Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 1303
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 1303.67 (2026)

Payment - UCC 3-602

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
April 6, 2017
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 463 - 131st General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

(A) Subject to division (E) of this section, an instrument is paid to the extent payment is made by or on behalf of a party obliged to pay the instrument and to a person entitled to enforce the instrument.

(B)(1) Subject to division (E) of this section, a note is paid to the extent payment is made by or on behalf of a party obliged to pay the note to a person that formerly was entitled to enforce the note only if at the time of the payment the party obliged to pay has not received adequate notification that the note has been transferred and that payment is to be made to the transferee. A notification is adequate only if all of the following apply:

(a) It is signed by the transferor or the transferee.

(b) It reasonably identifies the transferred note.

(c) It provides an address at which payments subsequently are to be made.

(2) Upon request, a transferee shall seasonably furnish reasonable proof that the note has been transferred. Unless the transferee complies with the request, a payment to the person that formerly was entitled to enforce the note is effective for purposes of division (C) of this section even if the party obliged to pay the note has received a notification under division (B)(1) of this section.

(C) Subject to division (E) of this section, to the extent of a payment under divisions (A) and (B) of this section, the obligation of the party obliged to pay the instrument is discharged even though payment is made with knowledge of a claim to the instrument under section 1303.36 of the Revised Code by another person.

(D) Subject to division (E) of this section, a transferee, or any party that has acquired rights in the instrument directly or indirectly from a transferee, including any such party that has rights as a holder in due course, is deemed to have notice of any payment that is made under division (B) of this section after the date that the note is transferred to the transferee but before the party obliged to pay the note received adequate notification of the transfer.

(E) The obligation of a party to pay the instrument is not discharged under division (A), (B), (C), or (D) of this section under either of the following circumstances:

(1) A claim to the instrument under section 1303.36 of the Revised Code is enforceable against the party receiving payment and either of the following applies:

(a) Payment is made with knowledge by the payor that payment is prohibited by injunction or similar process of a court of competent jurisdiction.

(b) In the case of an instrument other than a cashier's check, teller's check, or certified check, the party making payment accepted, from the person having a claim to the instrument, indemnity against loss resulting from refusal to pay the person entitled to enforce the instrument.

(2) The person making payment knows that the instrument is a stolen instrument and pays a person it knows is in wrongful possession of the instrument.

(F) As used in this section, "signed," with respect to a record that is not a writing, includes the attachment to or logical association with the record of an electronic symbol, sound, or process with the present intent to adopt or accept the record.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1991–2015 · leading case: Bank of Am., N.A. v. Pasqualone, 2013 Ohio 5795 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bank of Am., N.A. v. Pasqualone, 2013 Ohio 5795 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 6× “They are designed to 4 R.C. 1303.67 states: (A) Subject to division (B) of this section, an instrument is paid to the extent payment is made by or on behalf of a party obliged to pay the instrument and to a person entitled to enforce the instrument.”
McGlothin v. Huffman, 640 N.E.2d 598 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 5× “Instead, R.C. 1303.67 (UCC 3-601) indexes and cross-references relevant code sections on discharge.”
Nationstar Mtge., L.L.C. v. West, 2014 Ohio 735 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). “UCC § 3-602(a), (c) [R.C. 1303.67(A)]. By contrast, the rules concerning transfer of ownership and other interests in a note identify who, among competing claimants, is entitled to the note's economic value (that is, the value of the maker's promise to pay).”
U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v. George, 2015 Ohio 4957 (Ohio Ct. App. 2015). “Chapter 1303 and our precedent in Pasqualone, a payment to a person entitled to enforce satisfies the debtor's mortgage loan obligation on a dollar-for-dollar basis, and the debtor never has to pay that amount again.”
U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v. George, 2015 Ohio 4957 (Ohio Ct. App. 2015). “R.C. 1303.67(A); Pasqualone at ¶ 24. Thus, once a bank proves its status as the person entitled to enforce the note, then the debtor will not face the danger of double liability.”
Baumgart v. Hobart Corp. (In re Freewerth Enter., Inc.), 125 B.R. 505 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1991). “HNB claims *508 lack of perfection constitutes an unjustifiable impairment of collateral for the promissory notes given by the Debtor, against whom Harry Friedman had a right of recourse, pursuant to Ohio Revised Code, §§ 1303.67 and 1303.72(A)(2). 9. That Harry Freedman was the…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 1303.67(A) — 4 cases
Bank of Am., N.A. v. Pasqualone, 2013 Ohio 5795 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013). “They are designed to 4 R.C. 1303.67 states: (A) Subject to division (B) of this section, an instrument is paid to the extent payment is made by or on behalf of a party obliged to pay the instrument and to a person entitled to enforce the instrument.”
Nationstar Mtge., L.L.C. v. West, 2014 Ohio 735 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). “UCC § 3-602(a), (c) [R.C. 1303.67(A)]. By contrast, the rules concerning transfer of ownership and other interests in a note identify who, among competing claimants, is entitled to the note's economic value (that is, the value of the maker's promise to pay).”
U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v. George, 2015 Ohio 4957 (Ohio Ct. App. 2015). “Chapter 1303 and our precedent in Pasqualone, a payment to a person entitled to enforce satisfies the debtor's mortgage loan obligation on a dollar-for-dollar basis, and the debtor never has to pay that amount again.”
U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v. George, 2015 Ohio 4957 (Ohio Ct. App. 2015). “R.C. 1303.67(A); Pasqualone at ¶ 24. Thus, once a bank proves its status as the person entitled to enforce the note, then the debtor will not face the danger of double liability.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 1303.67(B) — 2 cases
McGlothin v. Huffman, 640 N.E.2d 598 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994). “Instead, R.C. 1303.67 (UCC 3-601) indexes and cross-references relevant code sections on discharge.”
Bank of Am., N.A. v. Pasqualone, 2013 Ohio 5795 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013). “They are designed to 4 R.C. 1303.67 states: (A) Subject to division (B) of this section, an instrument is paid to the extent payment is made by or on behalf of a party obliged to pay the instrument and to a person entitled to enforce the instrument.”
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.