Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 47-3311 (2026)

Accord and satisfaction by use of instrument

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. If a person against whom a claim is asserted proves that the person in good faith tendered an instrument to the claimant as full satisfaction of the claim, the amount of the claim was unliquidated or subject to a bona fide dispute and the claimant obtained payment of the instrument, subsections B and C 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:

(a) 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

(b) 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 ninety 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 paragraph does not apply if the claimant is an organization that sent a statement complying with paragraph 1, subdivision (a).

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.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2015–2026 · leading case: Equity Recovery Specialists LLC v. Select Portfolio Servicing Inc. (D. Ariz. 2023).
Equity Recovery Specialists LLC v. Select Portfolio Servicing Inc. (D. Ariz. 2023). · cites it 29× “See A.R.S. § 47-3311. Depositing the 7 enclosed check will be deemed an acceptance of this offer.”
Equity Recovery Specialists LLC v. Select Portfolio Servicing Inc. (D. Ariz. 2022). · cites it 12× “See A.R.S. § 47-3311. 6 Depositing the enclosed check will be deemed an acceptance of this offer.”
Alvarez v. CSAA Gen. Ins. Co. (D. Ariz. 2025). · cites it 6× “”) § 47-3311 and Arizona 1 common law show that the parties’ resolved Plaintiff’s UM claim through an accord and 2 satisfaction.”
Nutt (D. Ariz. 2026). · cites it 3× “) 21 Here, there are questions of fact regarding whether the accord and satisfaction was 22 1 Defendant does not argue statutory accord and satisfaction under A.R.S. § 47-3311, which provides in relevant part: 23 A.”
Taylor v. Aps (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “Instead, he argues that A.R.S. § 47-3311, which governs accord and satisfaction by instrument, was satisfied when he wrote “Settlement of all claims with APS” on the $4300 certified check.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 47-3311(A) — 1 case
Nutt (D. Ariz. 2026). “) 21 Here, there are questions of fact regarding whether the accord and satisfaction was 22 1 Defendant does not argue statutory accord and satisfaction under A.R.S. § 47-3311, which provides in relevant part: 23 A.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 47-3311(C)(2) — 1 case
Equity Recovery Specialists LLC v. Select Portfolio Servicing Inc. (D. Ariz. 2023). “See A.R.S. § 47-3311. Depositing the 7 enclosed check will be deemed an acceptance of this offer.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 47-3311(D) — 1 case
Alvarez v. CSAA Gen. Ins. Co. (D. Ariz. 2025). “”) § 47-3311 and Arizona 1 common law show that the parties’ resolved Plaintiff’s UM claim through an accord and 2 satisfaction.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 47-3311(c)(2) — 2 cases
Equity Recovery Specialists LLC v. Select Portfolio Servicing Inc. (D. Ariz. 2022). “See A.R.S. § 47-3311. 6 Depositing the enclosed check will be deemed an acceptance of this offer.”
Equity Recovery Specialists LLC v. Select Portfolio Servicing Inc. (D. Ariz. 2023). “See A.R.S. § 47-3311. Depositing the 7 enclosed check will be deemed an acceptance of this offer.”
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.