Shopping Bag

0 item(s) in cart/ total: $0    view cart
Free Instant Delivery  |  No Sales Tax
Home > Case Law > Contracts  >  Banks Must Use Due Care
Banks Must Use Due Care
Banks Must Use Due Care Cartoons

Banks Must Use Due Care

Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. of America v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A. A bank or other institution that receives a check for deposit has a duty to exercise due care to make sure that the depositor is the intended recipient of the funds. Subrogate.
Your Price: $10.00

Select Usage (details) :

Related Cartoons

Price Setting
Price Setting
Casserlie v. Shell Oil Co.; claim for bad faith price setting; a price in an open price contract is set in good faith if it is commercially reasonable and nondiscriminatory; disparate pricing between jobbers and dealers is not evidence of discrimination
Premises Liability
Premises Liability
Flippo v. Mode O'Day Frock Shops of Hollywood; implied warranty of merchantability; defect that attaches itself to product is not product defect or breach of warranty.
Right to Walk Away
Right to Walk Away
United Rentals, Inc. v. RAM Holdings, Inc.; When the examination of extrinsic evidence does not lead to an obvious, objectively reasonable conclusion, the court may apply the forthright negotiator principle.
Doctrine of Impossibility
Doctrine of Impossibility
YPI 180 N. LaSalle Owner, LLC v. 180 N. LaSalle II, LLC; the doctrine of impossibility of performance excuses performance if objectively impossible due to destruction of the subject matter of the contract or by operation of law.
Letters of Intent
Letters of Intent
Empro Manufacturing Co., Inc. v. Ball-Co Manufacturing, Inc.; an agreement that is made subject to a later agreement is not sufficiently definite to be a binding contract.
Detrimental Reliance
Detrimental Reliance
Frank Dixon v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.; promissory estoppel will be applied when the promisor makes a promise that the promisee reasonably and foreseeably relies on to his or her detriment.
Moral Obligation is not Consideration
Moral Obligation is not Consideration
Harrington v. Taylor; A humanitarian act performed voluntarily is not sufficient consideration for a promise.
Puffery is not Fraud
Puffery is not Fraud
Speakers of Sports v. ProServ; A promise that is intended as aspirational, and that a reasonable person in the position of the promisee would understand as an expression of hope, is not an enforceable commitment.
Guardianship
Guardianship
Kenai Chrysler Center, Inc. v. Denison; Guardianship proceedings are treated as providing public notice of the ward's incapacity, even though the other party to a particular transaction may have no knowledge or reason to know of the guardianship.
Repudiate a Contract
Repudiate a Contract
Rocheux Int'l of N.J. v. U.S. Merchants Fin. Group; whether one party repudiated a contract or provided adequate assurance of future performance are questions of fact that must be decided by the trier of fact based on commercial standards.
Clickwrap Agreement
Clickwrap Agreement
Hancock v. American Telephone & Telegraph, Inc.; When customers are given notice of the terms and conditions of a contract via a clickwrap agreement and must affirmatively manifest assent by clicking I Agree, the clickwrap agreements is valid.
Moral Obligation from Material Benefit
Moral Obligation from Material Benefit
Webb v. McGowin; the law recognizes a distinction between a promisor's moral obligation that results from a feeling of ethical obligation and one that results from conferring a material benefit to the promisor.