Illinois Compiled Statutes
810 ILCS 5/3-309 (2026)
Enforcement of lost, destroyed, or stolen instrument
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(810 ILCS 5/3-309)
(from Ch. 26, par. 3-309)
Sec. 3-309.
Enforcement of lost, destroyed, or stolen instrument.
(a) A person not in possession of an instrument is entitled to enforce
the instrument if (i) the person was in possession of the
instrument and entitled to enforce it when loss of possession occurred,
(ii) the loss of possession was not the result of a transfer by the person
or a lawful seizure, and (iii) the person cannot reasonably obtain
possession of the instrument because the instrument was destroyed, its
whereabouts cannot be determined, or it is in the wrongful possession of an
unknown person or a person that cannot be found or is not amenable to
service of process.
(b) A person seeking enforcement of an instrument under subsection
(a) must prove the terms of the instrument and the person's right to
enforce the instrument. If that proof is made, Section 3-308 applies to
the case as if the person seeking enforcement had produced the instrument.
The court may not enter judgment in favor of the person seeking enforcement
unless it finds that the person required to pay the instrument is
adequately protected against loss that might occur by reason of a claim by
another person to enforce the instrument. Adequate protection may be
provided by any reasonable means.
(Source: P.A. 87-582; 87-1135.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1998–2022 · leading case: Affiliated Heath Grp., Ltd v. Devon Bank, 2016 IL App (1st) 152685 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016).
Affiliated Heath Grp., Ltd v. Devon Bank, 2016 IL App (1st) 152685 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “810 ILCS 5/3-309(a) (West 2014). Affiliated cannot satisfy the third requirement of section 3- 309(a) because the instrument has not been destroyed.”
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC v. Dominguez, 2021 IL App (2d) 190763-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). “See 810 ILCS 5/3-309 (West 2018) (discussing requirements to enforce a lost or destroyed instrument).”
Parkway Bank & Trust Co. v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 2013 IL App (1st) 122387 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013). “In such a case, the co-payee may sue the payor bank for conversion under section 3-420 (810 ILCS 5/3-420 (West 2010)) or sue the drawer under section 3-309 (810 ILCS 5/3-309 (West 2010)) for enforcement of a lost, destroyed, or stolen instrument; however, he “cannot merely…”
Wilmington Sav. Fund Soc'y FSB v. Schrader, 2022 IL App (1st) 210372-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). “810 ILCS 5/3-309 (West 2020)1. Defendant argued that under section 3-309, a party seeking to enforce a lost note must demonstrate possession prior to its loss.”
Strosberg v. Brauvin Realty Servs., Inc. (Ill. App. Ct. 1998). “Under section 3-301, a person who does not have possession of the instrument can enforce it if the person was in possession of the instrument and was entitled to enforce it but the instrument was lost, destroyed or stolen (see 810 ILCS 5/3-309 (West 1996)) or if the instrument…”
Greeling v. Abendroth (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). “Calling the certificate of deposit "lost" was a fictional device to get around plaintiff's possession of it.”
— 810 ILCS 5/3-309(a) — 2 cases
Affiliated Heath Grp., Ltd v. Devon Bank, 2016 IL App (1st) 152685 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “810 ILCS 5/3-309(a) (West 2014). Affiliated cannot satisfy the third requirement of section 3- 309(a) because the instrument has not been destroyed.”
Greeling v. Abendroth (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). “Calling the certificate of deposit "lost" was a fictional device to get around plaintiff's possession of it.”
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.
|