Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 104A.4212 (2026)

Liability and duty of receiving bank regarding unaccepted payment order

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

NRS 104A.4212 Liability and duty of receiving bank regarding unaccepted payment order. If a receiving bank fails to accept a payment order that it is obliged by express agreement to accept, the bank is liable for breach of the agreement to the extent provided in the agreement or in this article, but does not otherwise have any duty to accept a payment order or, before acceptance, to take any action, or refrain from taking action, with respect to the order except as provided in this article or by express agreement. Liability based on acceptance arises only when acceptance occurs as stated in NRS 104A.4209, and liability is limited to that provided in this article. A receiving bank is not the agent of the sender or beneficiary of the payment order it accepts, or of any other party to the funds transfer, and the bank owes no duty to any party to the funds transfer except as otherwise provided in this article or by express agreement.

(Added to NRS by 1991, 439)

Part 3

Execution of Sender’s Payment Order by Receiving Bank

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 2011–2011 · leading case: Lombino v. Bank of Am., N.A., 797 F. Supp. 2d 1078 (D. Nev. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Lombino v. Bank of Am., N.A., 797 F. Supp. 2d 1078 (D. Nev. 2011). · cites it 2× “Furthermore, even if this court were to adopt the reasoning of Chino Commercial Bank and conclude that “[u]nder UCC section 4A-212 [Nev.Rev.Stat. § 104A.4212] ... a receiving bank cannot be held liable under common law theories for merely accepting a wire transfer,” Chino…”

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.