Your recipients will receive an email with this envelope shortly and will be able to access it on trellis. You can always see your envelopes by clicking the Inbox on the top right hand corner.
Your subscription has successfully been upgraded.
(A) Subject to divisions (B), (C), (D), and (E) of this section and to division (D) of section 1303.59 of the Revised Code, if an instrument is dishonored, an indorser is obliged to pay the amount due on the instrument according to the terms of the instrument at the time it was indorsed, or, if the indorser indorsed an incomplete instrument, according to its terms when completed, to the extent required by sections 1303.11 and 1303.50 of the Revised Code. The obligation of the indorser is owed to a person entitled to enforce the instrument or to a subsequent indorser who paid the instrument under this section.
(B) If an indorsement states that it is made "without recourse" or otherwise disclaims liability of the indorser, the indorser is not liable under division (A) of this section to pay the instrument.
(C) If notice of dishonor of an instrument is required by section 1303.63 of the Revised Code and notice of dishonor complying with that section is not given to an indorser, the liability of the indorser under division (A) of this section is discharged.
(D) If a draft is accepted by a bank after an indorsement is made, the liability of the indorser under division (A) of this section is discharged.
(E) If an indorser of a check is liable under division (A) of this section and the check is not presented for payment, or given to a depositary bank for collection, within thirty days after the day the indorsement was made, the liability of the indorser under division (A) of this section is discharged.
Eranklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2022 Dec 27 11:48 AM-18CV005430 0G205 - Bé IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO CIVIL DIVISION Kevin O’Brien & Associates Co., LPA, Plaintiff, Case No. 18-CV-05430 v. …
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS SUMMIT COUNTY, OHIO FORD MOTOR COMPANY PLAINTIFF vs CASE NO. CV- 2005-08-4856 TAMI MAUST DEFENDANT ANSWER TO COMPLAINT, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES COMES NOW the Defendants TAMI MAUST, herein after “Defendants” acting by and through herself, and file this her ANSWER TO COMPLAINT, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES against FORD MOTOR COMPANY, as follows, to-wit: General Denial Defendant generally denies the allegations in Plaintiff's petition. Defendant is not a corporation or bu…
Aug 25, 2005
Summit County, OH
Oct 03, 2005
REPLEVIN
JAMES E. MURPHY
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Please wait a moment while we load this page.