Chase Federal Bank v. Kim

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Chase Federal Bank v. Kim

604 So. 2d 909, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 9412, 1992 WL 213114

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 4, 1992

DocketNo. 92-1912

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 604 So. 2d 909 (Chase Federal Bank v. Kim) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chase Federal Bank v. Kim, 604 So. 2d 909, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 9412, 1992 WL 213114 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Chase Federal Bank seeks certiorari review of a partial summary judgment which in essence held that a variable interest rate note tied to the interest rate of United States Treasury Notes was not for a “sum certain” ¹ and for that reason not negotiable, and therefore Chase Federal could not be a holder in due course.

We deny the petition for certiorari not because such a variable interest rate note is not negotiable but because the issue should be raised in a direct plenary appeal from a final judgment and does not justify certiorari review of a non-final partial summary judgment.

DENIED.

GOSHORN, C.J., and COWART and PETERSON, JJ. concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Chase Federal Bank seeks certiorari review of a partial summary judgment which in essence held that a variable interest rate note tied to the interest rate of United States Treasury Notes was not for a “sum certain” ¹ and for that reason not negotiable, and therefore Chase Federal could not be a holder in due course.

We deny the petition for certiorari not because such a variable interest rate note is not negotiable but because the issue should be raised in a direct plenary appeal from a final judgment and does not justify certiorari review of a non-final partial summary judgment.

DENIED.

GOSHORN, C.J., and COWART and PETERSON, JJ. concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

604 So. 2d 909, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 9412, 1992 WL 213114, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chase-federal-bank-v-kim-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack