Legal Opinion · Dissent
Schering-Plough Healthcare Products, Inc. v. Nbd Bank, N.A., N/k/a Nbd Bank, and Nbd Bank Dearborn, N.A.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided October 25, 1996No. 95-1781Published
1DissentMatia, District Judge
The majority holds that the transactions under review in this ease, NBD’s alleged promises to either certify or issue cashier’s checks for checks presented to it by Scher-ing-Plough, constitute financial accommodations within the meaning of the Michigan Statute of Frauds, Mich. Comp. Laws § 566.182(2) (as amended January 1, 1998). Because I am neither comfortable with the ground on which the majority opinion is built, nor confident in the ultimate conclusion it reaches, I dissent.
The majority reasons first that degree of risk is the determining factor in understanding which transactions, in…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States v. Larry BrownCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
- Sheila Arbour, Personal Representative of the Estate of Victor Arbour v. Eugene JenkinsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
- In Re Sun Runner Marine, Inc., D/B/A Sun Runner Yachts, Debtor. Transamerica Commercial Finance Corporation v. Citibank, N.A.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- In Re Placid Oil Co.United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · 1987
- In Re Thomas Hamilton Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1992
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.