American International Group, Inc. (AIG), an insurance company, issued a check to Jermielem Merriwether in connection with a personal-injury matter. Merriwether presented the check to A-1 Check Cashing Emporium (A-1) for payment. A-1s clerk forgot to have Merriwether sign the check. When he could not reach Merriwether to ask him to come back to A-1 to sign the check, the clerk printed Merriwethers name on the back and deposited it for collection. When the check was not paid, A-1 sold it to Robert Triffin, who is in the business of buying dishonored checks. When Triffin could not get the check honored, he sued AIG, contending that he, through A-1, had the right to collect on the check as a holder in due course (HDC). The trial court rejected that claim. Triffin appealed. On what basis could he claim HDC status? [Triffin v. American International Group, Inc., ___A.2d___(NJ Super. 2008)] Choose one of the parties to this case, and describe the accounting aspects from that partys point of view. Respecting the boundaries between practicing law and counseling the party on accounting matters, how would you have detected the issue from that partys perspective, and what would you advise in terms of accounting for that partys role and its financial effects? You can use outside research on this case and its accounting implications, but be sure to cite your sources properly