The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Barness (D) sought to avoid enforcement of a promissory note for $64,835 to Centennial Bank. The FDIC (P) came into possession of the note when the Centennial was taken over by regulators. D claimed he signed the note solely to aid Centennial in order to satisfy HUD's loan guaranty requirements for construction projects that the bank was financing. D was a major shareholder of Centennial. P contends that the Uniform Written Obligations Act has control over this situation. The note only contained a bare promise to pay.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.