In Lor-Mar/Toto v.Constitution Bank,where checks were forged on a company account with a signature that looked like the stamped signature used by Lor-Mar,the court held that the bank was not liable for the checks because the signature looked like the official one.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The statement is incorrect. In Lor-Mar/Toto v. Constitution Bank, the court held that the bank was liable for the forged checks because the signature was not a proper authentication of the drawer's identity. The bank should have been more careful in verifying the authenticity of the signature.

In Lor-Mar/Toto V