DZ Bank AG Deutsche Zentral-Genossenschaftsbank v. McCranie
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
720 F. App’x 576 (2018)
- Written by Alexander Hager-DeMyer, JD
Facts
In October 2000, Michael McCranie (defendant) entered into several loan agreements with Brooke Credit Corporation to purchase an insurance franchise. One of the initial agreements was an Agreement for Advancement of Loan that contained provisions governing McCranie’s and Brooke Credit’s rights. Two years later, McCranie entered into a promissory note with Brooke Credit to refinance his earlier loans. Under an additional-terms heading, this note contained text that stated: “See Agreement for Advancement of Loan dated October 30, 2000.” No language in the note indicated what the additional terms in this provision governed or altered about McCranie’s or Brooke Credit’s rights and obligations. Several years later, DZ Bank AG Deutsche Zentral-Genossenschaftsbank (bank) (plaintiff) ended up taking a security interest in multiple of Brooke Credit’s loans, including McCranie’s note. McCranie defaulted on the note, and the bank filed suit in federal district court for the balance of the note. Among several claims, the bank asserted that it was a holder in due course of the note, a negotiable instrument under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the bank, and McCranie appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. The court of appeals remanded the case, and the district court again ruled in favor of the bank. McCranie appealed the verdict of the remanded case to the court of appeals.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Melloy, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.