(a) Limitations on payment. (1) Treasury shall not be required to pay any check that is not negotiated to a financial institution within 12 months after the date on which the check was issued.
(2) All checks shall bear a legend, stating “Void After One Year.” The legend is notice to payees and indorsers of a general limitation on the payment of checks. The legend, or the inadvertent lack thereof, does not limit, or otherwise affect, the rights of Treasury under the law.
(b) Cancellation and distribution of proceeds of checks. (1) Any check that has not been paid and remains outstanding for more than 12 months after the issue date will be canceled by Treasury.
(2) The proceeds from checks canceled pursuant to paragraph (b)(1) of this section will be returned to the payment certifying or authorizing agency for ultimate credit to the appropriation or fund account initially charged for the payment.
(3) On a monthly basis, Treasury will provide to each agency that authorizes the issuance of checks a list of those checks issued for such agency which were canceled during the preceding month pursuant to paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
Notes of Decisions
Alnor Check Cashing v. Katz, 821 F. Supp. 307 (E.D. Pa. 1993).
· cites it 9× “The Treasury rules promulgated in Chapter 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations set forth a bank’s responsibilities when handling federal commercial paper.”
Noble Energy, Inc. v. Kenneth Salazar, 671 F.3d 1241 (D.C. Cir. 2012).
· cites it 2× “2 (quoting 31 C.F.R. § 240.5 ). The court, while acknowledging that the regulations were “fairly comprehensive” and apparently accepting the government’s argument that their literal language would abrogate the common law, nevertheless held that the regulations did not “make…”
United States v. Jeffrey Page, 116 F.4th 822 (9th Cir. 2024).
“§ 3328 (a)(1)(A); 31 C.F.R. § 240.5 (a)(1), (b)(1), and may “decline payment of a Treasury check after first examination,” 31 U.”
ABN Amro Bank N.V. v. United States, 34 Fed. Cl. 126 (Fed. Cl. 1995).
· cites it 3× “Defendant also rests a contingent counterclaim on the theory that plaintiff breached its guarantee of prior indorsements pursuant to 31 C.F.R. § 240.5 . As explained above, that guarantee does not control in situations when a check contains a forged drawer’s signature in…”
Breault v. Heckler, 591 F. Supp. 308 (D. Conn. 1984).
· cites it 2× “The Treasury made no determination as to who ultimately received the funds from the Treasury nor did it direct the bank to recover any funds from appellant.”
United States v. Jeffrey Page (9th Cir. 2024).
“§ 3328 (a)(1)(A); 31 C.F.R. § 240.5 (a)(1), (b)(1), and may “decline payment of a Treasury check after first examination,” 31 U.”
United States v. Jeffrey Page (9th Cir. 2024).
“§ 3328 (a)(1)(A); 31 C.F.R. § 240.5 (a)(1), (b)(1), and may “decline payment of a Treasury check after first examination,” 31 U.”
Crockford v. Merchants Nat'l Bank, 2 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 235 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1986).
“” 31 CFR 240.5 (a) provides the Treasury with the right to demand a refund from the presenting bank when the check is found to bear a forged and/or unauthorized indorsement: "The Treasury has the right to demand refund from the presenting bank of the amount of a paid check if…”
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.