In the case in the text Marion T v.Northwest Metals Processors,what was the court's holding?
A)Reed was not personally liable for the dishonored checks although he did not indicate his representative capacity.
B)Reed was personally liable for the dishonored checks because he did not indicate his representative capacity.
C)Reed was personally liable for the dishonored checks because he knew the account did not have sufficient funds.
D)Reed was not personally liable for the dishonored checks because he signed the checks as a representative of the corporation.

Question

In the case in the text Marion T v.Northwest Metals Processors,what was the court's holding?
A)Reed was not personally liable for the dishonored checks although he did not indicate his representative capacity.
B)Reed was personally liable for the dishonored checks because he did not indicate his representative capacity.
C)Reed was personally liable for the dishonored checks because he knew the account did not have sufficient funds.
D)Reed was not personally liable for the dishonored checks because he signed the checks as a representative of the corporation.

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Under Indiana law,the court found it was undisputed that Reed signed his name to each of the corporate checks on the Sky Bank accounts as the authorized signatory,but without indicating his representative capacity.Consequently,in the language of Indiana Code section 3.1-402(c),he is "not liable on the check(s)" when the checks identify the drawer,and Reed was an authorized signatory.

In the Case in the Text Marion T V