Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Triffin v. Dillabough

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 21, 1998No. 365 Philadelphia 1995PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

NEWMAN, Justice.

Appellant American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. (American Express) asks this Court to decide whether certain of its money orders are negotiable instruments pursuant to the Pennsylvania version of the Uniform Commercial Code, 13 Pa.C.S. § 1101, et seq., (Commercial Code) and if they are, whether appellee Robert J. Triffin (Triffin) has the rights of a holder in due course who may recover the face value of those money orders from American Express. We hold that the money orders in question are negotiable instruments and Triffin has the rights of a holder…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Thatcher's Drug Store of West Goshen, Inc. v. Consolidated Supermarkets, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  2. Manor Building Corp. v. Manor Complex Associates, Ltd.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  3. UAW-CIO Local 31 Credit Union v. Royal Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1980
  4. Finalco, Inc. v. RooseveltCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
  5. DH Cattle Holdings Co. v. KuntzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. McShea v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
  2. Wilson v. Transport Ins. Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  3. Commonwealth v. PantalionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  4. Gutteridge v. J3 Energy Group, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  5. PHH Mortgage Corp. v. Powell, R.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API