Florida Statute 673.3081 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XXXIX
COMMERCIAL RELATIONS

Chapter 673
UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE: NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 673.3081

673.3081 Proof of signatures and status as holder in due course.—

(1) In an action with respect to an instrument, the authenticity of, and authority to make, each signature on the instrument is admitted unless specifically denied in the pleadings. If the validity of a signature is denied in the pleadings, the burden of establishing validity is on the person claiming validity, but the signature is presumed to be authentic and authorized unless the action is to enforce the liability of the purported signer and the signer is dead or incompetent at the time of trial of the issue of validity of the signature. If an action to enforce the instrument is brought against a person as the undisclosed principal of a person who signed the instrument as a party to the instrument, the plaintiff has the burden of establishing that the defendant is liable on the instrument as a represented person under s. 673.4021(1).

(2) If the validity of signatures is admitted or proved and there is compliance with subsection (1), a plaintiff producing the instrument is entitled to payment if the plaintiff proves entitlement to enforce the instrument under s. 673.3011, unless the defendant proves a defense or claim in recoupment. If a defense or claim in recoupment is proved, the right to payment of the plaintiff is subject to the defense or claim, except to the extent the plaintiff proves that the plaintiff has rights of a holder in due course which are not subject to the defense or claim.

History.—s. 2, ch. 92-82.

F.S. 673.3081 on Google Scholar

F.S. 673.3081 on Casetext

Amendments to 673.3081

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 673.3081

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 673.3081.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 673.3081

Total Results: 20

Evelyn Martinez v. Selene Finance LP

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-07-10

Snippet: LOBREE, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See § 673.3081(1), Fla. Stat. (2022); Bennett v. Deutsche Bank

EMAD SELIM v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., etc.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2023-09-06

Snippet: GORDO, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See § 673.3081(1), Fla. Stat. (2020); Barsan v. Trinity Fin.

THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, etc. v. REGIS BONTOUX

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2022-03-16

Snippet: 320, 323 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) holds that section 673.3081(1), Florida Statutes, “instructs that once an

AZRAN MIAMI 2 LLC v. US BANK TRUST, N.A., etc.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2022-01-26

Snippet: opinion which reads in full: Affirmed. See § 673.3081(1), Fla. Stat. (2016); Bennett v. Deutsche

TAMMY CAMPBELL v. ATTORNEYS TITLE INSURANCE FUND, INC. and JERRY A. RIGGS, SR.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2021-01-06

Snippet: presumption of the validity of the checks. See §§ 673.3081(1), 673.1041, Fla. Stat. (2006). The disciplinary

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST, ETC. v. FLEMING HARRIS

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2020-08-12

Snippet: is presumed to be authentic and authorized. § 673.3081(1), Fla. Stat. (2019). “When indorsed in blank

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. v. MARGARETH F BRICOURT

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2020-02-12

Snippet: instrument. If that proof is made, s. 673.3081 applies to the case as if the person

AMY B. SCHWARTZ and JAY F. SCHWARTZ v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., etc.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2019-03-06

Citation: 267 So. 3d 414

Snippet: enforce the note. The appellee relied on section 673.3081, Florida Statutes (2012), to establish its standing

Barsan v. Trinity Fin. Servs., LLC

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2018-10-10

Citation: 258 So. 3d 516

Snippet: PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See § 673.3081(1), Fla. Stat. (2016) ; Bennett v. Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust Co

PMT NPL Financing v. Centurion Systems

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2018-08-20

Citation: 257 So. 3d 516

Snippet: unless specifically denied in the pleadings.” Id. § 673.3081(1). The Uniform Commercial Code (“U.C.C.”) Comment

Rey v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2018-05-08

Citation: 244 So. 3d 409

Snippet: validity of signatures on allonge, based on section 673.3081(1), Florida Statutes, in absence of any evidence

Rey v. U.S. Bank

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2018-05-07

Snippet: validity of signatures on allonge, based on section 673.3081(1), Florida Statutes, in absence of any evidence

HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOC., ETC. v. JAMES HESS a/k/a JAMES H. HESS

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-10-18

Citation: 228 So. 3d 143

Snippet: “contrary” evidence exists in this case. See § 673.3081(1), Fla. Stat. (2016) (“In an action with respect

Peters v. The Bank of New York Mellon

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-05-26

Citation: 227 So. 3d 175, 2017 WL 2304263, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 7646

Snippet: enforce the instrument. If that proof is made, s. 673.3081 applies to the case as if the person seeking enforcement

U.S. Bank National Ass'n v. Roseman

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-03-15

Citation: 214 So. 3d 728, 92 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 159, 2017 WL 1013189, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 3453

Snippet: first affirmative defense stated: Pursuant to 673.3081, Florida Statutes, Defendants specifically deny

PennyMac Corp. v. Frost

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-03-15

Citation: 214 So. 3d 686, 92 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 169, 2017 WL 1013192, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 3441

Snippet: generally “presumed to be authentic and authorized.” § 673.3081(1), Fla. Stat. (2015). However, the issue of whether

Houk v. PennyMac Corp.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-02-10

Citation: 210 So. 3d 726, 2017 WL 535437, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 1659

Snippet: enforce the instrument, If that proof is made, s. 673.3081 applies to the case as if the person seeking enforcement

Polonsky v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2016-11-30

Citation: 207 So. 3d 362, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 17698

Snippet: signatures on the note and mortgage. See § 673.3081(1), Fla. Stat. (2009) (providing that “[i]n an

Sanabria v. Pennymac Mortgage Investment Trust Holdings I, LLC

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2016-07-15

Citation: 197 So. 3d 94, 90 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 57, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 10878, 2016 WL 3767181

Snippet: produce pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 673.3081 (2011), assuming, without conceding

Federal National Mortgage Association v. McFadyen

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2016-04-27

Citation: 194 So. 3d 418, 89 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 652, 2016 WL 1658773, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 6351

Snippet: enforce the instrument. If that proof is made, s. 673.3081 applies to the case as if the person seeking enforcement