Impulse Trading, Inc. v. Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.

907 F. Supp. 1284 (1995)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Impulse Trading, Inc. v. Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.

United States District Court for the District of Minnesota
907 F. Supp. 1284 (1995)

Facts

Marc Stipakov owned Impulse Trading, Inc. (Impulse) (plaintiff) and was Impulse’s only employee. Stipakov banked with Norwest Bank of Minnesota, N.A. (Norwest) (defendant). Impulse started doing business with companies in Russia. Because Russian rubles were difficult to convert to dollars, Impulse arranged for payment in Indian rupees. Stipakov tried to open an account at the State Bank of India (SBOI); however, SBOI informed Stipakov that he could not open an individual account there. Accordingly, Stipakov called Norwest to discuss how he could facilitate his transactions. Norwest informed Stipakov that it had an account with SBOI and agreed to accept the rupees in said account, exchange the rupees for dollars, and credit the funds to Stipakov’s Norwest account. A couple of funds transfers occurred in this manner without any problems. Problems subsequently arose involving a payment order that SBOI received from a Russian bank on November 21, 1991, for approximately 6,000,000 rupees. On December 19, 1991, SBOI deposited the rupees in Norwest’s SBOI account. On December 28, 1991, SBOI learned from another office that the deposit must be reversed because both the Foreign Exchange Regulations of India and the Soviet-Indian Trade and Payment Agreement prohibit the transfer of nonconvertible rupees to accounts held by firms and banks outside of India and Russia. SBOI did not immediately reverse the deposit. Consequently, Norwest exchanged the rupees and credited $231,929.12 to Stipakov’s account. Thereafter, SBOI reversed the deposit. In turn, Norwest debited the $231,929.12 from Stipakov’s account plus interest. Impulse sued Norwest for violating Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) Article 4A, as well as for the common-law claims of wrongful setoff, conversion, and negligence.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Williams, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 736,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 736,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 736,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership