O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 11-4-212 (2019)

Presentment by notice of item not payable by, through, or at a bank; liability of drawer or indorser

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)

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.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Unless otherwise instructed, a collecting bank may present an item not payable by, through, or at a bank by sending to the party to accept or pay a written notice that the bank holds the item for acceptance or payment. The notice must be sent in time to be received on or before the day when presentment is due and the bank must meet any requirement of the party to accept or pay under Code Section 11-3-501 by the close of the bank’s next banking day after it knows of the requirement. (b) If presentment is made by notice and payment, acceptance, or request for compliance with a requirement under Code Section 11-3-501 is not received by the close of business on the day after maturity or, in the case of demand items by the close of business on the third banking day after notice was sent, the presenting bank may treat the item as dishonored and charge any drawer or indorser by sending it notice of the facts.

History

Code 1933, § 109A-4-210, enacted by Ga. L. 1962, p. 156, § 1; Code 1981, § 114-212, as redesignated by Ga. L. 1996, p. 1306, § 9.

Annotations

Editor’s notes. Ga. L. 1996, p. 1306, § 11, effective July

1, 1996, renumbered former Code Section 11-4-210 as present Code Section 11-4-212 and renumbered former Code Section 114-212 as present Code Section 11-4-214.

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 11 Am. Jur. 2d, Banks and Financial Institutions, §§ 980, 981.

C.J.S. 9 C.J.S., Banks and Banking, § 408 et seq.

U.L.A. Uniform Commercial Code (U.L.A.) § 4212. ALR. Who must bear loss of funds from fail-

ure of bank, at which bill or note is payable, during delay in presenting it, 2 A.L.R. 1381.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases, 1983–2009 · leading case: Nat. Bank of Georgia v. Weiner, 348 S.E.2d 492 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Nat. Bank of Georgia v. Weiner, 348 S.E.2d 492 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 16× “The law specifically provides the bank with a right to charge back or obtain refund, OCGA § 11-4-212 (1), (3), (4), and (5), and to apply a deposit to an obligation of the customer, OCGA § 11-4-213 (5).”

First Georgia Bank v. Webster, 308 S.E.2d 579 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 8× “Under OCGA § 11-4-212 (Code Ann. § 109A-4 — 212), the bank had the right to revoke the credit it had extended appellee when it was unable to collect the check upon which it had extended the provisional credit.”

Vadde v. Bank of Am., 687 S.E.2d 880 (Ga. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “307, 309 (2) ( 308 SE2d 579 ) (1983) (decided under former OCGA § 11-4-212). 18 Vadde contends that Bank of America is a depositary bank or payor bank.”

Baker v. Campbell, 565 S.E.2d 855 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “The law specifically provides the bank with a right to charge back or obtain refund, OCGA § 11-4-212 (1), (3), (4), and (5), and to apply a deposit to an obligation of the customer [’s debt].”

Landers v. Heritage Bank, 374 S.E.2d 353 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “Held: The bank advanced four theories of recovery: (1) that under the Uniform Commercial Code it had the right to revoke and charge back to a customer’s account those checks it was unable to collect upon which it had extended provisional credit (OCGA § 11-4-212); (2) that it was…”

Peavy v. Bank South, N.A., 474 S.E.2d 690 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “Thus, although the Bank revoked its settlement and charged plaintiffs’ account, ostensibly under OCGA § 11-4-212 (3), claiming that plaintiffs breached warranties imposed by OCGA § 11-4-207 (1), the record in the case sub judice does not establish beyond all question that the…”

Citizens & S. Nat'l Bank v. Sun Belt Elec. Constructors, Inc. (In Re Sun Belt Elec. Constructors, Inc.), 64 B.R. 377 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1986). · cites it 2× “See O.C.G.A. § 11-4-212. If so, C&S will be a creditor of the debtor, and the argument that it is a secured creditor will then be relevant, but it is immaterial to this case.”

Cohutta Banking Co. v. Home Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 372 S.E.2d 689 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “That same day NBG also notified Cohutta by telephone of the returned check. It was undisputed that Cohutta had the right to “charge back” dishonored checks to funds available from the account of Earl’s Used Cars, as specifically set forth in the account agreement.”

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.