California Codes

Cal. Commercial Code § 11212 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

If a receiving bank fails to accept a payment order that it is obliged by express agreement to accept, the bank is liable for breach of the agreement to the extent provided in the agreement or in this division, but does not otherwise have any duty to accept a payment order or, before acceptance, to take any action, or refrain from taking action, with respect to the order except as provided in this division or by express agreement. Liability based on acceptance arises only when acceptance occurs as stated in Section 11209, and liability is limited to that provided in this division. A receiving bank is not the agent of the sender or beneficiary of the payment order it accepts, or of any other party to the funds transfer, and the bank owes no duty to any party to the funds transfer except as provided in this division or by express agreement.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2023–2025 · leading case: BPi Bright Power, Inc. v. Umpqua Holding Corp. d/b/a Umpqua Bank (N.D. Cal. 2023).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

BPi Bright Power, Inc. v. Umpqua Holding Corp. d/b/a Umpqua Bank (N.D. Cal. 2023). “See Dkt. No. 42 ¶¶ 21-25. In effect, BPi says that Umpqua is at fault for 4 accepting BPi’s payment orders.”

Capital Express Lines, Inc. v. Chase Bank, N.A (E.D. Cal. 2025). “2023) (citations omitted); see also Cal. Com. Code § 11212 6 (“Liability based on acceptance arises only when acceptance occurs as stated in Section 11209, 7 and liability is limited to that provided in this division.”

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.