Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.4402 (2026)

Payor bank; wrongful dishonor; liability to customer; determination of account balance.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE


Act 174 of 1962


440.4402 Payor bank; wrongful dishonor; liability to customer; determination of account balance.

Sec. 4402.

    (1)  Except as otherwise provided in this article, a payor bank wrongfully dishonors an item if it dishonors an item that is properly payable, but a bank may dishonor an item that would create an overdraft unless it has agreed to pay the overdraft.

    (2) A payor bank is liable to its customer for damages proximately caused by the wrongful dishonor of an item. Liability is limited to actual damages proved and may include damages for an arrest or prosecution of the customer or other consequential damages. Whether any consequential damages are proximately caused by the wrongful dishonor is a question of fact to be determined in each case.

    (3) A payor bank's determination of the customer's account balance on which a decision to dishonor for insufficiency of available funds is based may be made at any time between the time the item is received by the payor bank and the time that the payor bank returns the item or gives notice in lieu of return, and no more than 1 determination need be made. If, at the election of the payor bank, a subsequent balance determination is made for the purpose of reevaluating the bank's decision to dishonor the item, the account balance at that time is determinative of whether a dishonor for insufficiency of available funds is wrongful.

History: 1962, Act 174, Eff. Jan. 1, 1964 ;-- Am. 1993, Act 130, Eff. Sept. 30, 1993

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1982–1991 · leading case: Check Reporting Servs., Inc v. Michigan Nat'l Bank-Lansing, 478 N.W.2d 893 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991).
Check Reporting Servs., Inc v. Michigan Nat'l Bank-Lansing, 478 N.W.2d 893 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991). “Crs’ complaint alleged that defendants’ refusal to honor drafts on February 20, 1986, for which there were currently funds on deposit, constituted wrongful dishonor in violation of § 4-402 of the Uniform Commercial Code, MCL 440.4402; MSA 19.4402. *625 The trial court dismissed…”
Hansman v. Imlay City State Bank, 328 N.W.2d 653 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 2× “MCL 440.4402; MSA 19.4402. Therefore, *428 plaintiffs’ complaint stated a cause of action for wrongful dishonor.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.