Which of the following is NOT a real defense that will be successful against a Holder in Due Course?

Which of the following is NOT a real defense that will be successful against a Holder in Due Course?

• A. Infancy
• B. Fraud in factum
• C. Negligence
• D. Duress

Answer: (C)

The key idea is that a Holder in Due Course takes the instrument free from most defenses, but only universal (real) defenses can still bar payment. Infancy, fraud in factum, and duress are classic real defenses that can defeat enforcement even against an HDC because they strike at the signer’s ability to be bound or at the instrument’s formation. Negligence, on the other hand, isn’t a universal defense to payment on a negotiable instrument. It doesn’t impair the issuer’s obligation or the instrument’s validity in a way that would excuse payment to an HDC. So negligence isn’t a real defense, making it the correct choice.

The key idea is that a Holder in Due Course takes the instrument free from most defenses, but only universal (real) defenses can still bar payment. Infancy, fraud in factum, and duress are classic real defenses that can defeat enforcement even against an HDC because they strike at the signer’s ability to be bound or at the instrument’s formation. Negligence, on the other hand, isn’t a universal defense to payment on a negotiable instrument. It doesn’t impair the issuer’s obligation or the instrument’s validity in a way that would excuse payment to an HDC. So negligence isn’t a real defense, making it the correct choice.