Potts an employee for Jemoli and had a personal account

Question: In chapter 30 question 14. Potts an employee for J…

In chapter 30 question 14. Potts an employee for Jemoli and had a personal account with Raymond James and after the market crash in 2000 due to the dotcom bubble. Potts write checks for 4 months after totaling $1.5 million dollars to cover the margin calls. Once the principals at Jemoli discovered the embezzlement, Jemoli brought suit to recover the funds from Raymond James. Raymond James says it was a holder in due course (HDC) of the checks and not subject to Jemoli’s claims for breach of fiduciary duty by its agent, Potts. Who is correct about the HDC status of Raymond James and why? Is Raymond James correct that they are the holder in due course? Or, is the company that Potts worked for, Jemloi the holder in due course?