If, instead of endorsing the note to Tonya, Felicia had wanted to demand payment on the note from Branson, could Branson be held liable since he did not sign his name?

A) No, a signature is required to hold a party liable for a negotiable instrument.
B) Yes, because the "X" Branson wrote on the instrument could constitute a signature if Branson used it with the intent to authenticate the instrument.
C) No, because the "X" does not constitute a signature because it does not identify the endorser.
D) Yes, the "X" could constitute a signature, but only if Branson also printed his name on the note.
E) No, public policy would not support holding a party liable for payment if that party did not actually sign the instrument.

Question

Oshante Mckeithan · Accepted Answer

Final Answer : B, Explanation :  The X can be considered a valid signature if Branson intended it as such to authenticate the instrument. Under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), a signature can be any symbol executed or adopted with the intent to authenticate a writing.

Definitions

Learning Objectives

Learning Objectives

Related questions