Skip to main content
Log in

The Intersection of Law and Ethics – at 600 Grant Street, Pittsburgh, PA: Is it Ethical to Assert a Legal Technicality to Avoid Liability for a Debt Created by Fraud?

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A considerable literature exists regard-ing the moral obligation to keep one's promises. Several authors have focused on the exceptional circumstances which may or should excuse this moral duty. Less frequently discussed is the question of how this general moral obligation and its possible exceptions play out in the context of negotiable written promises to pay money, i.e., so-called "commercial paper."

This paper focuses on the application of the legal rules governing commercial paper, and on the ethical implications involved in the application of those rules. More specifically, it asks whether the assertion of the technical doctrine known as "holder in due course," and the denial of that status in some cases, promotes ethical behavior in the marketplace. By examining the circumstances of one case, involving a substantial investment and a large bank, I hope to shed some light on how the legal and ethical rules do in fact "intersect."

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cameron, G.D. The Intersection of Law and Ethics – at 600 Grant Street, Pittsburgh, PA: Is it Ethical to Assert a Legal Technicality to Avoid Liability for a Debt Created by Fraud?. Journal of Business Ethics 49, 107–113 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000015847.96783.85

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000015847.96783.85

Keywords

Navigation