12 U.S.C. § 5004

Substitute check warranties

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 12 CasesGoogle Scholar

A bank that transfers, presents, or returns a substitute check and receives consideration for the check warrants, as a matter of law, to the transferee, any subsequent collecting or returning bank, the depositary bank, the drawee, the drawer, the payee, the depositor, and any endorser (regardless of whether the warrantee receives the substitute check or another paper or electronic form of the substitute check or original check) that—(1) the substitute check meets all the requirements for legal equivalence under section 5003(b) of this title; and(2) no depositary bank, drawee, drawer, or endorser will receive presentment or return of the substitute check, the original check, or a copy or other paper or electronic version of the substitute check or original check such that the bank, drawee, drawer, or endorser will be asked to make a payment based on a check that the bank, drawee, drawer, or endorser has already paid.(Pub. L. 108–100, § 5, Oct. 28, 2003, 117 Stat. 1181.)Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective at the end of the 12-month period beginning on Oct. 28, 2003, see section 20 of Pub. L. 108–100, set out as a note under section 5001 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2017–2023 · leading case: Speedy Check Cashers, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 286 F. Supp. 3d 934 (E.D. Ill. 2017).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Speedy Check Cashers, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 286 F. Supp. 3d 934 (E.D. Ill. 2017). · cites it 4× “" 12 U.S.C. § 5004 . The Check 21 Act states that it "shall supersede any provision of Federal or State law, including the Uniform Commercial Code, that is inconsistent with [the Check 21 Act], but only to the extent of the inconsistency.”

Speedy Check Cashers, Inc. v. United States Postal Serv. (N.D. Ill. 2017). · cites it 3× “” 12 U.S.C. § 5004 . The Check 21 Act states that it “shall supersede any provision of Federal or State law, including the Uniform Commercial Code, that is inconsistent with [the Check 21 Act], but only to the extent of the inconsistency.”

Robert J. Triffin v. Pino's Pizzeria & Restaurant (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2023). “12 U.S.C. § 5004 (2). The record is uncontroverted.”

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.