Reference no: EM131388951
Edmund Jezemski, estranged and living apart from his wife, Paula, was administrator and sole heir-at-law of his deceased mother's estate, one asset of which was real estate in Philadelphia. Without Edmund's knowledge or consent, and with the assistance of John M. McAllister, an attorney, and Anthony DiBenedetto, a real estate broker, Paula arranged for a mortgage on the property through Philadelphia Title Insurance Company.
Shortly before settlement, Paula represented to McAllister and DiBenedetto that her husband would be unable to attend the closing on the mortgage. She appeared at McAllister's office in advance of the closing accompanied by a man whom she introduced to McAllister and DiBenedetto as her husband. She and this man, in the presence of McAllister and DiBenedetto, executed a deed conveying the property from the estate to her husband and herself as tenants by the entireties and also executed the mortgage. McAllister and DiBenedetto were witnesses.
Thereafter, McAllister, DiBenedetto, and Paula met at the office of the Title Company on the closing date, produced the signed deed and mortgage, and Paula obtained from Title Company its check for the mortgage loan proceeds of $15,640.82, payable to the order of Edmund Jezemski and Paula Jezemski individually and to Edmund as administrator. Paula cashed the check, bearing the purported indorsements of all the payees, at Penns Grove National Bank and Trust Company. Edmund received none of the proceeds, either individually or as administrator. His purported indorsements were forgeries. In the collection process, the check was presented to and paid by the drawee bank, FidelityPhiladelphia Trust Company, and charged against the drawer Title Company's account.
Upon discovery of the existence of the mortgage, Edmund brought an action that resulted in the setting aside of the deed and mortgage and the repayment of the amount advanced by the mortgagee. Title Company then sued the drawee bank (Fidelity) to recover the amount of the check, $15,640.82. Is the indorsement effective? Explain.
|
What rights if any does elizabeth acquire in the check
: Debbie Dean issued a check to Betty Brown payable to the order of Cathy Cain and Betty Brown. Betty indorsed the check, ‘‘Payable to Elizabeth East, (signed) Betty Brown.'' What rights, if any, does Elizabeth acquire in the check?
|
|
Is fair park national bank liable to tubin
: The loan was never closed, and the $14,250 was never returned to Tubin. Is Fair Park National Bank liable to Tubin? Discuss.
|
|
Are there any warning labels on the product
: Do any of the ingredients jump out at you as being potentially dangerous to your health or the environment? Are there any warning labels on the product? Should there be? Any connection to the course material?
|
|
Is lamson a holder and why
: The Corporation contends that Lamson was not a holder of the checks because the indorsement was not in conformity with the Uniform Commercial Code in that it was stapled to the checks. Is Lamson a holder? Why?
|
|
Explain is the indorsement effective
: Title Company then sued the drawee bank (Fidelity) to recover the amount of the check, $15,640.82. Is the indorsement effective? Explain.
|
|
Whether or not nicole is an independent contractor
: Whether or not Nicole is an independent contractor. Discuss whether or not CARDWARE Inc. would be liable for Nicole's torts/criminal acts if she is considered to be an independent contractor.
|
|
Is coles signature effective against machine mfg
: In midJune, Machine Mfg., Inc., learned of Cole's fraudulent conduct, fired her, and brought an appropriate action against Capital Bank, seeking a judgment for $3,200. Is Cole's signature effective against Machine Mfg., Inc.? Explain.
|
|
Discuss the differences between quality and scope
: Do you think it is possible for the scope of a project to be completed, but the client is dissatisfied with quality? Why or why not? Discuss the differences between quality and scope
|
|
Explain is the indorsement effective
: Travco subsequently discovered the embezzlement, and after its demand for reimbursement was denied, it brought this suit against Citizens. Is the indorsement effective? Explain.
|