Ala. Code
Code of Alabama

Ala. Code § 7-3-311 (2026)

Accord and Satisfaction by Use of Instrument.

✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaAla. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) If a person against whom a claim is asserted proves that (i) that person in good faith tendered an instrument to the claimant as full satisfaction of the claim, (ii) the amount of the claim was unliquidated or subject to a bona fide dispute, and (iii) the claimant obtained payment of the instrument, the following subsections apply.

(b) Unless subsection (c) applies, the claim is discharged if the person against whom the claim is asserted proves that the instrument or an accompanying written communication contained a conspicuous statement to the effect that the instrument was tendered as full satisfaction of the claim.

(c) Subject to subsection (d), a claim is not discharged under subsection (b) if either of the following applies:

(1) The claimant, if an organization, proves that (i) within a reasonable time before the tender, the claimant sent a conspicuous statement to the person against whom the claim is asserted that communications concerning disputed debts, including an instrument tendered as full satisfaction of a debt, are to be sent to a designated person, office, or place, and (ii) the instrument or accompanying communication was not received by that designated person, office, or place.

(2) The claimant, whether or not an organization, proves that within 90 days after payment of the instrument, the claimant tendered repayment of the amount of the instrument to the person against whom the claim is asserted. This subdivision does not apply if the claimant is an organization that sent a statement complying with subdivision (1) (i).

(d) A claim is discharged if the person against whom the claim is asserted proves that within a reasonable time before collection of the instrument was initiated, the claimant, or an agent of the claimant having direct responsibility with respect to the disputed obligation, knew that the instrument was tendered in full satisfaction of the claim.

(Acts 1995, No. 95-668, p. 1381, §1.)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2002–2023 · leading case: Wallace v. Wallace, 909 So. 2d 827 (Ala. Civ. App. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Wallace v. Wallace, 909 So. 2d 827 (Ala. Civ. App. 2005). · cites it 5× “Specifically, the wife argues that the husband did not tender the check in "good faith" and that there was no "bona fide dispute," as required under § 7-3-311, Ala.Code 1975. [2] Section 7-3-311 applies where "an accord and satisfaction is asserted on the basis of a written…”
Shoreline Towers Condo. Owners Assoc., Inc. v. Zurich Am. Ins., 196 F. Supp. 2d 1210 (S.D. Ala. 2002). · cites it 2× “Ala.Code § 7-3-311 (1975). By accepting the $86,000 check, Shoreline agreed to the condition under which payment was made, which was the release of all claims.”
Ross Bros. Constr. Co. v. Markwest Hydrocarbon, Inc., 196 F. App'x 412 (6th Cir. 2006). “2001) (interpreting Ala.Code 1975 § 7-3-311(a)); and Webb Bus.”
Ingram-Bey v. Reg'l Acceptance Corp. (N.D. Ala. 2023). · cites it 2× “Ala. Code § 7-3-311 (a). The official comments to that statute state that the provision “does not apply” when “a debtor is seeking discharge of such a debt by paying less than the amount owed.”
— Ala. Code § 7-3-311(a) — 1 case
Ross Bros. Constr. Co. v. Markwest Hydrocarbon, Inc., 196 F. App'x 412 (6th Cir. 2006). “2001) (interpreting Ala.Code 1975 § 7-3-311(a)); and Webb Bus.”
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.