Wesseling & Brackmann v. Huntington Bancshares Financial Corp.
Michigan Court of Appeals
2018 WL 1176334 (2018)
- Written by Alexander Hager-DeMyer, JD
Facts
Wesseling & Brackmann, PC (Brackmann) (plaintiff) was a banking client of Huntington Bancshares Financial Corporation (Huntington) (defendant). An individual, Jason Walter, retained Brackmann’s legal services for the sale of a drilling rig. Walter sent Brackmann a cashier’s check and specified that a portion of the funds needed to be wired to an outside corporation. Brackmann deposited the check into its bank account with Huntington. Several days later, Brackmann contacted Huntington to determine the status of the check. A Huntington bank teller looked only at the computer display of Brackmann’s account and never saw the physical check that Brackmann had deposited. The teller confirmed that, according to the computer display, the check had cleared and that Brackmann was “good to go.” Under the impression that the check funds were available, Brackmann initiated Walter’s wire transfer. Soon after, Huntington notified Brackmann that Walter’s initial check was dishonored. Huntington had attempted to stop the wire transfer but was able to recover only part of the transferred funds. Brackmann filed suit in Michigan state court against Huntington for the unrecovered funds, claiming that Huntington falsely represented that Walter’s check had cleared. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Huntington, finding that no question of material fact existed that Huntington acted in good faith and engaged in commercially appropriate conduct. Brackmann appealed to the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 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.