Gentner and Company, Inc. v. Wells Fargo Bank

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 1081·76 Cal. App. 4th 1165·90 Cal. Rptr. 2d 904·99 Daily Journal DAR 12477·40 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 38
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 9, 1999B128574California7,468 words

Opinion

Opinion

Curry, J.

This case presents the issue of whether a bank that erroneously accepts an endorsed check on which a stop payment order has been placed, and issues a cashier’s check to the payee in the same amount, can thereafter refuse to pay the cashier’s check. We conclude that as between the bank and a payee who acts in good faith, the Commercial Code clearly requires the bank to suffer the loss occasioned by its error in accepting or paying a check covered by a stop payment order, and that the result is the same whether the check is paid in cash or exchanged for a cashier’s check.

Factual and Procedural Background

With one notable exception, the parties do not dispute the essential facts. L&M Home Health Corporation (L&M) had a checking account with appellant Wells Fargo Bank. L&M engaged respondent Centner and Company, Inc. (Centner) to provide consulting services, and paid Centner for services rendered with a check drawn on its Wells Fargo account in the amount of $60,000, dated September 23, 1996. Eleven days later, on October 4, 1996, L&M orally instructed Wells Fargo to stop payment on the check. Eleven days after that, on October 15, 1996, Centner presented the L&M check to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.