Bibi, a lawyer, provided legal advice to Bjorn on a small matter. When he asked her for her fee, she said, “Oh, just pay whatever you think is appropriate.” Although the evidence indicates that the reasonable value of Bibi’s work was $2500, Bjorn gave her a cheque on February 14 for $15 000. Bibi slipped it into her desk without even looking at the amount. The cheque sat there until December, when Bibi presented it to the drawee bank for payment. The bank refused to honour it, however, because Bjorn’s account was overdrawn. Bibi then telephoned Bjorn personally and asked him for payment of $15 000. He refused, claiming that he was temporarily insane when he drafted the cheque: “You should have known that I was on the verge of a complete mental collapse and that I was madly—if irrationally—in love with you. Why else would I give you a cheque for that much money on Valentine’s Day? You certainly didn’t earn $15 000.” And indeed, the evidence indicates that Bjorn was quite obviously insane when he drafted the cheque. Bibi wanted nothing more to do with Bjorn, but she did want the money. Therefore she sold the cheque to the Bergman Collection Agency, which was entirely unaware of Bjorn’s argument when it purchased the instrument from Bibi. Bergman has since learned of Bjorn’s argument but claims that it is entitled to payment as a holder in due course. Is that correct? Explain your answer.