Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 673.3111 (2025)

Accord and satisfaction by use of instrument.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

673.3111 Accord and satisfaction by use of instrument.—

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

(2) Unless subsection (3) 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.

(3) Subject to subsection (4), a claim is not discharged under subsection (2) if either paragraph (a) or paragraph (b) applies:

(a) The claimant, if an organization, proves that:

1. 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

2. The instrument or accompanying communication was not received by that designated person, office, or place.

(b) The claimant, whether or not an organization, proves that, within 90 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 subparagraph (a)1.

(4) 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.

History.—s. 2, ch. 92-82.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1996–2021 · leading case: Madison at Soho II Condo. Ass'n v. Devo Acquisition Enter., LLC, 198 So. 3d 1111 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Madison at Soho II Condo. Ass'n v. Devo Acquisition Enter., LLC, 198 So. 3d 1111 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016). · cites it 8× “Devo argued that the Association’s acceptance of Devo’s 12 payment constituted' an accord and satisfaction of that débt, pursuant to section 673.3111, Florida Statutes (2014).”

Berman v. U.S. Fin. Acceptance Corp., 669 So. 2d 1116 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). · cites it 7× “05, Florida Statutes (1993), which allows the satisfaction of a liquidated debt for less than the full amount due by execution of a written instrument was dispositive of the claim, rejecting the appellant’s contention that section 673.3111, Florida Statutes (1993), and the…”

St. Croix Lane Trust v. St. Croix at Pelican Marsh Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 144 So. 3d 639 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014). · cites it 3× “DISCUSSION Section 673.3111, Florida Statutes (2011), “Accord and satisfaction by use of instrument,” provides, in pertinent part, as follows: (1) If a person against whom a claim is asserted proves that that person in good faith tendered an instrument to the claimant as full…”

United Auto. Ins. Co. v. Rivero Diagnostic Ctr., Inc., a/a/o Carlos Bacallao (Fla. 3d DCA 2021). · cites it 9× “§ 673.3111, Fla. Stat. (2020), cmt. 4. Additionally, we find guidance in the comments to section 1-201 of the Uniform Laws Annotated of the Uniform Commercial Code 2, which provide, inter alia: 10.”

Certified Priority Restoration a/a/o Cheryl Coakley v. Universal Ins. Co. of North Am. (Fla. 4th DCA 2021). · cites it 6× “First, the insurer alleged that a valid accord and satisfaction under section 673.3111, Florida Statutes (2017), discharged CPR’s claim.”

Mayfair Int'l, Inc. v. Del Gardo, 864 So. 2d 1239 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). · cites it 3× “See § 673.3111, Fla. Stat. (2001). . The seller cross-appealed asserting that the trial court abused it discretion in denying his motion for leave to amend his answer to add a claim for attorney's fee.”

— 673.3111(1) — 1 case

Certified Priority Restoration a/a/o Cheryl Coakley v. Universal Ins. Co. of North Am. (Fla. 4th DCA 2021). “First, the insurer alleged that a valid accord and satisfaction under section 673.3111, Florida Statutes (2017), discharged CPR’s claim.”

— 673.3111(2) — 2 cases

Madison at Soho II Condo. Ass'n v. Devo Acquisition Enter., LLC, 198 So. 3d 1111 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016). “Devo argued that the Association’s acceptance of Devo’s 12 payment constituted' an accord and satisfaction of that débt, pursuant to section 673.3111, Florida Statutes (2014).”

United Auto. Ins. Co. v. Rivero Diagnostic Ctr., Inc., a/a/o Carlos Bacallao (Fla. 3d DCA 2021). “§ 673.3111, Fla. Stat. (2020), cmt. 4. Additionally, we find guidance in the comments to section 1-201 of the Uniform Laws Annotated of the Uniform Commercial Code 2, which provide, inter alia: 10.”

— 673.3111(4) — 1 case

Mayfair Int'l, Inc. v. Del Gardo, 864 So. 2d 1239 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). “See § 673.3111, Fla. Stat. (2001). . The seller cross-appealed asserting that the trial court abused it discretion in denying his motion for leave to amend his answer to add a claim for attorney's fee.”

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.