ILCS » Chapter 810 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

810 ILCS 5/3-201 (2026)

Negotiation

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(810 ILCS 5/3-201) (from Ch. 26, par. 3-201)
    Sec. 3-201. Negotiation.
    (a) "Negotiation" means a transfer of possession, whether voluntary or involuntary, of an instrument by a person other than the issuer to a person who thereby becomes its holder.
    (b) Except for negotiation by a remitter, if an instrument is payable to an identified person, negotiation requires transfer of possession of the instrument and its indorsement by the holder. If an instrument is payable to bearer, it may be negotiated by transfer of possession alone.
(Source: P.A. 87-582; 87-1135.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2021 · leading case: U.S. Bank Trust Nat'l Assoc. v. Lopez, 2018 IL App (2d) 160967 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
U.S. Bank Trust Nat'l Assoc. v. Lopez, 2018 IL App (2d) 160967 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “Plaintiff concedes that it was not the holder of the note when the original complaint was filed.”
U.S. Bank Trust Nat'l Ass'n. v. Lopez, 2018 IL App (2d) 160967 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “¶ 25 Similarly, defendants cite section 3-201 of the UCC (810 ILCS 5/3-201 (West 2014)) to demonstrate that negotiation of a note requires an indorsement by the holder.”
US Bank v. Kosterman, 2015 IL App (1st) 133627 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “810 ILCS 5/3-201(a) (West 2012). Defendants’ claim that these endorsements are not clearly visible or legible is unavailing.”
People v. Minter, 2015 IL App (1st) 133627 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “810 ILCS 5/3-201(a) (West 2012). Defendants’ claim that these endorsements are not clearly visible or legible is unavailing.”
Wilmington Trust Nat'l Ass'n v. Bozek, 2021 IL App (1st) 200932-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). “Garner, 2013 IL App (1st) 123422, ¶ 26 ; see 810 ILCS 5/3-201(b) (West 2012). The burden was on the defendants to prove that Wilmington Trust did not have an interest in the note, and they did not produce any admissible evidence in support of their assertion.”
Harder v. First Capital Bank (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). “See 810 ILCS 5/3-201, 3-301 (West 1998). This requires banks to determine if a party to any instrument is a holder in due course and further requires consideration of whether the instrument is payable jointly or in the alternative.”
Strosberg v. Brauvin Realty Servs., Inc. (Ill. App. Ct. 1998). “See 810 ILCS 5/3-201 (West 1996) (the status of holder can arise when the instrument is negotiated and possession is transferred by a person other than the issuer to a person who thereby becomes a holder).”
— 810 ILCS 5/3-201(a) — 2 cases
US Bank v. Kosterman, 2015 IL App (1st) 133627 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “810 ILCS 5/3-201(a) (West 2012). Defendants’ claim that these endorsements are not clearly visible or legible is unavailing.”
People v. Minter, 2015 IL App (1st) 133627 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “810 ILCS 5/3-201(a) (West 2012). Defendants’ claim that these endorsements are not clearly visible or legible is unavailing.”
— 810 ILCS 5/3-201(b) — 1 case
Wilmington Trust Nat'l Ass'n v. Bozek, 2021 IL App (1st) 200932-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). “Garner, 2013 IL App (1st) 123422, ¶ 26 ; see 810 ILCS 5/3-201(b) (West 2012). The burden was on the defendants to prove that Wilmington Trust did not have an interest in the note, and they did not produce any admissible evidence in support of their assertion.”
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.