## Facts

- Jeff E. Messing, a noncustomer of Bank of America, sought to cash a $976 check drawn on a Bank of America customer’s account.
- A teller verified the drawer’s account had sufficient funds, printed processing information on the back of the check, and Messing endorsed it.
- Messing presented a driver’s license and a major credit card as identification; the teller removed $976 from her cash drawer.
- Bank of America had a written policy requiring noncustomers cashing checks drawn on the bank to provide an inkless thumbprint on the instrument.
- Messing refused to provide a thumbprint, asserting he had already provided adequate identification and that a thumbprint would only aid later identification.
- The teller withheld the cash and the transaction was not completed.
- Messing filed an action for declaratory relief alleging the thumbprint policy violated the Maryland UCC and his privacy rights.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for Bank of America; the intermediate appellate court affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether a drawee bank dishonors a check under Maryland UCC Article 3 when it refuses to cash an over-the-counter check presented by a noncustomer who declines to provide a thumbprint required by bank policy.
2. Whether a thumbprint requirement constitutes “reasonable identification” such that refusal to pay is excused under Md. Code, Com. Law § 3-502(b)(2)(ii).
3. Whether the thumbprint requirement unlawfully infringes the presenter’s privacy rights so as to support declaratory relief.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of Maryland affirmed summary judgment for Bank of America.
- The court held the bank could refuse to cash the check without dishonoring it because Messing declined to provide “reasonable identification” within the meaning of § 3-502(b)(2)(ii).
- The court held the thumbprint policy, applied uniformly to noncustomers, qualified as a reasonable identification measure.
- The court rejected Messing’s argument that the bank “accepted” the check through preliminary processing steps, because payment was expressly conditioned on providing the thumbprint and cash was never delivered.
- The court rejected the privacy-based challenge in this proceeding, concluding Messing was free to refuse the thumbprint and the bank could then decline to cash the check.

## Legal Principles

- Under Md. Code, Com. Law § 3-502(b)(2)(ii), a bank’s refusal to pay is not a “dishonor” when payment is refused for lack of reasonable identification of the person making presentment.
- “Reasonable identification” under § 3-502(b)(2)(ii) may include identification measures that facilitate later verification in the event of fraud, not only immediate visual identification at the counter.
- A drawee bank does not “accept” an instrument merely by taking preliminary processing steps when payment is conditioned on satisfaction of an identification requirement and cash is withheld upon noncompliance.
- A noncustomer’s refusal to comply with a neutral, uniformly applied identification condition permits the bank to decline payment without violating the UCC’s dishonor rules.

## Conclusion

The court held that a drawee bank in Maryland may require a noncustomer seeking to cash an over-the-counter check to provide a thumbprint as reasonable identification and may refuse payment without dishonoring the check when the noncustomer declines to comply.


Messing v. Bank of Am., N.A., 373 Md. 672, 821 A.2d 22 (Md. 2003)