If you are speaking of a negotiable instrument, the principal benefits are that many defenses to contracts are not available to holders in due course of negotiable instruments. The second benefit is the means of endorsement as a manner of transfer.
The above is general legal and business analysis. It is not "legal advise" but analysis, and different lawyers may analyse this matter differently, especially if there are additional facts not reflected in the question. I am not your attorney until retained by a written retainer agreement signed by both of us. I am only licensed in California. See also avvo.com terms and conditions item 9, incorporated as if it was reprinted here.
A holder in due course who has provided value in good faith for a negotiable instrument can be insulated from claims against the original parties to the transaction. In some ways (too complicated too discuss here), the Uniform Commercial Code elevates a holder in due course to a status above a normal party to a contract. The general idea is to protect an innocent third party (the holder in due course) who has no notice of a defect and bargains for the negotiable instrument in good faith. There can be other rights, and obligations, of being a holder in due course beyond this simplistic explanation, but I hope this provides some general information as a starting point for you.
PS: If this was most helpful please mark it as a best answer.
The Law Office of Christopher Barrett Fay, 1325 Spruce St., Philadelphia, PA 19107, firstname.lastname@example.org, (267) 519-2719, www.cfaylaw.com. LEGAL DISCLAIMER: The law changes frequently, and the material on this website is for general information purposes only and neither constitutes nor is intended to be legal advice. You should not act based upon this general information nor without seeking legal counsel regarding your specific legal matter. The outcome of every case is dependent on the specific facts and legal circumstances of each individual case. Any client reviews or attorney endorsements posted on this website are solely the opinion of that person and should not be construed as representative of the results you might expect to receive in your specific legal matter. No one can offer a review or endorsement concerning the type or quality of legal work they received in relation to the type or quality of legal work that might be done for you if you become a client of this office. This website is not advertising. This website is not an offer to represent you, which can only be made after a consultation with one of our attorneys. This website and its feature to contact us do not create an attorney-client relationship between you and The Law Office of Christopher Barrett Fay or any of its attorneys. The Law Office of Christopher Barrett Fay practices law only in the states of Pennsylvania and New Jersey. The Law Office of Christopher Barrett Fay does not intend to practice in any other jurisdictions where it is not licensed. The firm does not seek to represent anyone viewing this website in other jurisdictions, and the website may not comply with the laws and ethical rules of states other than Pennsylvania and New Jersey.
The other answers are excellent. I want to add two points (note, the topic of holder in due course is fascinating and there is a myriad of laws and cases regarding same --the foundation of same is found in the Uniform Commercial Code). First, even if holder in due course, some defenses can still be raised. Second, unbeknownst to most, any endorsement page that might be on a page that is separate from the instrument must be affixed to the instrument such as by stapling. Years ago I was involved in such a case in federal court. There a lender bought millions of dollars of instruments and sued obligors when they defaulted for non-payment. It turned out that the endorsements that transferred the instruments were on separate pages that were not stapled. The lender had boxes of instruments that had each instrument folded with the endorsement page. The court held this was problematic and could be a defect barring any collection since cannot prove for sure that the endorsement goes with the instrument.
Note, I do not represent you and no attorney client privilege exists between us. I recommend you obtain counsel.