Legal Opinion

Hanover Insurance v. M & T Bank

District Court, E.D. Virginia

Decided May 5, 2011No. Case 1:11cv11PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

T.S. ELLIS, III, District Judge.

At issue in this diversity action is whether plaintiff surety’s breach of contract claim against defendant bank is barred by Va.Code § 8.4-406(f) because the surety failed to notify the bank of improper withdrawals from a guardianship account within one year. For the reasons that follow, a surety with limited signatory authority over a guardianship account is not a “customer” within the meaning of the Code, and hence the Code’s statutory notice provision does not apply. Accordingly, the motion to dismiss must be denied.

I. 1

Plaintiff, Hanover…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
  4. Saint Paul Mercury Indemnity Co. v. Red Cab Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
  5. Velasco v. Government of IndonesiaCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2004

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. SFS Check, LLC v. First Bank of DelawareCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2014
  2. Ads Associates Group, Inc. v. Oritani Savings Bank (069987)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2014
  3. Ads Associates Group, Inc. v. Oritani Savings Bank (069987)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API