(a) A person commits the crime of negotiating a worthless negotiable instrument if the person negotiates or delivers a negotiable instrument for a thing of value and with the intent, knowledge, or expectation that it will not be honored by the drawee.
(b) For the purposes of this section, it is prima facie evidence that the maker or drawer intended, knew, or expected that the instrument would not be honored in any of the following instances:
(1) The maker or drawer had no account with the drawee at the time the negotiable instrument was negotiated or delivered, as determined according to Section 7-3-503(2).
(2) Payment was refused by the drawee for lack of funds, upon presentation within 30 days after delivery, and the maker or drawer shall not have paid the holder thereof the amount due thereon, together with a service charge of not more than (fill in appropriate amount as provided by law), within 10 days after receiving written notice from the holder of the instrument that payment was refused upon the instrument, as provided in Section 13A-9-13.2.
(3) Notice that payment was refused is mailed by certified or registered mail and is returned undelivered to the sender, when the notice is mailed within a reasonable time after dishonor to the address printed on the instrument or given by the maker or drawer at the time of issuance of the instrument.
(c) Negotiating a worthless negotiable instrument is a Class A misdemeanor.
(d) The definition of “negotiable instrument” in Section 7-3-104 applies to this section and Sections 13A-9-13.2 and 13A-9-13.3. For the purposes only of this section and Sections 13A-9-13.2 and 13A-9-13.3, the term “negotiable instrument” shall include electronic drafts.
(e) The definition of “negotiation” in Section 7-3-202 applies to this section and Sections 13A-9-13.2 and 13A-9-13.3.
(f) The definition of “delivery” in Section 7-1-201(14) applies to this section and Sections 13A-9-13.2 and 13A-9-13.3.
(Acts 1980, No. 80-200, p. 279, §1; Acts 1989, No. 89-807, p. 1608, §2; Acts 1991, No. 91-319, p. 578, §1; Acts 1997, No. 97-413, p. 679, §1; Act 2014-444, p. 1659, §1.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
20
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1981–2024 · leading case:
Steeley v. State, 533 So. 2d 665 (Ala. Crim. App. 1988).
Steeley v. State, 533 So. 2d 665 (Ala. Crim. App. 1988).
· cites it 14× “James Steeley was charged by solicitor's complaint with issuing a worthless instrument, in violation of § 13A-9-13.1, Code of Alabama 1975. The case was originally tried in the District Court of Etowah County, Alabama, and there the appellant was found guilty as charged.”
Capitol Chevrolet v. Bullock (In Re Bullock), 322 B.R. 176 (Bankr. M.D. Ala. 2005).
· cites it 6× “Capitol Chevrolet cites to the provisions of Alabama Code § 13A-9-13.1 in support of its contention that it was substantially ■justified here.”
Gore v. City of Hoover, 559 So. 2d 163 (Ala. 1990).
· cites it 2× “Gore, alleging that she had presented a worthless check drawn on insufficient funds in violation of Ala.Code 1975, § 13A-9-13.1. Sellers had called the telephone number on the check but the number had been disconnected; she had sent a certified letter to the address on the…”
Prince Hotel, S.A. v. Blake Marine Grp., 858 F. Supp. 2d 1287 (S.D. Ala. 2012).
· cites it 4× “First, defendants maintain that Prince cannot show fraud, reasoning that Alabama’s criminal worthless checks statute, Ala. Code § 13A-9-13.1, does not apply because "Plaintiff does not allege that payment was refused for lack of funds.”
Kmart, Inc. v. Asaro, 751 So. 2d 513 (Ala. Civ. App. 1999).
· cites it 2× “See, Ala.Code 1975, § 13A-9-13.1 through -13.3.”
Bray v. Holley (In Re Bray), 12 B.R. 359 (Bankr. M.D. Ala. 1981).
“Section 13A-9-13 of the Alabama Criminal Code, is repealed by Acts 1980, Number 80-200 Section 5, effective April 15, 1980, and is now codified as Section 13A-9-13.1 through 13.3. The Criminal Code of 1978 in Alabama, according to the Code Commissioner’s note also repealed by…”
Checkcare Sys. v. Alexander (In Re Alexander), 212 B.R. 993 (Bankr. M.D. Ala. 1997).
· cites it 2× “Code § 6-5-285 (civil) and § 13A-9-13.1 (criminal) (1975). The debtor has not been criminally prosecuted for issuance of the instant worthless checks.”
Caine v. Am. Life Assur. Corp., 554 So. 2d 962 (Ala. 1989).
“See Code 1975, § 13A-9-13.1. But if that is done simply to collect the debt, that is abuse of process.”
McCray v. State, 785 So. 2d 394 (Ala. Crim. App. 2000).
· cites it 2× “Ala. Code 1975, § 13A-9-13.1. However, Alabama does not preclude a prosecution for theft of property when the passer of a worthless cheek receives property in return.”
West v. Bruno's, Inc., 837 So. 2d 303 (Ala. Civ. App. 2002).
· cites it 9× “The Alabama Worthless Check Act is codified at § 13A-9-13.1 et seq., Ala.Code 1975. Bruno’s relies on the following provision stating that “[a]ny party holding a worthless negotiable instrument and giving notice in substantially similar form to that provided in [§ 13A-9-13.”
Asaro v. Kmart, Inc., 824 So. 2d 792 (Ala. Civ. App. 2001).
· cites it 4× “The motion challenged the sufficiency of Asa-ro’s evidence as to her fraud claim; it also presented the argument that under the Alabama Worthless Check Act, Ala.Code 1975, §§ 13A-9-13.1 through -13.”
Ala. Code § 13A-9-13.1(a): 3 cases
West v. Bruno's, Inc., 837 So. 2d 303 (Ala. Civ. App. 2002).
“The Alabama Worthless Check Act is codified at § 13A-9-13.1 et seq., Ala.Code 1975. Bruno’s relies on the following provision stating that “[a]ny party holding a worthless negotiable instrument and giving notice in substantially similar form to that provided in [§ 13A-9-13.”
Ala. Code § 13A-9-13.1(a)(1975): 1 case
Steeley v. State, 533 So. 2d 665 (Ala. Crim. App. 1988).
“James Steeley was charged by solicitor's complaint with issuing a worthless instrument, in violation of § 13A-9-13.1, Code of Alabama 1975. The case was originally tried in the District Court of Etowah County, Alabama, and there the appellant was found guilty as charged.”
Ala. Code § 13A-9-13.1(b): 1 case
West v. Bruno's, Inc., 837 So. 2d 303 (Ala. Civ. App. 2002).
“The Alabama Worthless Check Act is codified at § 13A-9-13.1 et seq., Ala.Code 1975. Bruno’s relies on the following provision stating that “[a]ny party holding a worthless negotiable instrument and giving notice in substantially similar form to that provided in [§ 13A-9-13.”
Ala. Code § 13A-9-13.1(b)(2): 2 cases
Prince Hotel, S.A. v. Blake Marine Grp., 858 F. Supp. 2d 1287 (S.D. Ala. 2012).
“First, defendants maintain that Prince cannot show fraud, reasoning that Alabama’s criminal worthless checks statute, Ala. Code § 13A-9-13.1, does not apply because "Plaintiff does not allege that payment was refused for lack of funds.”
West v. Bruno's, Inc., 837 So. 2d 303 (Ala. Civ. App. 2002).
“The Alabama Worthless Check Act is codified at § 13A-9-13.1 et seq., Ala.Code 1975. Bruno’s relies on the following provision stating that “[a]ny party holding a worthless negotiable instrument and giving notice in substantially similar form to that provided in [§ 13A-9-13.”
Ala. Code § 13A-9-13.1(b)(3): 1 case
Steeley v. State, 533 So. 2d 665 (Ala. Crim. App. 1988).
“James Steeley was charged by solicitor's complaint with issuing a worthless instrument, in violation of § 13A-9-13.1, Code of Alabama 1975. The case was originally tried in the District Court of Etowah County, Alabama, and there the appellant was found guilty as charged.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.