Negotiable instruments
Question 1: Negotiable instrument is a signed document that demonstrates a certain amount of money has been assigned to a specific person. The name of the assigned person and the amount must be included in the instrument for verification, it may be paid on the date or when the assignee demands it, when the assignee receives the instrument he/she acquires its legal ownership
Image labeling
Name: City Finance Co.
Amount: $50,000
Question 2:Yes Muriel Evans note was a negotiable instrument because in his note he promised to pay Karen Marvin amount of money on demand, making the document a promissory note, also known as a note payable.
Question 3: BAC could not foreclose the note, because only the holder of a blank endorsed document has the right to claim ownership of property or good. Dutch bank had the legal ownership of the document, thus it was the only claimant and not BAC Home loan services.
Question 4: Fannie Mae had legal right to foreclose and sell it to recover the balance due, though Becky Smith had not specified in whose favor the document was endorsed to, it was still a negotiable instrument. Any holder of a blank endorsed document has claim to ownership.
Part II
- Yes, because Steven had signed an agreement with GRB financial corp., changing the repayment terms.
- Sherri’s decision was impractical because when she received the ring as a, gift from her husband she had already acquired its legal ownership, she was not even aware of conditions under which Steven and royal had agreed on.
- Sherri had obligation to pay the ring, because she was the one in possession of the ring in the moment
- The ethical implication in this case is that Steven should have notified his wife Sherri about the terms and conditions in whiz he had acquired the ring from royal jewelers and the modified agreement with GRB.
Work Cited