Messeroff v. Kantor, 71--989
| Decision Date | 02 May 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 71--989,71--989 |
| Parties | 10 UCC Rep.Serv. 826 Alvin J. MESSEROFF and Ann J. Messeroff, each individually, and as the father and mother of and next friend of William Couglas Messeroff, a minor, and Marjorie Messeroff, a minor, Appellants, v. Irving KANTOR et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Berryhill, Avery, Schwenke & Williams, Ft. Lauderdale, and Varon & Stahl, Hollywood, for appellants.
Bradford, Williams, McKay, Kimbrell, Hamann & Jennings, L. Kenneth Barnett, Miami, and Straughn & Sharit, Winter Haven, for appellees.
Before PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ., and GROSSMAN, RHEA P., Associate Judge.
The appellants filed a complaint against all the appellees. The trial judge granted summary judgments in favor of Irving Kantor, Harold Kantor, State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. and Holyoke Mutual Fire Insurance Company. The appellants then filed an amended complaint against the two appellees, Exchange National Bank of Winter Haven, Florida and the Jefferson National Bank of Miami Beach. The trial judge granted a summary judgment in favor of the appellees, Exchange National Bank of Winter Haven, Florida and Jefferson National Bank of Miami Beach, Florida from which the appellants have filed this appeal.
The appellants were co-payees of a draft representing settlement proceeds in a personal injury claim. The drafts in question were drawn in such a fashion that they were Payable through the Exchange National Bank of Winter Haven, Florida. The appellants' previous attorney, who was also the co-payee of the drafts, unauthorizedly endorsed the appellants' signatures on the drafts in question and deposited them in his trust account at the Jefferson National Bank of Miami Beach via the Exchange National Bank of Winter Haven, Florida; and the ultimate Drawees of the drafts being the insurance companies in question.
It is well settled both under precode and post-code law that an unauthorized endorsement does not operate to bar an action by a payee against the drawee bank who ultimately pays the draft. However, in our particular factual situation, the drawee, as indicated by the present state of the record, was the insurance company.
The trial court entered a summary final judgment in favor of the both appellee banks on the basis that § 673.3--419(3), Fla.Stat., F.S.A., makes it clear that the banks which operate as intermediary or collecting banks shall bear no...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mandelbaum v. P & D Printing Corp.
...FDIC v. Marine Nat'l Bank of Jacksonville, 303 F.Supp. 401 (D.Fla.1969)). The judge in the present case relied on Messeroff v. Kantor, 261 So.2d 553 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1972), which held that the collecting banks were relieved of liability by U.C.C. § 3-419(3). Messeroff, supra, 261 So.2d at 5......
-
Morris v. Ohio Cas. Ins. Co.
...which presentment is properly made to the drawee." (Emphasis added.) Comment to UCC 3-120, R.C. 1303.19. See, also, Messeroff v. Kantor (Fla.App.1972), 261 So.2d 553. Therefore, appellant's bank was not the drawee of the drafts, but merely a conduit that presented the drafts to appellant fo......
-
Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Fennessey
...bank through which the draft is payable. See, e.g., Harper v. K & W Trucking Co., 725 P.2d 1066, 1068 (Alaska 1986); Messeroff v. Kantor, 261 So.2d 553, 555 (Fla.1972); Manufacturers Nat. Bank of Detroit v. Sutherland, 16 Mich.App. 286, 290, 167 N.W.2d 894 (1969); 238 East 34th Street Corp.......
-
Continental Bank v. Wa-Ho Truck Brokerage
...533 F.2d 255 (5th Cir. 1976) and Cooper v. Union Bank, 9 Cal.3d 371, 107 Cal.Rptr. 1, 507 P.2d 609 (1973). See also Messeroff v. Kantor, 261 So.2d 553 (Fla.App.1972).2 The plaintiffs do not contend that the Bank acted in bad faith and therefore we need concern ourselves only with the reason......