Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Chemical Bank

New York Court of Appeals

Decided November 18, 1982Published

1Concurrence

Chief Judge Cooke,

(concurring). To permit a drawee bank to avoid liability for paying a check on a forged indorsement by asserting the “fictitious payee” rule, when the bank itself may have acted negligently in paying the check, is a harsh result. Inasmuch as section 3-405 of the Uniform Commercial Code does not include any requirement that a bank act with ordinary care, however, I am constrained to concur in the majority’s result.

As a general rule, a forged indorsement is wholly inoperative and ineffective to negotiate an instrument (see Uni-, form Commercial Code, § 3-404, subd [11).…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Underpinning & Foundation Constructors, Inc. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.New York Court of Appeals · 1979
  2. Riegert Apartments Corp. v. Planning BoardNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
  3. Holt v. County of TiogaNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
  4. In re Carmelo E.New York Court of Appeals · 1982
  5. Titan Air Conditioning Corp. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N. A.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API