Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Because of the fraudulent alteration, Martha is not liable to Henry for any amounts under the promissory note although she may be liable under some other theory.
B) Martha's obligation will be enforced only in the amount of $4,000.
C) Martha's obligation will be enforced in the amount of $4,500 unless she has a writing signed by Henry to the effect that the deal was for 4,000. No other evidence would be allowed.
D) Unless Martha has a written document from Henry to the effect that the agreement was for $4,000 only, Martha and Henry will be legally required to split the remainder with Martha being held responsible for $4,250.
E) Unless Martha either has a written document from Henry showing that the agreement was for $4,000 or unless she can get Henry to admit that the agreement was for $4,000, then Martha will be required to pay $4,500 because the obligation was upon Martha to obtain confirmation of the terms of the original agreement.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) The note was never dishonored by Millie because she eventually acknowledged his entitlement to payment and only refused to pay because she lacked funds with which to do so.
B) Millie dishonored the instrument when she asked for proper identification.
C) Millie dishonored the instrument when she refused to pay it on the basis that she lacked funds with which to do so, but Anne did not dishonor the instrument.
D) Anne dishonored the instrument when she told Henry that he would have to seek recovery from Bob, but Millie did not dishonor the instrument.
E) Millie dishonored the instrument when she told Henry that she could not pay him because she lacked the funds, and also Anne dishonored the instrument when she told Henry that he would have to seek payment from Bob.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) The notice has no effect on her status as holder in due course because it was provided after she cashed the check.
B) The notice prevents her from being a holder in due course.
C) The notice prevents her from being a holder in due course only if Bob had been convicted of check cashing offenses in the past since she would have discovered his history had she checked.
D) The notice prevents her from being a holder in due course only if she subjectively knew that Bob had been charged criminally with check cashing violations in the past.
E) The notice prevents her from being a holder in due course because it was presented to a business; only individuals can avoid the effect of notice of theft by cashing a check prior to receiving notice.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Cancellation.
B) Renunciation.
C) Reacquisition.
D) Recourse.
E) Release.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Maker.
B) Acceptor.
C) Drawer.
D) Endorser.
E) Promisor.
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Promissory notes can be negotiated between parties.
B) Checks can be negotiated between parties.
C) Bills of exchange can be negotiated between parties.
D) Promissory notes can be negotiated between parties, checks can be negotiated between parties, and bills of exchange can be negotiated between parties.
E) Promissory notes and checks can be negotiated between parties, but bills of exchange cannot be negotiated between parties.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Before midnight of the next day.
B) Within 48 hours.
C) Within 7 days.
D) Within 10 days.
E) Within 30 days.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Yes, because Martin forged Adam's name.
B) Yes, because Martin posed as an imposter in regard to Adam.
C) Yes, because the XYZ, Inc. has a cause of action against Martin and can likely get a default judgment.
D) No, because of the imposter rule.
E) No, because of the fictitious-payee rule.
Correct Answer
verified
Essay
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) The Digital Signatures in Commerce Act.
B) The Electronic and National Digital Act.
C) The Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act.
D) The Digital Signals in International and National Transactions Act.
E) The Electronic Signatures in International and Federal Commerce Act.
Correct Answer
verified
Essay
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
Multiple Choice
A) As soon as a transferee discovers a breach of warranty has occurred, he or she can bring suit against the transferor.
B) A transferee must wait at least 48 hours after he or she discovers that a breach of warranty has occurred before bringing suit against the transferor.
C) A transferee must wait at least 5 days after he or she discovers that a breach of warranty has occurred before bringing suit against the transferor.
D) A transferee must wait at least 10 days after he or she discovers that a breach of warranty has occurred before bringing suit against the transferor.
E) A transferee must wait at least 30 days after he or she discovers that a breach of warranty has occurred before bringing suit against the transferor.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) A party who is secondarily liable.
B) A party who is a drawer and a party who is secondarily liable.
C) A party who is an endorser.
D) A party who is a drawer or an endorser.
E) A party who is primarily liable.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) He will be liable because an official banking document was involved.
B) He will not be liable because a party is never liable when the party signed a negotiable instrument without knowing that it is, in fact, a negotiable instrument.
C) He will be liable without further inquiry unless he can establish that the note had not been endorsed to a holder in due course.
D) He can claim fraud in the factum and whether he is liable or not will depend upon whether a court determines that he should have known what he was signing.
E) He can claim fraud in the inducement.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) That because the name of the fictitious payee was forged, the payor bank was required to take the loss, and Halliburton was entitled to a summary judgment ruling in its favor.
B) That because a fictitious payee was involved, Halliburton was required to take the loss as a matter of law; and Fleet, the brokerage firm, was entitled to a summary judgment ruling in its favor.
C) That Halliburton was not entitled to a summary judgment ruling in its favor because of a lack of evidence that Fleet, the brokerage firm, was anything other than a holder in due course.
D) That because of the lack of a showing of bad faith, Halliburton and Fleet were required to split the loss on a 50-50 basis.
E) That because of the lack of a showing of bad faith, Halliburton, Fleet, and the original drawer of the check were all required to share the loss on a proportional basis.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Anne is correct.
B) Anne is correct only if Bob is able to pay and has not filed bankruptcy.
C) Anne is correct in that Henry should seek recovery from Bob only if Millie has filed bankruptcy because, otherwise, Henry should be seeking primary payment from Millie.
D) Anne is correct unless the notice is for over $10,000, in which case Henry can seek recovery from her without resorting to recovery from Bob or Millie.
E) Anne is incorrect. Henry may seek recovery from her without first seeking recovery from Bob or Millie.
Correct Answer
verified
Essay
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
Showing 1 - 20 of 86
Related Exams