Santander Bank, N.A. v. Durham Commercial Capital Corp.
United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
88 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d 838 (2016)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Santander Bank, N.A. (Santander) (plaintiff) was a client of the Connolly, Geaney, Ablitt, & Willard, P.C. (CGAW) law firm. CGAW assigned Santander’s account receivable to Durham Commercial Capital Corporation (Durham) for collection. Durham duly notified Santander of the assignment and of Santander’s legal obligation to henceforth make account payments exclusively to Durham. Santander received Durham’s notice but did not comply with Durham’s instructions to acknowledge receipt of the notice and acceptance of the notice’s terms. Thereafter, Santander continued to pay off its CGAW account by making payments directly to CGAW. Minimal but far from overwhelming evidence suggested that Durham was aware of these ongoing payments. After CGAW declared bankruptcy, Santander sued for a federal district-court declaratory judgment that Santander had no obligation to pay Durham sums that Santander had already paid CGAW. Santander argued that (1) the confidentiality clause of CGAW’s legal-services agreement prevented CGAW from assigning Santander’s account, (2) the assignment was void as against public policy, (3) Durham’s assignment notice was ambiguous as to the need for Santander’s acceptance and therefore ineffective, (4) Durham’s awareness of Santander’s continued payments to CGAW waived any Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) § 9-406 claim, and (5) Santander was entitled to the defense of recoupment. Both Santander and Durham moved for partial summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Saylor, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 807,000 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.