521 F. App'x 425
6th Cir.2013Background
- Plaintiff Kenneth L. White appeals district court grant of summary judgment in favor of JPMorgan Chase Bank on Rule 17(a) grounds.
- White is president and sole shareholder of Steigmeyer, Inc.; he deposited a $75,000 cashier’s check into Steigmeyer’s account.
- The check was issued to White as payee, but deposited by Steigmeyer, Inc., and the bank honored a stop payment.
- A subsequent October 15, 2007 asset sale produced a $100,000 cashier’s check deposited into Steigmeyer, Inc.’s account.
- Steigmeyer, Inc. dissolved on July 15, 2010; White argues he is entitled to the $75,000 check personally.
- The district court held Steigmeyer, Inc. was the real party in interest and dismissed the action; reconsideration was denied; White appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether White is the real party in interest to enforce the cashier’s check | White (White) | JPMorgan Chase | No; Steigmeyer, Inc. is the real party in interest. |
| Whether Michigan UCC provisions allow enforcement by the holder after negotiation | White is holder by name on the check | Steigmeyer, Inc. became holder after endorsement/deposit | No; once negotiated to Steigmeyer, Inc., White could not enforce. |
| Whether the district court erred in granting summary judgment under Rule 17(a) | There were genuine issues of material fact | No genuine issue; law precludes White’s enforcement | Affirmed; summary judgment proper. |
| Whether reconsideration was properly denied | New successor-in-interest theory could be raised | Argument could have been raised earlier; not proper for reconsideration | Affirmed; denial proper. |
Key Cases Cited
- ACLU of Ohio Found., Inc. v. DeWeese, 633 F.3d 424 (6th Cir. 2011) (standard for de novo review of summary judgment)
- Zurich Ins. Co. v. Logitrans, Inc., 297 F.3d 528 (6th Cir. 2002) (distinguishes Article III standing from Rule 17(a) real party in interest)
- Ceratin Interested Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, England v. Layne, 26 F.3d 39 (6th Cir. 1994) (real party in interest analysis hinges on substantive right to relief)
- Bowles v. Oakman, 225 N.W.613 (Mich. 1929) (holder/right of enforcement upon negotiation)
- Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490 (1975) (standing-related principles in real party in interest discussion)
- Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Flowers, 513 F.3d 546 (6th Cir. 2008) (preserves arguments not properly raised in motion for reconsideration)
- Fassihi v. Sommers, Schwartz, Silver, Schwartz & Tyler, P.C., 309 N.W.2d 645 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981) (corporate entity as separate legal person)