EMI v. Comerica: Court Finds Commercially Reasonable Security — Bank Loses Motion for Summary Judgment

David Navetta provides a legal analysis of the court’s denial of the bank’s motion for summary judgment in the case.

An odd result — we know.

We previously reported on the lawsuit filed by Experi-Metal, Inc. (“EMI”) and the subsequent motion for summary judgment (and briefs) filed by Comerica Bank to have the case dismissed. As reported in July, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan has issued a ruling on Comerica’s motion for summary judgment. To make a long story short, the Court denied Comerica’s motion and this case appears headed toward trial (or potentially appeal or settlement). Ironically, in the course of its ruling the Court found that Comerica had utilized commercially reasonable security procedures. However, that ruling had more to do with the language in Comerica’s contracts than an actual substantive analysis of Comerica’s security procedures. In this blogpost, we take a closer look at the Court’s ruling.

Read more on Info Law Group.

About the author: Dissent

Comments are closed.