Triphonoff sued J.W. Sweeney Construction Company after a check for $2,294.74 payable to Dan Malcheff was dishonored. Malcheff negotiated the check to Triphonoff before the postdated date of April 15, 1911. Sweeney Construction argued the check was not a negotiable instrument since it was negotiated before the date, and Triphonoff should have been on notice of issues with Malcheff's title. The court found that the check was a negotiable instrument as it met legal requirements, and postdating did not provide notice of defects to Triphonoff as the holder in due course. Postdating is common practice and the check is understood to be payable
Triphonoff sued J.W. Sweeney Construction Company after a check for $2,294.74 payable to Dan Malcheff was dishonored. Malcheff negotiated the check to Triphonoff before the postdated date of April 15, 1911. Sweeney Construction argued the check was not a negotiable instrument since it was negotiated before the date, and Triphonoff should have been on notice of issues with Malcheff's title. The court found that the check was a negotiable instrument as it met legal requirements, and postdating did not provide notice of defects to Triphonoff as the holder in due course. Postdating is common practice and the check is understood to be payable
Triphonoff sued J.W. Sweeney Construction Company after a check for $2,294.74 payable to Dan Malcheff was dishonored. Malcheff negotiated the check to Triphonoff before the postdated date of April 15, 1911. Sweeney Construction argued the check was not a negotiable instrument since it was negotiated before the date, and Triphonoff should have been on notice of issues with Malcheff's title. The court found that the check was a negotiable instrument as it met legal requirements, and postdating did not provide notice of defects to Triphonoff as the holder in due course. Postdating is common practice and the check is understood to be payable
FACTS J.W. Sweeney Construction Company drew its check on the US National Bank of Portland Oregon for USD 2,294.74 payable to the order of DAN MALCHEFF. The check was drawn and delivered on or about March 25, 1911 but was POSTDATED APRIL 15, 1911. Malcheff negotiated it to TRIPHONOFF before April 15, 1911 who took it for value and in good faith. J.W. SWEENEY CONSTRUCTION (the drawer) stopped payment for the check on the ground that Malcheff (the named payee), an employee of the drawer, obtained the check by means of false and forged estimates of work done by him for the drawer. The check was DISHONORED UPON PRESENTMENT about APRIL 17, 1911. Triphonoff (INDORSER) sued the drawer J.W. SWEENEY. The latter argued that Triphonoff should have been put on notice of the infirmity in the instrument or defect in the tile of MALCHEFF by the fact that the check was POSTDATED. Counsel for Sweeney goes as far as arguing that a postdated check is not a negotiable instrument if taken before the date on which demand can be made for payment but is simply an assignment of rights of the payee and opens the check to all equities and defenses. ISSUE 1. Whether or not the check in this case is NOT a negotiable instrument? NO 2. Whether or not postdating of the check amounts to a notice of the infirmity on the instrument as to disqualify the holder from becoming a HIDC? NO. RATIO 1. The check is a negotiable instrument. It is full and complete on its face as it satisfies the requirements of the law for an instrument to be negotiable. It is worthy to note that the law does not require an instrument to be dated. It is settled that the instrument is not rendered invalid by its antedating or postdating provided that it is not done for an illegal or fraudulent purpose. 2. The plaintiff indorsee was not as a matter of law put into inquiry by reason of the checks being negotiated prior to day of its date. The law itself does not proscribe postdating of the check. It is noteworthy that the drawing of a postdated check is an everyday occurrence in the commercial world and the uniform understanding of the parties is that, when a check is postdated, it is payable on the day it purports to be drawn even though it be negotiated beforehand