Illinois Compiled Statutes
810 ILCS 5/4-208 (2026)
Presentment warranties
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(810 ILCS 5/4-208)
(from Ch. 26, par. 4-208)
Sec. 4-208.
Presentment warranties.
(a) If an unaccepted draft is presented to the drawee for payment or
acceptance and the drawee pays or accepts the draft, (i) the person
obtaining payment or acceptance, at the time of presentment, and (ii) a
previous transferor of the draft, at the time of transfer, warrant to the
drawee that pays or accepts the draft in good faith that:
(1) the warrantor is or was, at the time the | warrantor transferred the draft, a person entitled to enforce the draft or authorized to obtain payment or acceptance of the draft on behalf of a person entitled to enforce the draft; |
(2) the draft has not been altered; and
(3) the warrantor has no knowledge that the signature | of the purported drawer of the draft is unauthorized. |
(b) A drawee making payment may recover from any warrantor damages for
breach of warranty equal to the amount paid by the drawee less the amount the
drawee received or is entitled to receive from the drawer because of the
payment. In addition, the drawee is entitled to compensation for expenses and
loss of interest resulting from the breach. The right of the drawee to recover
damages under this subsection is not affected by any failure of the drawee to
exercise ordinary care in making payment. If the drawee accepts the draft (i)
breach of warranty is a defense to the obligation of the acceptor, and (ii) if
the acceptor makes payment with respect to the draft, the acceptor is entitled
to recover from any warrantor for breach of warranty the amounts stated in this
subsection.
(c) If a drawee asserts a claim for breach of warranty under subsection
(a) based on an unauthorized indorsement of the draft or an alteration of
the draft, the warrantor may defend by proving that the indorsement is
effective under Section 3-404 or 3-405 or the drawer is precluded under
Section 3-406 or 4-406 from asserting against the drawee the unauthorized
indorsement or alteration.
(d) If (i) a dishonored draft is presented for payment to the drawer or an
indorser or (ii) any other item is presented for payment to a party obliged to
pay the item, and the item is paid, the person obtaining payment and a prior
transferor of the item warrant to the person making payment in good faith that
the warrantor is or was, at the time the warrantor transferred the item, a
person entitled to enforce the item or authorized to obtain payment on behalf
of a person entitled to enforce the item. The person making payment may recover
from any warrantor for breach of warranty an amount equal to the amount paid
plus expenses and loss of interest resulting from the breach.
(e) The warranties stated in subsections (a) and (d) cannot be
disclaimed with respect to checks. Unless notice of a claim for breach of
warranty is given to the warrantor within 30 days after the claimant has
reason to know of the breach and the identity of the warrantor, the
warrantor is discharged to the extent of any loss caused by the delay in
giving notice of the claim.
(f) A cause of action for breach of warranty under this Section accrues
when the claimant has reason to know of the breach.
(Source: P.A. 87-582; 87-1135.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1997–2025 · leading case: Newell v. Newell, 942 N.E.2d 776 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
Newell v. Newell, 942 N.E.2d 776 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “" 810 ILCS 5/4-208(f) (West 2006). Had the drafters intended the discovery rule to apply to all article 4 claims, they would have included this discovery rule language in section 4-111.”
Byline Bank v. Bank of Am., 2025 IL App (1st) 230927-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2025). “First, it warranted that, pursuant to sections 3-417 and 4-208 of the UCC (810 ILCS 5/3-417), (810 ILCS 5/4-208) (West 2020)), it was entitled to enforce the checks or was authorized to obtain payment of a person entitled to enforce the checks.”
Newell v. Newell (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “" 810 ILCS 5/4-208(f) (West 2006). Had the drafters intended the discovery rule to apply to all article 4 claims, they would have included this discovery rule language in section 4-111.”
Clean World Eng'g, LTD. v. MidAmerica Bank (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “See also 810 ILCS 5/4-208(a) (West 2000) (substantially similar to section 3-417(a)).”
Napleton v. Great Lakes Bank (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “(f) Without regard to care or lack of care of either the customer or the bank, a customer who does not within one year after the statement or items made available to the customer (subsection (a)) discover and report the customer’s unauthorized signature on or any alteration on…”
NBD Bank v. Stand. Bank & Trust Co., 956 F. Supp. 788 (N.D. Ill. 1997). “* ‡ ‡ ‡ * (b) The liability of a payor bank to pay an item pursuant to subsection (a) is subject to defenses based on breach of a presentment warranty (Section 4-208 [810 ILCS 5/4-208]) or proof that the person seeking enforcement of the liability presented or transferred the…”
— 810 ILCS 5/4-208(a) — 1 case
Clean World Eng'g, LTD. v. MidAmerica Bank (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “See also 810 ILCS 5/4-208(a) (West 2000) (substantially similar to section 3-417(a)).”
— 810 ILCS 5/4-208(f) — 2 cases
Newell v. Newell, 942 N.E.2d 776 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “" 810 ILCS 5/4-208(f) (West 2006). Had the drafters intended the discovery rule to apply to all article 4 claims, they would have included this discovery rule language in section 4-111.”
Newell v. Newell (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “" 810 ILCS 5/4-208(f) (West 2006). Had the drafters intended the discovery rule to apply to all article 4 claims, they would have included this discovery rule language in section 4-111.”
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.
|