First International Bank of Israel, Ltd. v. L. Blankstein & Son, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that parol evidence is “clearly admissible” to establish that a party who took an instrument that was clear on its face did not take the instrument for value, in good faith, or without notice
• holding “bank did not act in a commercially unreasonable manner when it proceeded against the notes rather than selling the diamonds it also held as collateral”
• conclusory allegations attacking holder in due course status are insufficient
• “Since the requirement that a holder show that it did not have knowledge of a defense or claim to the instrument involves proof of a negative fact, we have held that its burden of proof is a slight one.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).