Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Strawser

United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
908 F. Supp. 249 (1995)


Facts

In consideration of a $350,000 loan, Chester and Connie Strawser (defendants) issued an adjustable-rate note in favor of Homestead Savings Association (Homestead). The note required payment in monthly installments, with a final due date of any remaining balance on January 1, 1997. Paragraph 7(c) of the note provided that, in the event of a default by the Strawsers, the holder of the note was entitled to notify the Strawsers that the holder would accelerate the payment obligation and require immediate payment of the entire balance if the Strawsers did not satisfy the overdue payments by a specified date. Homestead assigned its rights in the note to State Street Bank & Trust Company (State Street) (plaintiff). State Street sent a notice of default to the Strawsers, requiring their overdue payments to be made within 30 days. The notice indicated that State Street would otherwise invoke paragraph 7(c) of the note and demand full, immediate payment of the remaining balance. The Strawsers did not respond to the notice. State Street brought suit against the Strawsers, seeking payment of the remaining balance on the note. State Street then filed a motion for summary judgment, claiming status as a holder in due course entitled to enforce the note free of the Strawsers’ potential defenses. The Strawsers argued that State Street was not a holder in due course, because State Street had known of the Strawsers’ potential defense to payment under § 3305(a) of the Pennsylvania Commercial Code (Code). Specifically, the Strawsers asserted that State Street was on notice, through a letter sent by the Strawsers to Homestead, that the note might be unenforceable due to Homestead’s violation of state law.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Caldwell, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 219,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.