Mississippi Code

Miss. Code Ann. § 31-5-15 (2026)

Withdrawal by contractor of amounts retained on public contracts by furnishing different security

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaMiss. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Under any public contract heretofore or hereafter made or awarded by the State of Mississippi, or any agency or department of the State of Mississippi, or by any political subdivision thereof, the contractor may, with the written consent of his or its surety, from time to time, withdraw the whole or any portion of the amount retained from payments due the contractor pursuant to the terms of the contract by depositing with the State Treasurer of the State of Mississippi, or the treasurer or secretary of the political subdivision of the State of Mississippi holding funds belonging to the contractor, the following security, or any combination thereof in an amount equal to or in excess of the amount so withdrawn, said securities to be accepted at the time of deposit at market value but not in excess of par value, to wit:

Codes, 1942, § 9022.5; Laws, 1971, ch. 516, § 1, eff. 7/1/1971; Laws, 1992, ch. 364, § 1, eff. 7/1/1992.

Amended by Laws, 2024, ch. 387, SB 2762,§ 2, eff. 7/1/2024.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2000–2011 · leading case: First Tennessee Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Trustmark Nat'l Bank, 157 F. Supp. 2d 706 (S.D. Miss. 2000).
First Tennessee Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Trustmark Nat'l Bank, 157 F. Supp. 2d 706 (S.D. Miss. 2000). · cites it 5× “First, although First Tennessee did purport to give Trustmark notice of its claimed security interest, it did so long after the securities had been substituted for retainage pursuant to Miss.Code Ann. § 31-5-15 and after the 1996 revisions of Articles 8 and 9 eliminated…”
Trustmark Nat'l Bank v. Roxco Ltd. (Miss. 2009). “Miss. Code Ann. § 31-5-15 (Rev. 2010). ¶13.”
Trustmark Nat'l Bank v. Roxco Ltd., 82 So. 3d 573 (Miss. 2011). “Miss.Code Ann. § 31-5-15 (Rev.2010). ¶ 13.”
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.