Mid-Term Review Session

24
Mid-Term Review Session Commercial Paper

description

Commercial Paper. Mid-Term Review Session. Analytical Framework. 1 . Identify the type of paper. Promissory note (including CDs) Draft (including checks and remote-created items). Analytical Framework. 2 . Identify the parties, for example: Maker Drawer Payee Drawee Indorser - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Mid-Term Review Session

Page 1: Mid-Term Review Session

Mid-Term Review SessionCommercial Paper

Page 2: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

1. Identify the type of paper.

Promissory note (including CDs)

Draft (including checks and remote-created items)

Page 3: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

2. Identify the parties, for example:▪ Maker▪ Drawer▪ Payee▪ Drawee▪ Indorser▪ Holder▪ Accommodation Party▪ Depositary Bank▪ Payor Bank

Page 4: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

3. Is instrument negotiable (form):▪ In writing▪ Signed by maker or drawer▪ Unconditional promise or order to pay▪ Fixed amount▪ Of money▪ No other undertaking or instruction▪ Payable on demand or at a definite time▪ Words of negotiability (order or bearer

language)

Page 5: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

4. Was instrument properly negotiated (transferred to a holder): Bearer paper = possession Order paper = possession plus

necessary indorsements▪ Blank (creates bearer paper)▪ Special (names new owner)▪ Restrictive (e.g., for deposit only)

Page 6: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

5. Does holder qualify as HDC? Negotiable instrument Holder status Authenticity not apparently questioned Holder gave value for the instrument Holder took instrument in good faith Holder was without notice▪ E.g., overdue, dishonored, unauthorized

signature, alteration, claim, defense, claim in recoupment

Page 7: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

5. HDC issues Shelter Rule – taker from HDC may

receive HDC rights Subject to real defenses▪ Infancy▪ Duress voiding obligation▪ Lack of legal capacity making obligation

void▪ Illegality making obligation void▪ Fraud in the execution[continued]

Page 8: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

5. HDC issues [continued]

Subject to real defenses [continued]▪ Bankruptcy discharge▪ Omission of required consumer protection

language▪ Statute of limitations▪ Payment by obligor without notice to former

holder▪ Alteration▪ Unauthorized signatures and forgeries[continued]

Page 9: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

5. HDC issues [continued]

Takes free of personal defenses Takes free of all claims Burden of proof on HDC HDC status sometimes denied by

statute

Page 10: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

6. Liability of Parties – General Approach

Who wants the money (plaintiff)? Who does not want to pay (defendant)? What are plaintiff’s legal theories of

recovery? What defenses may the defendant raise? If the defendant is a loser, may liability

be passed on to another party?

Page 11: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

7. Contract liability Underlying obligation Maker’s contract Indorser’s contract Accommodation parties Drawer’s contract Drawee’s contract (acceptance and

certification) Signature by agents

[continued]

Page 12: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

7. Contract liability [continued] Checking Account▪ Properly payable▪ Wrongful dishonor▪ Customer’s death or incompetence▪ Setoff▪ Stop payment orders▪ Final payment▪ Charge back

Page 13: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

8. Warranty Liability Transfer warranties▪ Entitled to enforce (holder status)▪ Signatures authentic and authorized▪ No alteration▪ No defense good against transferor (perfect

plaintiff)▪ No knowledge of insolvency proceeding

against maker, drawer, or acceptor▪ If remotely created item, the person

identified as the drawer authorized the item

Page 14: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

8. Warranty Liability [continued] Presentment warranties (checks)▪ Entitled to enforce▪ No alteration▪ No knowledge of unauthorized drawer’s

signature▪ If remotely-created item, the person

identified as the drawer authorized the item.

Presentment warranty (notes)▪ Entitled to enforce

Page 15: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

9. Conversion Liability

Wrongful dominion Drawee bank paying on forged

indorsement

Page 16: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework 10. Forgery

Maker’s signature Drawer’s signature Indorsement Forgery validation▪ Ratification▪ No loss▪ Impostor Rule (estops issuer)▪ Fraudulent indorsement by payee’s

employee (estops payee)▪ Negligence▪ Bank statement rule

Page 17: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

11. Alteration Types Effect on HDC Effect on non-HDC Defenses▪ Negligence▪ Bank statement rule

Page 18: Mid-Term Review Session

Analytical Framework

12. Other issues

Discharge by h0lder Failure to produce original

instrument Overdrafts Postdated “checks” Payment in full checks

Page 19: Mid-Term Review Session

Sample Objective Questions

Page 20: Mid-Term Review Session

Sample Essay 1

Madonna PrinceMaker Payee

Disco

Negotiable?

HDC?presentmentdishonor

1. Negotiable?2. HDC?3. D v. P on underlying obligation4. D v. M on maker’s contract5. D v. P on indorser’s contract6. D v. P on transfer warranties

Page 21: Mid-Term Review Session

Sample Essay 2

Bob AlMaker Payee

Cal

Tom

$500 notedefective watch

blank indorsementlost note

$350

Page 22: Mid-Term Review Session

Sample Essay 3

Taylor XYZDrawer Payee

First

BankLNBDrawee

Check 1 -- $2,500 for furniture

Check 2 -- $1,500 for refrigerator

Cashed checksClosed accountSPO

Provides indorsementpresentment

Dishonored for NSF

Page 23: Mid-Term Review Session

Sample Essay 4

Della Stella Fred[alleged drawer] [drawer & forger] [fictitious payee]

CNB Corner GroceryDrawee State Bank[depositary bank]

theft issuance

presentmentfinal payment

NPP

Page 24: Mid-Term Review Session

Sample Essay 5

Effect of death of drawer/depositor