Cumis Insurance Society, Inc. v. Girard Bank

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the agreement between the bank and the commercial customer relating to forged checks and the bank’s limited liability contained conflicting interpretations which indicated that the bank failed to establish immunity from liability under Pennsylvania law
• Exculpatory clause valid only if it does not contravene any policy of law
• similarly noting that, under Pennsylvania law, a bank may not debit account based on forged signature, unless it is shown that customer’s negligence contributed to the forgery
• applying Pennsylvania law, ambiguity in exculpatory agreement resolved against bank

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).