O.C.G.A.
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
(a) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument, the effect of tender is governed by principles of law applicable to tender of payment under a simple contract.
(b) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument and the tender is refused, there is discharge, to the extent of the amount of the tender, of the obligation of an indorser or accommodation party having a right of recourse with respect to the obligation to which the tender relates.
(c) If tender of payment of an amount due on an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument, the obligation of the obligor to pay interest after the due date on the amount tendered is discharged. If presentment is required with respect to an instrument and the obligor is able and ready to pay on the due date at every place of payment stated in the instrument, the obligor is deemed to have made tender of payment on the due date to the person entitled to enforce the instrument.
History
Code 1981, § 11-3-603, enacted by Ga. L. 1996, p. 1306, § 3.
Annotations
Law reviews. For article surveying developments in
Georgia commercial law from mid-1980 through mid-1981, see 33 Mercer L. Rev. 33 (1981).
RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 11 Am. Jur. 2d, Bills and Notes, §§ 316, 324 et seq., 422. 68A Am. Jur. 2d, Secured Transactions, § 569. C.J.S. 10 C.J.S., Bills and Notes, § 234. 20 C.J.S., Costs, § 39 et seq. 47 C.J.S., Interest, §§ 61-63. 86 C.J.S., Tender, § 42 et seq. U.L.A. Uniform Commercial Code (U.L.A.) § 3603.
ALR. Is actual tender excused by inability of other party to produce paper or other thing to be surrendered as condition of tender, 14 A.L.R. 1120. Renewal of bill or note as precluding defenses available against the original, 41 A.L.R. 963. Surrender of commercial paper received as conditional payment as condition to recovery on original obligation, 85 A.L.R. 1057.
Notes of Decisions
Bush v. Bank of New York Mellon, 720 S.E.2d 370 (Ga. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 16× “, the Georgia Commercial Code, OCGA § 11-3-603, the statutory requirement that an assignment of a security deed must be recorded before the assignee can exercise its power of sale, OCGA § 44-14-162 (b), and the settlement and satisfaction to which First Horizon allegedly had…”
Skott v. Bank of Am. Illinois, 468 S.E.2d 359 (Ga. 1996).
· cites it 8× “2 If it is a negotiable instrument, then under OCGA § 11-3-603 (3), the Williams, as makers, were authorized as a matter of law to pay Modern Mortgage until Skott, as the assignee, notified them by registered or certified mail of the assignment and that payment was to be made to…”
Fid. Nat'l Bank v. Reid, 348 S.E.2d 913 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 2× “OCGA § 11-3-603. Therefore, at that time, any guaranty ancillary to a fully paid note would generally be deemed nudum pactum ex quo non oritur actio, having no worth or actionable value.”
Union Planters Nat'l Bank v. Crook, 484 S.E.2d 327 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 2× “OCGA § 11-3-603.” The pretrial order was entered by the court on January 23, 1996, prior to the order partially granting and partially denying Union Bank’s summary judgment motion.”
Womack v. Columbus Rentals, Inc., 478 S.E.2d 611 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996).
“…§ 11-3-107 (Foreign Money), § 11-2-201 (Statute of Frauds in the Title on Sales of Goods), and former § 11-3-604 now § 11-3-603 (Tender of Payment). A liberal construction of this timely pro se response in a dispossessory action authorizes the conclusion that defendants…”
— 11-3-603(1) — 1 case
Skott v. Bank of Am. Illinois, 468 S.E.2d 359 (Ga. 1996).
“2 If it is a negotiable instrument, then under OCGA § 11-3-603 (3), the Williams, as makers, were authorized as a matter of law to pay Modern Mortgage until Skott, as the assignee, notified them by registered or certified mail of the assignment and that payment was to be made to…”
— 11-3-603(3) — 1 case
Skott v. Bank of Am. Illinois, 468 S.E.2d 359 (Ga. 1996).
“2 If it is a negotiable instrument, then under OCGA § 11-3-603 (3), the Williams, as makers, were authorized as a matter of law to pay Modern Mortgage until Skott, as the assignee, notified them by registered or certified mail of the assignment and that payment was to be made to…”
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.