Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf

Citation: Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/D2%2051946-1-II%20Published%20Opinion.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

1,627 chars

State v. Bradshaw, 3 Wn. App. 2d 187, 190 n.1, 414 P.3d 1148 (2018) (quoting former RCW

9.44.020 (1909)). Legislation revising the forgery statute in 1975 removed the particularized list

of categories of items that can be forged. Bradshaw, 3 Wn. App. 2d at 190. However, the “use

of the expression ‘written instrument’ was meant to encompass the full range of items in the

previous statute.” State v. Scoby, 117 Wn.2d 55, 59-60, 810 P.2d 1358 (1991).

6
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 51946-1-II

No Washington case previously has considered the legal efficacy of a bank account

application under the forgery statute. As authority, the State points to several military court

cases holding that checking account applications had legal efficacy under 10 U.S.C. § 905. See

U.S. v. White, 35 M.J. 154, 156 (C.M.A. 1992); U.S. v. Ivey, 32 M.J. 590, 591 (A.C.M.R. 1991);

U.S. v. Sherman, 52 M.J. 856, 859 (C.M.A. 2000).

In general, bank account applications initiate a contractual relationship between the bank

and the depositor that, once accepted by the bank, create rights in and impose obligations on both

parties. Depositors give money to the bank in exchange for the bank’s services. The bank

services the depositor’s account in exchange for fees and the use of the depositor’s funds.

Here, by signing the applications, Smith agreed that his relationship with the bank would

be bound by certain agreements. The trial court admitted the account applications themselves as

evidence. The applications both contained a “Certificate of Authority” which read in part