In the Case of Carter & Grimsley V

Multiple Choice

In the case of Carter & Grimsley v. Omni Trading, Inc., Carter argues that its motion for summary judgment should have been granted because:

A) as a holder in due course, it has the right to recover on the checks from the drawer, Omni.
B) it was a "promise of performance," not yet performed.
C) this retainer was a contract for future legal services.
D) when the attorney-client relationship is created by payment of a fee or retainer, the contract is executory.
E) contract for future legal services should be treated the same as other executory contracts.