In 1792, Colonel Marinus Willett wrote a document stating that in 1781 he had entered into an agreement with 60 members of the Oneida tribe. In return for their help in fighting during the Revolutionary War, the colonel promised each of the 60 members a blanket, but he later found himself unable to fulfill his commitment. In 2004, Andre Deeks filed suit against the U.S. government, claiming that he, as the possessor of Colonel Willett's note, was owed $3 million because the government had never paid its debt to the Oneida tribe. Deeks claimed that the document written by Colonel Willet was a "Bill of Credit in bearer form," which had transferred to him, the cur rent possessor, the standing to sue for the document's enforcement. The text of the note reveals neither an intent that it be circulated as money nor an unconditional promise to pay a certain sum. Based on this information, is the document a negotiable instrument? Does it meet the standards for negotiability?
Answer to relevant QuestionsAre negotiable instruments more similar to money or contracts? Explain. Explain the rationale for the following statement: "The purpose of holder-in-due-course status is to encourage parties to engage in financial transactions." A business associate of an elderly man persuaded the man to issue a $10,000 check to recover a failed investment as part of a scam perpetrated on the maker of the check. The business associate (endorser) presented the check ...Kevin Scott purchased a new Ford van on credit from Koons Ford of Baltimore, Inc. He made a down payment of $3,406 and agreed to make 60 monthly payments of $403.93 to pay off the balance. The contract was assigned by Koons ...What is the distinction between a general partnership and a limited partnership?
Post your question