Just prior to undergoing knee surgery, Gregory Levine came into possession of a check in the amount of $253,023.04, made out to himself as payee, representing his share of the proceeds from the sale of his parents’ house. Levine asserts that upon receiving the check, he placed it in a desk drawer at his office. At some point, an individual named Skippy Ely came into possession of the check. Levine states that he does not know Mr. Ely and asserts that the unrebutted facts establish that the check was stolen by Ely.

On January 24, 2018, over three weeks after Levine received the check, Ely presented the check to Check Pros, a check-cashing business. Ely presented a copy of Levine’s driver’s license and Social Security number, which Check Pros verified itself and through Wells Fargo, the drawee bank. Check Pros gave Ely only a small portion of the value of the check, requesting that he submit an affidavit from Levine before he could collect the rest. Ely submitted a notarized affidavit allegedly signed by Levine. Levine would testify at trial that the affidavit contained numerous errors: It did not refer to the check at issue, it refers to a different check-cashing company at a different address, and the date the document was notarized differed from the date Levine allegedly signed it. All the same, Check Pros paid out the remainder of the funds to Ely. Levine testified that upon returning to work, he discovered the check as stolen and later sued Check Pros for the amount of the check. What defenses does Check Pros have available to it? How strong are those defenses, given the facts? How did the court rule?