The requirements to be a holder in due course include the holder of
the instrument of a complete and authentic negotiable, in good faith,
and without notice of defects. In the Kane vs. Kroll case, Michael
Kane was a holder in due course because he met three of the
requirements was when he took the payment from Mr. Kroll's mother
to repay the debt that Gerald Kroll owed him. "In this case, Kane’s
affidavit supports his contention that he accepted the check in good
faith for the payment of Gerald’s antecedent debt. Moreover, none
of the affidavits supplied by either party suggests evidence of bad
faith on Kane’s part. In the absence of such evidence, we conclude
Kane took the check in good faith as a matter of law" (Kubasek et al.,
2020). Judge Myse believed that Michael Kane met the requirements
to be a holder in due course and Kane held up his end of the bargain
by supplying the cows to Gerald. It does not seem that there are any
ambiguities as it pertains to the rules of law so I agree with Judge
Myse's ruling as Grace's deal with Gerald did not give her the right to
cancel payment to Mr. Kane, if Gerald did not uphold his end of the
deal as it pertained to the payment to his mother that is a separate
case and ethically, a 3rd party (Mr. Kane) should not be impacted
financially because of it.
Reference:
Kubasek, N., Browne, M., Herron, D., Dhooge, L., Herron, D., Barkacs,
L. (2020). Requirements for Holder-in-Due-Course Status. McGraw-
Hill Connect.
