In Samuel James Thompson v.First Citizens Bank & Trust Co. ,the case in the text in which the parties disagreed as to whether an instrument referenced as a certificate of deposit was actually negotiable,which of the following was the result?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

A)According to the court "In the instant case,the CD confirmation clearly states,in
upper case type,"NON-TRANSFERABLE." We conclude that this qualifies as "a conspicuous statement ...that the promise or order is not negotiable," and,thus,that the CD does not fall within the purview of the negotiable instrument provisions of the UCC."
B)According to the court "In the instant case,the CD confirmation clearly states,in upper case type,"NON-TRANSFERABLE." We conclude that this qualifies as "a conspicuous statement ...that the promise or order is not negotiable," and,thus,that the CD does not fall within the purview of the negotiable instrument provisions of the UCC."
C)According to the court "In the instant case,the CD confirmation clearly states,in upper case type,"NON-TRANSFERABLE." We conclude that this qualifies as "a conspicuous statement ...that the promise or order is not negotiable," and,thus,that the CD does not fall within the purview of the negotiable instrument provisions of the UCC."
D)According to the court "In the instant case,the CD confirmation clearly states,in upper case type,"NON-TRANSFERABLE." We conclude that this qualifies as "a conspicuous statement ...that the promise or order is not negotiable," and,thus,that the CD does not fall within the purview of the negotiable instrument provisions of the UCC."
E)According to the court "In the instant case,the CD confirmation clearly states,in upper case type,"NON-TRANSFERABLE." We conclude that this qualifies as "a conspicuous statement ...that the promise or order is not negotiable," and,thus,that the CD does not fall within the purview of the negotiable instrument provisions of the UCC."

In Samuel James Thompson V