Home > Journals > Michigan Law Review > MLR > Volume 29 > Issue 6 (1931)
Abstract
In an action by the payee against the insane accommodation maker of a promissory note, the court held that the payee is presumed to be a holder in due course. F. S. Royster Guano Co. v. Sherman (N. J. 1930) 151 Atl. 382.
Recommended Citation
BILLS AND NOTES-PAYEE AS HOLDER IN DUE COURSE,
29
Mich. L. Rev.
770
(1931).
Available at:
https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol29/iss6/15