Robert Triffin, who makes a living of buying bounced checks and trying to recover as a holder in due course, has resorted to the courts so often and so perniciously that a New Jersey appeals panel evidently feels enough is enough.

Though finding his fabrication of check assignments did not make Triffin liable for common law fraud, the judges said his actions might constitute a fraud on the court itself. On Thursday, they remanded the case, Triffin v. Automatic Data Processing Inc., A-6986-03, to the trial court for a hearing on the possible imposition of sanctions.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]