2021 Colorado Code
Title 15 - Probate, Trusts, and Fiduciaries
Article 1 - Fiduciary
Part 1 - General Provisions
§ 15-1-107. Check Drawn by Fiduciary Payable to Third Person, Effect
If a check or other bill of exchange is drawn by a fiduciary as such or in the name of his principal by a fiduciary empowered to draw such instrument in the name of his principal, the payee is not bound to inquire whether the fiduciary is committing a breach of his obligations as fiduciary in drawing or delivering the instrument and is not chargeable with notice that the fiduciary is committing a breach of his obligation as fiduciary unless he takes the instrument with actual knowledge of such breach or with knowledge of such facts that his action in taking the instrument amounts to bad faith. If, however, such instrument is payable to a personal creditor of the fiduciary and delivered to the creditor in payment of or as security for a personal debt of the fiduciary to the actual knowledge of the creditor or is drawn and delivered in any transaction known by the payee to be for the personal benefit of the fiduciary, the creditor or other payee is liable to the principal if the fiduciary in fact commits a breach of his obligation as fiduciary in drawing or delivering the instrument.
History. Source: L. 23: P. 175, § 5. CSA: C. 67, § 5. CRS 53: § 57-1-5. C.R.S. 1963: § 57-1-4. History. Source: L. 23: P. 175, § 5. CSA: C. 67, § 5. CRS 53: § 57-1-5. C.R.S. 1963: § 57-1-4.
ANNOTATION
The Uniform Fiduciaries Act relaxes some of the harsher rules which require of a bank and of individuals the highest degree of vigilance in the detection of a fiduciary's wrongdoing. Wysowatcky v. Denver-Willys, Inc., 131 Colo. 266 , 281 P.2d 165 (1955).
Where an instrument is good on its face, there is no apparent reason for inquiry; it remains good until shown to have been taken in “bad faith” and the burden of proving that is on the plaintiff. Wysowatcky v. Denver-Willys, Inc., 131 Colo. 266 , 281 P.2d 165 (1955).
The loss for breach of a fiduciary obligation should fall on the party directly responsible for the faithless agent and not on one who was a mere conduit to transmit the fund. Wysowatcky v. Denver-Willys, Inc., 131 Colo. 266 , 281 P.2d 165 (1955); Commercial Sav. Bank v. Baum, 137 Colo. 538 , 327 P.2d 743 (1958).
