(a) Unless otherwise agreed, if a certified check, cashier's check, or teller's check is taken for an obligation, the obligation is discharged to the same extent discharge would result if an amount of money equal to the amount of the instrument were taken in payment of the obligation. Discharge of the obligation does not affect any liability that the obligor may have as an indorser of the instrument.
(b) Unless otherwise agreed and except as provided in subsection (a) of this section, if a note or an uncertified check is taken for an obligation, the obligation is suspended to the same extent the obligation would be discharged if an amount of money equal to the amount of the instrument were taken, and the following rules apply:
(1) In the case of an uncertified check, suspension of the obligation continues until dishonor of the check or until it is paid or certified. Payment or certification of the check results in discharge of the obligation to the extent of the amount of the check.
(2) In the case of a note, suspension of the obligation continues until dishonor of the note or until it is paid. Payment of the note results in discharge of the obligation to the extent of the payment.
(3) Except as provided in paragraph (4) of this subsection (b), if the check or note is dishonored and the obligee of the obligation for which the instrument was taken is the person entitled to enforce the instrument, the obligee may enforce either the instrument or the obligation. In the case of an instrument of a third person which is negotiated to the obligee by the obligor, discharge of the obligor on the instrument also discharges the obligation.
(4) If the person entitled to enforce the instrument taken for an obligation is a person other than the obligee, the obligee may not enforce the obligation to the extent the obligation is suspended. If the obligee is the person entitled to enforce the instrument but no longer has possession of it because it was lost, stolen, or destroyed, the obligation may not be enforced to the extent of the amount payable on the instrument, and to that extent the obligee's rights against the obligor are limited to enforcement of the instrument.
(c) If an instrument other than one described in subsection (a) or (b) of this section is taken for an obligation, the effect is (i) that stated in subsection (a) of this section if the instrument is one on which a bank is liable as maker or acceptor, or (ii) that stated in subsection (b) of this section in any other case.
Source: L. 94: Entire article R&RE, p. 859, § 1, effective January 1, 1995.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
5
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 2002–2024 · leading case:
Fifth Third Bank v. Jones, 168 P.3d 1 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007).
Fifth Third Bank v. Jones, 168 P.3d 1 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 3× “" IL The bank asserts that the trial court erred as a matter of law by ruling that the promissory note was paid in full because the missing check was not "taken for an obligation" by the bank within the meaning of § 4-3-310(a), C.R.S.2006. Specifically, the bank argues that a…”
Lakeside Ventures, LLC v. Lakeside Dev. Co., 68 P.3d 516 (Colo. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 2× “Therefore, the DLMT note was "taken for an obligation" as provided in § 4-3-310(b). Because the agreement contained no provision limiting the effect of the DLMT note on the judgment, upon the Worrells' receipt of that note the judgment was suspended to the extent of the amount…”
Indiana Harbor Belt R.R. Co. v. United Rail Serv., Inc. (N.D. Ind. 2022).
“The Court will set this matter for a telephonic scheduling conference by separate order. 8 The Court finds these cases helpful because both states have adopted nearly identical versions of the suspension statute at issue in this case.”
Massey v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC (D. Colo. 2024).
“) Massey immediately filed a notice of appeal, and has since followed it with: • A “motion for clarification,” describing the Court’s judgment as “wholly unexplained” and “inexplicable” based on his view of the substantive application of C.R.S. 4-3-310 to his claims (ECF No. 159…”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 4-3-310(a): 2 cases
Fifth Third Bank v. Jones, 168 P.3d 1 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007).
“" IL The bank asserts that the trial court erred as a matter of law by ruling that the promissory note was paid in full because the missing check was not "taken for an obligation" by the bank within the meaning of § 4-3-310(a), C.R.S.2006. Specifically, the bank argues that a…”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 4-3-310(b): 2 cases
Lakeside Ventures, LLC v. Lakeside Dev. Co., 68 P.3d 516 (Colo. Ct. App. 2002).
“Therefore, the DLMT note was "taken for an obligation" as provided in § 4-3-310(b). Because the agreement contained no provision limiting the effect of the DLMT note on the judgment, upon the Worrells' receipt of that note the judgment was suspended to the extent of the amount…”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 4-3-310(b)(2): 1 case
Lakeside Ventures, LLC v. Lakeside Dev. Co., 68 P.3d 516 (Colo. Ct. App. 2002).
“Therefore, the DLMT note was "taken for an obligation" as provided in § 4-3-310(b). Because the agreement contained no provision limiting the effect of the DLMT note on the judgment, upon the Worrells' receipt of that note the judgment was suspended to the extent of the amount…”
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.