Bank of America NT & SA v. David W. Hubert, P.C.
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the Court
Sweeney, J. —
This appeal follows Seafirst Bank’s successful action to recover from its customer funds lost as the result of a check-kiting scheme. The customer argues that Seafirst was required to credit the disputed funds to the customer’s account because the payor bank missed the “midnight deadline” to dishonor the check. We agree and reverse and remand for entry of judgment in favor of the customer.
FACTS
Attorney David W. Hubert (Mr. Hubert) incorporated as David W. Hubert, P.C. (Hubert P.C.).1 He operates Law Clinic Northwest in Spokane. In the same building, paralegal Gail Williams ran…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Williams v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Hertog v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1999
- HERTOG, EX REL., SAH v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1999
- Hizey v. CarpenterWashington Supreme Court · 1992
- Trask v. ButlerWashington Supreme Court · 1994
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Loeffelholz v. Citizens for Leaders With Ethics & Accountability NowCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2004
- BANK OF AMERICA NT & SA v. HubertWashington Supreme Court · 2004
- Bank of America NT & SA v. David W. Hubert, P.C.Washington Supreme Court · 2004
- Bank of America Nt & Sa v. Hubert, PcCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2003
- Loeffelholz v. CITIZENS FOR LEADERSCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2004
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.