Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...CAMPBELL, Judge. Appellant, Dennis L. Koger, appeals the order dismissing his second amended complaint with prejudice. He raises two points on appeal. The first point concerns whether an individual corporate stockholder has a cause of action against a bank under section 674.402, Florida Statutes (1981), which tracks the language of section 4-402, Uniform Commercial Code (1977), for damages that result from actions between the bank and its corporate customer of which the individual is a stockholder....

...We conclude that our disposition of the first point raised is also dispositive of the second point. Any tort by the appellee bank against the appellant stockholder would necessarily arise out of the bank-customer relationship. That relationship, in turn, is the subject of section 674.402....

...The surety sued KKCI and its shareholders who had personally agreed to indemnify the surety in the event it was required to pay a claim against KKCI. Appellant further alleges that the surety obtained a judgment against him in the approximate amount of $280,000 as a result of appellee's actions. Section 674.402 provides: A payor bank is liable to its customer for damages proximately caused by the wrongful dishonor of an item....

...secution of the customer or other consequential damages. Whether any consequential damages are proximately caused by the wrongful dishonor is a question of fact to be determined in each case. We choose to adhere to the more literal interpretation of section 674.402, which follows the interpretation given to section 4-402 in Kesner v....

...In the instant case, appellant was not the proper party to bring an action against appellee. The named customer of the bank was the corporation KKCI. Thus, according to the above authorities, KKCI would have been the only party entitled to institute a cause of action against appellee under the provisions of section 674.402....

...App.3d 949, 123 Cal. Rptr. 848 (1975), for the proposition that individual members of a business entity, that is the customer of a bank, are entitled to obtain relief under section 4-402. Although the language of section 4-402 is identical to that of section 674.402, we choose to disagree with the liberal interpretation given it by the California courts....

...here is any theory or principle of law in the record which would support the ruling."); see also Carraway v. Armour & Co., 156 So.2d 494 (Fla.1963); Lowery v. State, 766 So.2d 417 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). JTM has failed to state a claim for relief under section 674.402, Florida Statutes (1993) because that statute does not apply to cashier's checks. Section 674.402(2) provides that a bank is liable for wrongful dishonor of an item drawn on the customer's account....

...(1993) ("A cashier's check ... purchased by a customer whose account is debited in payment for the check is not a check drawn on the customer's account within the meaning of subsection (a)...."). Thus, JTM has failed to state a claim for relief under section 674.402 because it does not apply to cashier's checks....

..."); Meckler v. Highland Falls Sav. & Loan Ass'n., 64 Misc.2d 407, 314 N.Y.S.2d 681 (Sup.Ct.1970) (holding that once a remitter delivers the cashier's check to the payee, the purchaser/remitter is no longer a party to that check). AFFIRMED. NOTES [1] Section 674.402(2) provides: A payor bank is liable to its customer for damages proximately caused by the wrongful dishonor of an item.......

damages for Wrongful Dishonor, pursuant to F.S. 674.-402, Interference with Advantageous Business Relationship

...THIS CAUSE came before the Court on April 11, 1991 on remand from the United States District Court. The district court remanded the case for a determination and recommendation as to the damages awarded the Trustee (Plaintiff) for the Defendant’s First American Bank & Trust Company (FABT) violation of Florida Statutes §§ 674.402 and 673.407 and acts of common law fraud....

...As a result, the instrument should be enforced according to its original provisions as spelled out in the oral banking agreement and the October 29, 1985 letter; 3. FABT wrongfully dishonored the Debtor’s checks, in violation of Florida Statutes § 674.402, ruining the Debtor’s business reputation and forcing the Debtor into bankruptcy; and 4....

...r findings on *914 the amount of damages owed Plaintiff, both compensatory and punitive. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Under Florida law, a “payor bank is liable to its customer for damages proximately caused by the wrongful dishonor of an item.” Fla.Stat. § 674.402....

...Assuming the value of intangible assets is 0, VI = $296,435 — $144,276 + $20,590 + 0 = $172,749. Therefore, actual damages = $172,749 — ($299,-459.00) = $472,208.00. The second issue before the Court is whether the Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages. Many courts analyzing U.C.C. 4-402, which Florida Statute § 674.402 codifies, have held that a Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages where the wrongful dishonor of checks is morally culpable, vio-lative of public policy, or motivated by malice....

...l ... that had no viability as a separate and distinct entity”). Thus, if we deem the collateral as assets of Vlock and the Zahns, inequity could result since Vlock and the Zahns might not have a cause of action against FABT under Florida Statutes § 674.402, and consequently, might not be able to collect the $95,000 they lost when the Bank took the collateral for application to the loan....

STONE, Judge. We reverse, in part, a final summary judgment entered in favor of the defendant bank on that portion of Appellant’s claim founded on a theory of wrongful dishonor under section 674.402(2), Florida Statutes....