Thomas Rusnack and his then-wife, Analisa Rusnack, opened a home equity line of credit (HELOC) with Cardinal Bank in August 2003.

Between 2003 and 2006, the Rusnacks periodically drew on the HELOC using checks issued by Cardinal Bank. In March 2006, Rusnack and his wife separated. On June 22, 2006, Rusnack wrote a letter to Cardinal Bank directing the Bank to “freeze my loan … from further advances.” The Bank acknowledged Rusnack’s request the same day in a letter addressed to the Rusnacks. The letter, written by loan services manager Barbara Hudson, informed the Rusnacks that the Bank had “placed a freeze on the above loan that will stop all future withdrawals from this account. If you need us to honor an item or release the freeze, both of your signatures will be required.”

Although the Bank received and confirmed Rusnack’s request, the Bank failed to honor it. Even after the separation and the June 22 correspondence, Rusnack’s then-wife withdrew money against the HELOC without Rusnack’s signature on two occasions. On July 26, 2006, Ms. Rusnack wrote a check for \($10,000\) made out to herself. The Bank honored the check. According to Rusnack, he called the Bank to complain after this first check cleared, and was told that “the account was blocked; that the money would be placed back into my account and that no other checks could be written on it[.]” But on September 12, 2006, the Bank once again honored a \($10,000\) check made out to and signed only by Ms. Rusnack. The two withdrawals increased the principal balance on the HELOC to

\($70,000.\) Rusnack later filed for bankruptcy and insisted that he owed the Bank \($50,000,\) not \($70,000.\) The Bank sued to recover the disputed \($20,000.\) Who are the drawers, drawee, and payee in the two \($10,000\) checks in question? Does Rusnack have a good case?