Law Commons^™

Nondeposit Deposits And The Future Of Bank Regulation, Jonathan R. Macey, Geoffrey P. Miller

Michigan Law Review

We argue in this paper that the nation has already entered with a vengeance into the era of nondeposit deposit banking. The traditional bank deposit against which reserves must be held and deposit insurance paid is suffering encroachment from a wide variety of competitive instruments and arrangements, all of which, to one degree or another - often to a substantial degree - serve a function economically similar to that of the checking account at a depository institution.

The legal system may respond to these developments by attempting to bring nondeposit deposits under regulation, as it has done with other banking …

Allocation Of Loss Due To Fraudulent Wholesale Wire Transfers: Is There A Negligence Action Against A Beneficiary's Bank After Article 4a Of The Uniform Commercial Code?, Robert M. Lewis

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that where a bank reasonably should have known of a fraud but still pays out a wire transfer to an unauthorized recipient, common law negligence should provide a basis for recovery despite the absence of an explicit Code provision imposing liability on the bank. Part I examines the UCC's language itself and analyzes possible cases, under 4A and under articles 3 and 4 by analogy, and discusses the applicability of these other parts of the UCC to wire transfers. Part II examines how extra-Code regulatory systems and the common law would determine wire transfer liability. Part II …

The Liability Of Officers And Directors Under The Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery And Enforcement Act Of 1989, Jon Shepherd

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that FIRREA's gross negligence standard implements a minimum federal requirement that preempts state law only to the extent state law provides a more relaxed criterion. Part I examines the plain meaning of the statute and concludes that FIRREA preempts state law only to the extent the state law standard of care is lower than gross negligence. Part II scrutinizes FIRREA's legislative history and demonstrates that Congress did not intend to prevent states from imposing more stringent standards of liability. Part III analyzes the policies behind FIRREA and argues that the statute's purposes are best served by allowing …