Experi-Metal, Inc., v. Comerica Bank (docket number: 2:2009cv14890) is a decision by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan in a case of a phishing attack that resulted in unauthorized wire transfers of US$1.9 million through Experi-Metal's online banking accounts. The court held Comerica liable for losses of US$560,000 that could not be recovered from the phishing attack, on the ground that the bank had not acted in good faith when it failed to recognize the transfers as fraudulent.
Attributes | Values |
---|
rdf:type
| |
rdfs:label
| - Experi-Metal v. Comerica (en)
|
rdfs:comment
| - Experi-Metal, Inc., v. Comerica Bank (docket number: 2:2009cv14890) is a decision by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan in a case of a phishing attack that resulted in unauthorized wire transfers of US$1.9 million through Experi-Metal's online banking accounts. The court held Comerica liable for losses of US$560,000 that could not be recovered from the phishing attack, on the ground that the bank had not acted in good faith when it failed to recognize the transfers as fraudulent. (en)
|
name
| - Experi-Metal v. Comerica Bank (en)
|
dcterms:subject
| |
Wikipage page ID
| |
Wikipage revision ID
| |
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
| |
sameAs
| |
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
citations
| - Docket Number: 2:2009cv14890 (en)
|
court
| - United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (en)
|
date
| |
full name
| - Experi-Metal, Inc., v. Comerica Bank (en)
|
keywords
| |
reason
| - Citing court documents not RS. See WP:RS (en)
|
has abstract
| - Experi-Metal, Inc., v. Comerica Bank (docket number: 2:2009cv14890) is a decision by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan in a case of a phishing attack that resulted in unauthorized wire transfers of US$1.9 million through Experi-Metal's online banking accounts. The court held Comerica liable for losses of US$560,000 that could not be recovered from the phishing attack, on the ground that the bank had not acted in good faith when it failed to recognize the transfers as fraudulent. (en)
|
date decided
| |
judge
| - Hon. Patrick J. Duggan (en)
|
opinions
| - "Good faith" in accepting orders for online bank transfers requires a bank to meet reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing. Failure to meet those standards may render the transactions void. (en)
|
prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
page length (characters) of wiki page
| |
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
of | |
is Wikipage redirect
of | |
is foaf:primaryTopic
of | |