Doseung Chung, the plaintiff, a horse player, was at Belmont Park Racetrack, which is owned by the defendant, New York Racing Association. While at the track, Chung was using a voucher to place bets on the races through an automated betting machine. After placing a bet, Chung took his betting ticket but forgot his voucher, which had thousands of dollars left on it. A few minutes later, he returned to the machine, but the voucher was gone. Chung put an electronic stop on the voucher, but the voucher had been cashed out about one minute after it was left in the machine. Chung subsequently sued the racetrack, arguing that the track was negligent in not requiring proof of identity when patrons cash out their vouchers, which constitute negotiable instruments. How did the court rule? Why?
Answer to relevant QuestionsDr. Rick LaCombe, an optometrist, was practicing optometry as a sole proprietorship and doing business as LaCombe Eye Center. His business took in checks for services and products made out in various ways: Dr. Rick LaCombe; ...What are the requirements of holder-in-due-course status? On August 2, 2000, Sheldon B. Toibb filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code, disclosing assets that included stock in an electric power company. When he discovered that the stock had ...Julaju drove a taxi on a part-time basis for El Pal- mar Taxi, Inc., usually only on Sundays and some- times on Mondays. He worked an unrelated job on the remaining days of the week. Julaju was given certain rules to ...Suppose you were asked to review and assess a franchise agreement. What responsibilities would you expect to be included in that agreement?
Post your question