District Court of Appeal of Florida

S. & V. Corp. v. Miami Beach First National Bank

196 So. 2d 194, 1967 Fla. App. LEXIS 5002

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 7, 1967

DocketNo. 66-429

StatusPublished

This text of 196 So. 2d 194 (S. & V. Corp. v. Miami Beach First National Bank) 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

S. & V. Corp. v. Miami Beach First National Bank, 196 So. 2d 194, 1967 Fla. App. LEXIS 5002 (Fla. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, plaintiff in the trial court, filed a complaint against the appellee-bank, seeking to recover corporate funds deposited in the bank which had been misappropriated by its president. The facts were not in dispute and both parties moved for a summary judgment. A summary final judgment was rendered in favor of the bank and this appeal ensued. We affirm.

On opening the bank account, the corporation caused a resolution with very broad powers ¹ to be served upon the bank, authorizing solely its president to sign the checks of the corporation. There was no contention that the bank was guilty of fraud, collusion, or any active negligence in the honoring of the checks drawn by the corporation’s president and, in the absence of such, a banking institution generally is not liable to a corporation for converted funds drawn from such depository upon the checks of the corporation, signed by a duly authorized officer pursuant to a corporate resolution on file with the bank. See: Gate City Bldg. & Loan Ass’n. v. National Bank of Commerce, 126 Mo. 82, 27 S.W. 633; McCullam v. Third National Bank, 209 Mo.App. 266, 237 S.W. 1051; Griffin v. National Bank of Commerce in St. Louis, S.Ct.Mo.1922, 246 S.W. 180; Klachko v. Lawyers Trust Co., 170 Misc. 134, 9 N.Y.S.2d 309.

Therefore, the final summary judgment here under review is hereby affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, plaintiff in the trial court, filed a complaint against the appellee-bank, seeking to recover corporate funds deposited in the bank which had been misappropriated by its president. The facts were not in dispute and both parties moved for a summary judgment. A summary final judgment was rendered in favor of the bank and this appeal ensued. We affirm.

On opening the bank account, the corporation caused a resolution with very broad powers ¹ to be served upon the bank, authorizing solely its president to sign the checks of the corporation. There was no contention that the bank was guilty of fraud, collusion, or any active negligence in the honoring of the checks drawn by the corporation’s president and, in the absence of such, a banking institution generally is not liable to a corporation for converted funds drawn from such depository upon the checks of the corporation, signed by a duly authorized officer pursuant to a corporate resolution on file with the bank. See: Gate City Bldg. & Loan Ass’n. v. National Bank of Commerce, 126 Mo. 82, 27 S.W. 633; McCullam v. Third National Bank, 209 Mo.App. 266, 237 S.W. 1051; Griffin v. National Bank of Commerce in St. Louis, S.Ct.Mo.1922, 246 S.W. 180; Klachko v. Lawyers Trust Co., 170 Misc. 134, 9 N.Y.S.2d 309.

Therefore, the final summary judgment here under review is hereby affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

196 So. 2d 194, 1967 Fla. App. LEXIS 5002, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/s-v-corp-v-miami-beach-first-national-bank-fladistctapp-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack