During a three$-$year period, Appliances, Inc., performed electrical heating and plumbing work for Yost Construction worth approximately $$7,000.$ Yost never paid Appliances for any of these jobs. Yost, in both his capacity as president of the construction company and his individual capacity, signed an undated ninety$-$day promissory note in favor of Appliances to reduce Yost Construction$’$s debt and to have Appliances perform services for Yost as an individual. Neither Yost in his individual capacity nor Yost Construction paid the note, and Appliances filed suit. The Trial court held that the undated note was totally unenforceable.

Should Appliances prevail on appeal by arguing that the note was negotiable? Appliances, Inc. v$.$ Yost, $181$ Conn. $207,435$ A$\mathrm{.}2$d $1(1980)$