Jerry O$.$ Peavy, Jr$.,$ who did not have a bank account of his own, received a draft from CNL Insurance America in the amount of $$5,323\mathrm{.}60.$ The draft was drawn on CNL$$s account at Bank South, N$.$A$.,$ and was $$payable to the order of Jerry Peavy and Trust Company Bank.$$ Jerry O$.$ Peavy, Sr$.,$ allowed his son Peavy, Jr$.,$ to deposit the draft in his account at Bank South, NA$.$ Bank South accepted the draft and deposited it on December $29,1992,$ with only the signature of Jerry Peavy, Jr$.$ Both Mr$.$ and Mrs$.$ Peavy, Sr$.,$ then wrote checks on the amount of the draft using the full amount to benefit their son.

On March $30,1993,$ Bank South realized that it had improperly deposited the draft because it was lacking an indorsement from Trust Company Bank and reversed the transaction by debiting Mr$.$ and Mrs$.$ Peavy$$s account for the full amount of the draft. A bank officer then called Mr$.$ and Mrs$.$ Peavy, told them what had happened with the draft, and $$threatened to send them to jail if they did not immediately deposit the sum of $$5,323\mathrm{.}60.$ The Peavys deposited that amount from the sale of some stock they owned and then filed suit against Bank South for its conversion of their son$$s draft and funds. Do the Peavys have a case? $[$Peavy v$.$ Bank South, $474$ S$.$E$.2$d $690($Ga$.$ App.$)]$