Plaintiff bank opened L/C for Third Party consignee/buyer in an international trade deal, and as security the consignee paid a cash deposit to and pledged the original bill of lading with the bank. The bank never intended to be the cargo owner, so the bill of lading was not endorsed to it. Further, the bank knew that in practice, the carrier would deliver the goods to the consignee without collection of original bill of lading. The goods were indeed taken by the consignee without original bill of lading, and the bank knew that. The consignee failed to reimburse the bank of the funds it paid under L/C to the foreign shipper/seller. The bank chose to sue the carrier for wrongful delivery of goods. The court held that despite of the knowledge and intention of the bank, it was the lawful bill of lading holder and had the entitlement to sue the carrier for wrongful delivery goods and recover its losses flowing from the wrongdoing. As to the losses, the court though it reasonable for the bank to recover from the carrier the price of the goods minus the cash deposit it received from the consignee, but unreasonable to recover the interest (economic loss) under L/C.