The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)
|
||||||
|
. . . Ann. § 674.406. . . . Stat: Ann. § 674.406. See EOF No. [125] at 6. . . . Ann.. § 674.406 to include electronic transfers. . . . Ann. § 674.406. . . . Ann. § 674.406. 2. . . .
. . . .§§ 674.406(6) (items), 670.505 (funds transfers). . . . Stat. § 674.406(6) (emphasis supplied); see also Redland Co. v. Bank of Am. . . . Stat. §§ 674.406(6) and 670.505. . . . Stat. § 674.406(1). . . . Stat. § 674.406(6). Similarly, Article 4A initially places the risk of loss on the bank. Fla. . . .
. . . . § 674.406; see also Cheese & Grill, 970 So.2d at 375. . . . Stat. 674.406(3). That argument fails. . . .
. . . Subsection 674.406(1) of the Florida Statutes provides that a statement of account provided by a bank . . . forgery of the maker’s signature — only an unauthorized endorsement on the back of the checks. . § 674.406 . . .
. . . Section 674.406(6), Florida Statutes (2002), states that a customer is precluded from asserting a claim . . .
. . . UCC Article 4 issues Colonial Bank relies upon UCC § 4-406, Florida Statutes § 674.406, for the proposition . . . failed to complain within the short 180-day period provided for in the applicable version of F.S. § 674.406 . . . The statute of limitations defense under F.S. § 674.406(6) on which Colonial Bank relies in seeking summary . . .
. . . of the condition precedent to suit provisions governing bank-customer relations contained in section 674.406 . . .
. . . For example, Cole Taylor contends that under section 674.406, Florida Statutes (1997), Mrs. . . . Without addressing the validity of appellant’s interpretation of section 674.406 or its constructive . . .
. . . Thus, the bank argued, the customer was precluded from recovery under section 674.406(4) Florida Statutes . . . (1991), moved after January 1, 1993, to section 674.406(6) Florida Statutes (1995). . . . Section 674.406(6) provides as did its predecessor: Without regard to care or lack of care of either . . . As mandated by section 674.406, the customer had an obligation to examine bank statements and notify . . .
. . . Thus, the bank argued, the customer was precluded from recovery under section 674.406(4) Florida Statutes . . . Section 674.406 provides in part: (3) If a bank sends or makes available a statement of account or items . . . As mandated by section 674.406, the customer had an obligation to examine bank statements and notify . . .
. . . Sun Bank next argues that Florida Statutes section 674.406 permits a customer to make a claim upon a . . . However, Sun Bank’s argument lacks merit because section 674.406 allows a claim to be made; it does not . . .
. . . A bank customer appeals the dismissal of his complaint against a bank as being barred by Section 674.406 . . . The bank filed a motion to dismiss, claiming that the suit was barred by Section 674.406(4). . . . Section 674.406(4), which is based upon U.C.C. . . . significantly from that used in Section 674.406(4)). . . . Section 674.406 only imposes on bank customers, who are in a better position to detect forgeries than . . .
. . . judgment on the ground that the action was barred by the statutes of limitations set forth in subsections 674.406 . . . Under subsection 674.406(4), a customer has one year within which to discover and report his unauthorized . . . Finally, the statute of limitations in subsection 674.406(4), is inapplicable in this case because the . . . Although Suncoast may not prevail on its affirmative defense of statute of limitations under subsection 674.406 . . .
. . . Florida statute § 674.406, which provides a defense to a bank if a customer fails to discover and report . . . Fla.Stat. § 674.406(3). . . . As the commentary to Fla.Stat. § 674.406 states: Subsection (3). . . .
. . . Flagship Bank of Melbourne, N.A., 402 So.2d 586 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Sections 674.406(1) & 674.-406(4 . . .
. . . . § 674.406(4)]. FINDINGS 1. . . . “The one-year period of limitation in subsection (4) [F.S. § 674.406(4)] is not merely a statute of limitation . . .
. . . Coles’s account, see § 674.401, Fla.Stat. (1983), was the plaintiff’s failure to comply with section 674.406 . . . Under section 674.406(3), however: (3) The preclusion under subsection (2) does not apply if the customer . . . s payment of the checks executed under the power of attorney was or was not negligent under section 674.406 . . . The bank does not invoke § 674.406(4), Fla. Stat. (1983) as a defense. See Space Distribs., Inc. v. . . . (d) Plaintiff is precluded from this action by Florida Statutes § 674.406 due to his failure to review . . . See section 674.406(3), Fla.Stat. (1983); Ossip Harris Ins., Inc. v. . . .
. . . defendant on the ground that the action was barred by the statute of limitations contained in section 674.406 . . . Our holding that the single-signature-when-two-are-required is an “unauthorized” one for 674.406(4) purposes . . . directly contrary to the appellant’s position that, for practical purposes, only forgeries qualify under 674.406 . . . Since the action was commenced beyond the period provided by the thus applicable terms of section 674.406 . . .
. . . DCA 1983) (customer’s negligent failure to promptly reconcile bank statements as required by section 674.406 . . .
. . . I further believe that the facts do not support the Bank’s affirmative defense under section 674.406, . . .
. . . The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of the bank on the authority of section 674.406, Florida . . . At the hearing on the motion for summary judgment, the bank argued that section 674.406(4) requires the . . . sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court correctly applied the one-year limitation of section 674.406 . . . the case law interpreting it, we conclude the legislature intended the one-year limitation of section 674.406 . . . RYDER, C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur. . 674.406 Customer’s duty to discover and report unauthorized signature . . .
. . . Central Plaza Bank will lose the benefit of the defenses guaranteed to the County Bank under section 674.406 . . .
. . . To support the trial court’s judgment, appellee relies on section 674.406, Florida Statutes (1981). . . . of ordinary care on the part of the bank in paying the item(s) as provided under subsection 3 of § 674.406 . . . Contrary to the appellee’s position, section 674.406 does not create an absolute liability on the part . . . 4th Cir.1980) the Louisiana appellate court, applying a statute almost identical to Florida Statute § 674.406 . . . Section 674.406, in relevant part, says: Customer’s duty to discover and report unauthorized signature . . .
. . . defenses, inter alia, that Ossip failed to detect and report the forgeries to Barnett pursuant to Section 674.406 . . . care in paying the items, thereby allowing for assertion of liability by Ossip pursuant to Section 674.406 . . . Resolution of this dispute turns on the provisions of subsections (1) through (3) of Section 674.406, . . . Flagship Bank of Melbourne, N.A., 402 So.2d at 588, and under Section 674.406(2)(b), is therefore precluded . . . Under Section 674.406(3), the burden of proving Barnett’s lack of ordinary care falls squarely on Ossip-Harris . . .
. . . record shows there were material questions of fact as to the Bank’s defenses under sections 673.406 and 674.406 . . . Neal, 3 Burr. 1354, has been complicated somewhat by sections 673.406 and 674.406, Florida Statutes ( . . . Appellee argues that both sections 673.406and 674.406 require an affirmative showing by the Bank that . . . regard to section 673.406 this may be true if the matter proceeds to trial, but with regard to section 674.406 . . . Section 674.406, Florida Statutes (1977), provides in part: (1) When a bank sends to its customer a statement . . .
. . . Section 674.406(1), Florida Statutes (1979), imposes the following duties upon a bank customer: When . . . failed to exercise reasonable care by promptly examining its cancelled checks as required by section 674.406 . . . Section 674.406(2) defines the effect of the failure of the customer to comply with subsection (1): If . . . Section 674.406(4) provides that: Without regard to care or lack of care of either the customer or the . . . Thus, under section 674.406(4), Tropic Air is not precluded from asserting unauthorized signatures on . . .
. . . MARTIN; and that pursuant to the preclusionary rules set forth in Section 674.406 of the Florida Statutes . . . the trial judge that Florida Federal could not avail itself of the defense it asserted under section 674.406 . . . Florida Federal therefore cannot rely upon section 674.406 in defense of Martin’s claim. . . .