ILCS » Chapter 810 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

810 ILCS 5/3-401 (2026)

Signature necessary for liability on instrument

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(810 ILCS 5/3-401) (from Ch. 26, par. 3-401)
    Sec. 3-401. Signature necessary for liability on instrument. A person is not liable on an instrument unless (i) the person signed the instrument, or (ii) the person is represented by an agent or representative who signed the instrument and the signature is binding on the represented person under Section 3-402.
(Source: P.A. 103-1036, eff. 1-1-25.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1993–2014 · leading case: Armagan v. Pesha, 2014 IL App (1st) 121840 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Armagan v. Pesha, 2014 IL App (1st) 121840 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “¶ 43 Defendants make additional arguments for dismissal of the verified complaint in their appeal brief: that Exhibit E, the alleged “receipt,” is a forgery; they attack the veracity of the allegations in the complaint; and that the “receipt” is unenforceable pursuant to section…”
Henry v. Waller, 2012 IL App (1st) 102068 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “, 810 ILCS 5/3-401 (West 2010) (a person’s liability on an instrument when signed by an agent or representative); 810 ILCS 5/3-402 (West 2010) (signature by a representative); 810 ILCS 5/3-405 (West 2010) (employer’s responsibility for fraudulent indorsement by an employee).”
First Nat'l Bank v. Colonial Bank, 831 F. Supp. 637 (N.D. Ill. 1993). “Funding, and Spec-Cast which would prevent Colonial from raising the defense of unjust enrichment and thereby decreasing its liability to the extent First National suffered no loss.”
— 810 ILCS 5/3-401(a) — 1 case
First Nat'l Bank v. Colonial Bank, 831 F. Supp. 637 (N.D. Ill. 1993). “Funding, and Spec-Cast which would prevent Colonial from raising the defense of unjust enrichment and thereby decreasing its liability to the extent First National suffered no loss.”
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.