M issued a negotiable order instrument to P in exchange for 10 cows to be delivered 90 days from date of issue. P endorsed it to A, then A to B. However, P was not able to deliver the cows on the due date. A did not know about the said non-delivery, but B did. Can B seek payment from M? YES OR NO?

M issued a negotiable order instrument to P in exchange for 10 cows to be delivered 90 days from date of issue. P endorsed it to A, then A to B. However, P was not able to deliver the cows on the due date. A did not know about the said non-delivery, but B did. Can B seek payment from M? YES OR NO?

Business Its Legal Ethical & Global Environment

10th Edition

ISBN:9781305224414

Author:JENNINGS

Publisher:JENNINGS

Chapter3: The Judicial System

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 5QAP

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

P has rendered construction services for M. M is currently illiquid due to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, M issued a negotiable promissory note in favor of P for the amount of his payable to M. P then endorsed it to A, who knows about the transaction between M and P, then A endorsed it to B, who also knows about the said transaction. Can B seek payment fom M? YES OR NO?
P is in dire need of cash. He then approaches M and requests that M issue a negotiable bill of exhange in P's favor at P50,000 so that P can sell the instrument to A. So M issued a negotiable BOE to P, then P endorsed it to A. Upon due date of the said BOE, who are the primarily liable party/parties to the instrument who should pay A? a. M and P b. M or P c. M d. P
A promises to deliver to B a specific horse. Their contract contains a penal clause that in case of non-fulfillment, A shall pay a penalty of P10,000. A wants to just pay that penalty instead of delivering the horse. Has B the right to refuse to accept the penalty in lieu of the horse?
27. M issued a promissory note to P which states “I promise to pay P P10,000.” The promissory note was issued in exchange for a bag of marijuana. P subsequently indorsed and delivered the said promissory note to A. Which of the following statements is correct? Group of answer choices a. A can validly collect from M if A acquired the promissory note in good faith and for value. b. A can only go after P if M will dishonor the note and only if a corresponding notice of dishonor will be given to P. c. A cannot validly collect from M if A has knowledge of the infirmity in the instrument thus making A a holder not in due course. d. A can validly collect from P because the latter violated his warranty.
Saul sold goods to Bruce, warranting that the goods were of a specified quality. The goods were not of the quality warranted, however, and Saul knew this at the time of the sale. Bruce drew and delivered a check payable to Saul and drawn on Third National Bank in the amount of the purchase price. Bruce subsequently discovered the goods were faulty and stopped payment on the check. Third National refused to pay Saul on the check. a. What are the arguments that Saul can recover (1) from Bruce and (2) from Third National? b. What are the arguments that (1) Bruce should prevail? and (2) Third National should prevail? c. Who should prevail? Why?
James Koontz agreed to purchase a Plymouth Sundance from Chrysler Credit Corporation (Chrysler) in exchange for sixty payments of $185.92. Koontz soon thereafter defaulted, and Chrysler notified Koontz that, unless he made the payments, it would repossess the vehicle. Koontz responded by notifying Chrysler that he would make every effort to make up missed payments, that he did not want the car repossessed, and that Chrysler was not to enter his private property to repossess the vehicle. A few weeks later, Chrysler sent the M & M Agency to repossess the vehicle. When he heard the repossession in progress, Koontz, dressed only in his underwear, came outside and yelled, “Don’t take it!” The repossessor ignored him and took the car anyway. Koontz did not physically challenge or threaten the repossessor. a. Discuss the arguments that Chrysler legally repossessed the automobile. b. Discuss the arguments that Chrysler illegally repossessed the automobile. c. Who should prevail?
Riker receives $45,000 from Troy as payment for a vehicle that has a fair value of $56,500. The $45,000 constitutes full payment for the vehicle as specified in the sales contract. Assume that the time value of money is viewed as significant for this contract. Required: (a) Did Troy pay Riker before or after delivery of the vehicle? (b) Prepare the journal entry Riker would make to record receipt of Troy’s payment, assuming no interest revenue or interest expense had been recorded previously. (c) Prepare the journal entry Riker would make to record delivery of the vehicle, assuming no interest revenue or interest expense had been recorded previously.
A owes B. B assigns the credit to C. B is in good faith. It was greed that B would be responsible for A’s solvency. The parties did not agree on the duration of the liability. If the debt was due July 6, 2019 and the assignment was made August 8, 2019. Until when is the guaranty?
Riker receives $36,000 from Troy as payment for a vehicle that has a fair value of $46,600. The $36,000 constitutes full payment for the vehicle as specified in the sales contract. Assume that the time value of money is viewed as significant for this contract. Required: (a) Did Troy pay Riker before or after delivery of the vehicle? (b) Prepare the journal entry Riker would make to record receipt of Troy's payment, assuming no interest revenue or interest expense had been recorded previously. (c) Prepare the journal entry Riker would make to record delivery of the vehicle, assuming no interest revenue or interest expense had been recorded previously. Complete this question by entering your answers in the tabs below. Req A Req B and C Did Troy pay Riker before or after delivery of the vehicle? Troy paid Riker of the vehicle.
X is indebted to Y in the amount of P25,000.00. In order to escape payment of his debt to Y he sold his only passenger jeepney to his brother-in-law Z. State whether the contract is absolute or relative simulation. Why? Subject : ME LAWS
86. T surreptitiously stole the specific necklace of S. Afterwards, T conducted a public auction then sold and delivered the said necklace to B at a price of P10,000. B acquired the said necklace in such public auction. Which of the following statements is correct? Group of answer choices a. S can legally recover the necklace from B even without reimbursing B. b. S may legally recover the necklace from B but he must reimburse B of the amount of P10,000. c. S can never legally recover the necklace from B because the latter is a purchaser in good faith and for value. d. S cannot legally recover the necklace from B even if he reimburses B of the amount of P10,000.
Due to his debt to Chur, Schwyz wrote a promissory note which is payable to the order of Chur. Chur's sister, Sion, misrepresenting herself as agent of Chur, obtained the note from Schwyz. Sion then negotiated the note to Lausanne after forging the signature of Chur. May Lausanne enforce the note against Schwyz? a. Yes, since Schwyz is the principal debtor. b. No, since it is Chur who can enforce it, the note being payable to the order of Chur. c. No, since the signature of Chur was forged. d. Yes, since Schwyz, as maker, is primarily liable on the note.