Beyene v. Irving Trust Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
762 F.2d 4 (1985)
- Written by Steven Pacht, JD
Facts
Dessaleng Beyene and Jean Hanson (collectively, Beyene) (plaintiffs) sold two prefabricated homes to Mohammed Sofan. The homes were to be shipped from the United States to Yemen. Sofan paid for the homes with a letter of credit issued by the Yemen Bank for Reconstruction and Development (YBRD). YBRD designated the Irving Trust Company (Irving) (defendant) as the letter of credit’s confirming bank; Beyene designated the National Bank of Washington (NBW) to be his collecting bank. The letter of credit specified the documents that Beyene would have to submit in order to be paid. These documents included a bill of lading identifying Mohammad Sofan as the person to be notified by the shipping company. Upon the arrival of the homes in Yemen (about which Sofan did not receive prompt notice), NBW sent a bill of lading along with other documents to Irving. Irving notified NBW about several discrepancies in the documents NBW submitted. Most importantly, Irving noted that the bill of lading stated that the recipient to be notified was Mohammad Soran, not Mohammad Sofan. Irving requested but did not receive consent from YBRD to pay the letter of credit despite the discrepancy, and Irving never waived the spelling discrepancy. Irving ultimately refused to pay on the letter of credit, leading Beyene to sue Irving. The district court granted summary judgment to Irving, ruling that the name misspelling was a material discrepancy that justified Irving’s refusal to pay. Beyene appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kearse, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 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.