What is considered "bad checks" in legal terms?

In legal terms, "bad checks" refer to worthless negotiable instruments. This generally means that a check is written on an account that lacks sufficient funds to cover the amount of the check when it is presented for payment. The act of writing a check without the necessary funds in the account is a form of fraud if the writer knew that there were insufficient funds available to honor the check. Therefore, from a legal standpoint, this establishes that the check cannot be redeemed, making it "bad."

Negotiating a valid payment, for instance, implies that the transaction is authorized and backed by sufficient funds, which does not align with the notion of bad checks. Similarly, responsibly using credit cards involves managing credit wisely, which is distinct from the issue of bad checks. Lastly, withdrawing funds from an account is a legitimate banking action, not related to the context of issuing checks that cannot be cashed due to insufficient funds. Thus, the only choice that accurately captures the legal definition of "bad checks" is the one that describes worthless negotiable instruments.