Ch. 92                                     1996 LAWS OF MARYLAND

SECURITY, OR SECURITY ENTITLEMENT OR IN SATISFYING THE CLAIM BY MEANS
ALLOWED AT LAW OR IN EQUITY IN REGARD TO PROPERTY THAT CANNOT READILY
BE REACHED BY OTHER LEGAL PROCESS.

8-113.

A CONTRACT OR MODIFICATION OF A CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OR PURCHASE
OF A SECURITY IS ENFORCEABLE WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS A WRITING SIGNED
OR RECORD AUTHENTICATED BY A PARTY AGAINST WHOM ENFORCEMENT IS
SOUGHT, EVEN IF THE CONTRACT OR MODIFICATION IS NOT CAPABLE OF
PERFORMANCE WITHIN 1 YEAR OF ITS MAKING.

8-114.

THE FOLLOWING RULES APPLY IN AN ACTION ON A CERTIFICATED SECURITY
AGAINST THE ISSUER:

(1)     UNLESS SPECIFICALLY DENIED IN THE PLEADINGS, EACH
SIGNATURE ON A SECURITY CERTIFICATE OR IN A NECESSARY INDORSEMENT IS
ADMITTED.

(2)     IF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A SIGNATURE IS PUT IN ISSUE, THE
BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING EFFECTIVENESS IS ON THE PARTY CLAIMING UNDER
THE SIGNATURE, BUT THE SIGNATURE IS PRESUMED TO BE GENUINE OR
AUTHORIZED.

(3)     IF SIGNATURES ON A SECURITY CERTIFICATE ARE ADMITTED OR
ESTABLISHED, PRODUCTION OF THE CERTIFICATE ENTITLES A HOLDER TO
RECOVER ON IT UNLESS THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES A DEFENSE OR A DEFECT
GOING TO THE VALIDITY OF THE SECURITY.

(4)     IF IT IS SHOWN THAT A DEFENSE OR DEFECT EXISTS, THE PLAINTIFF
HAS THE BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING THAT THE PLAINTIFF OR SOME PERSON UNDER
WHOM THE PLAINTIFF CLAIMS IS A PERSON AGAINST WHOM THE DEFENSE OR
DEFECT CANNOT BE ASSERTED.

8-115.

A SECURITIES INTERMEDIARY THAT HAS TRANSFERRED A FINANCIAL ASSET
IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN EFFECTIVE ENTITLEMENT ORDER, OR A BROKER OR
OTHER AGENT OR BAILEE THAT HAS DEALT WITH A FINANCIAL ASSET AT THE
DIRECTION OF ITS CUSTOMER OR PRINCIPAL, IS NOT LIABLE TO A PERSON HAVING
AN ADVERSE CLAIM TO THE FINANCIAL ASSET, UNLESS THE SECURITIES
INTERMEDIARY, OR BROKER OR OTHER AGENT OR BAILEE:

(1)     TOOK THE ACTION AFTER IT HAD BEEN. SERVED WITH AN
INJUNCTION, RESTRAINING ORDER, OR OTHER LEGAL PROCESS ENJOINING IT FROM
DOING SO, ISSUED BY A COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION, AND HAD A
REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO ACT ON THE INJUNCTION, RESTRAINING ORDER,
OR OTHER LEGAL PROCESS; OR

(2)     ACTED IN COLLUSION WITH THE WRONGDOER IN VIOLATING THE
RIGHTS OF THE ADVERSE CLAIMANT; OR

- 1308 -