Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Doris retrieved her husband's records from his secretary and his attorney. She reviewed the records of stores currently owned by herself and her husband, talked to business associates, the board of directors of his company, partners, and shareholders in his current business. She paid off or served the required notice on all creditors she knew about or discovered. She did not find the claim of Anchor. Anchor contends that the search was not reasonably diligent because she did not speak to all the employees of the stores owned by her husband or with all former business associates and did not consult the attorney files kept under names of businesses in which her husband was involved. Had she done so she would have discovered the debt of Anchor. The trial court ruled against Anchor, and this appeal resulted.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co