RSS

State Investment House v. Intermediate Appellate Court [G.R. No. 72764. July 13, 1989]

30 Jul

FACTS

New Sikatuna Wood Industries, Inc. (NSWI) secured a loan from respondent Anita Chua in the form of crossed checks. NWSI negotiated the checks to petitioner. The checks were dishonored.

 

ISSUE

Whether or not petitioner may be considered a holder in due course.

 

RULING

NO. Petitioner’s failure to inquire from the holder, party defendant NWSI, the purpose for which the three checks were cross despite the warning of the crossing, prevents him from being considered in good faith and thus he is not a holder in due course. Being not a holder in due course, plaintiff is subject to personal defenses, such as lack of consideration between appellants and New Sikatuna Wood Industries.

 

 

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: