Banco de la Provincia v. BayBank Boston N.A.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
985 F. Supp. 364 (1997)
- Written by Samantha Arena, JD
Facts
In January 1995, Banco de la Provincia de Buenos Aires (BPBA) (plaintiff) granted a $250,000 loan to Banco Feigin S.A. (BF), which was disbursed into Banco Feigin’s account at BPBA. Two months later, the Central Bank of Argentina (Central Bank) began an Argentine federal intervention to determine Banco Feigin’s solvency. As a result, Central Bank suspended Banco Feigin’s operations. BPBA responded by placing a freeze on Banco Feigin’s account, which contained approximately $245,000 of the loan proceeds. The intervention provided BPBA a statutory right to use the funds to “set off,” at any time, the money Banco Feigin owed to BPBA. On March 24, BPBA received a wire-transfer request from Banco Feigin to transfer the $245,000 from its BPBA account to its account at BayBank Boston, N.A. (BayBank) (defendant). BPBA did not accept the request due to the freeze on the account and BPBA’s right to set off the funds. On April 19, BPBA exercised its statutory right to set off, seizing the remaining $245,000 from Banco Feigin’s account. After BayBank threatened legal action, BPBA brought suit against BayBank, seeking a declaratory judgment that BPBA’s right to set off the funds in Banco Feigin’s account was superior to any right BayBank had to the funds. BayBank counterclaimed for $245,000, arguing that BPBA had converted BayBank’s money by declining the wire-transfer request and setting off the funds, because title transferred to BayBank once BPBA received the request. BPBA moved for summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Ward, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.