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
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?
Step by Step Solution
3.49 Rating (169 Votes )
There are 3 Steps involved in it
a Real defenses deal with fundamental challenges to the basic validity o... View full answer
Get step-by-step solutions from verified subject matter experts
Document Format (1 attachment)
842-L-B-L-L-E (4308).docx
120 KBs Word File
