Iowa Code

Iowa Code § 554.4201 (2026)

Status of collecting bank as agent and provisional status of credits — applicability of Article — item endorsed “pay any bank”

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IA-LEGlegis.iowa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

1. Unless a contrary intent clearly appears and before the time that a settlement given by a collecting bank for an item is or becomes final, the bank, with respect to the item, is an agent or subagent of the owner of the item and any settlement given for the item is provisional. This provision applies regardless of the form of endorsement or lack of endorsement and even though credit given for the item is subject to immediate withdrawal as of right or is in fact withdrawn; but the continuance of ownership of an item by its owner and any rights of the owner to proceeds of the item are subject to rights of a collecting bank, such as those resulting from outstanding advances on the item and rights of recoupment or setoff. If an item is handled by banks for purposes of presentment, payment, collection, or return, the relevant provisions of this Article apply even though action of the parties clearly establishes that a particular bank has purchased the item and is the owner of it.

2. After an item has been endorsed with the words “pay any bank” or the like, only a bank may acquire the rights of a holder until the item has been:

a. returned to the customer initiating collection; or

b. specially endorsed by a bank to a person who is not a bank. [C66, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, §554.4201] 94 Acts, ch 1167, §88, 122 Referred to in §554.3206 \n

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1990–1990 · leading case: Alta Vista State Bank v. Linda Kobliska, First Nat'l Bank of Minneapolis, D/B/A First Bank, Minneapolis, 897 F.2d 930 (1st Cir. 1990).
Alta Vista State Bank v. Linda Kobliska, First Nat'l Bank of Minneapolis, D/B/A First Bank, Minneapolis, 897 F.2d 930 (1st Cir. 1990). · cites it 2× “Iowa Code § 554.4201 Alta Vista argues that First Bank Minneapolis was its agent as to checks 0548 and 0549, and owed it all the duties associated with the agency relationship including the duty to disclose its suspicions that Andersen’s was kiting checks.”
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.