a) Why are both real and personal defenses valid against a holder; but only real defenses are

Question:

a) Why are both real and personal defenses valid against a holder; but only real defenses are valid against a holder in due course? What is the difference between real and personal defenses?
b) In the discussion of personal defenses in the text (p.547), why is Ross a "mere holder," and not a holder in due course?
Fantastic news! We've Found the answer you've been seeking!

Step by Step Answer:

Related Book For  book-img-for-question

Business Law and the Legal Environment

ISBN: 978-1285860381

7th edition

Authors: Susan S. Samuelson, Jeffrey F. Beatty

Question Posted: