Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

You're probably overthinking it. Call a lawyer.

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 673.3051 - Full Text and Legal Analysis
Florida Statute 673.3051 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
F.S. 673.3051 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 673.3051

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XXXIX
COMMERCIAL RELATIONS
Chapter 673
UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE: NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS
View Entire Chapter
673.3051 Defenses and claims in recoupment.—
(1) Except as stated in subsection (2), the right to enforce the obligation of a party to pay an instrument is subject to:
(a) A defense of the obligor based on:
1. Infancy of the obligor to the extent it is a defense to a simple contract;
2. Duress, lack of legal capacity, or illegality of the transaction which, under other law, nullifies the obligation of the obligor;
3. Fraud that induced the obligor to sign the instrument with neither knowledge nor reasonable opportunity to learn of its character or its essential terms; or
4. Discharge of the obligor in insolvency proceedings;
(b) A defense of the obligor stated in another section of this chapter or a defense of the obligor that would be available if the person entitled to enforce the instrument were enforcing a right to payment under a simple contract; and
(c) A claim in recoupment of the obligor against the original payee of the instrument if the claim arose from the transaction that gave rise to the instrument; but the claim of the obligor may be asserted against a transferee of the instrument only to reduce the amount owing on the instrument at the time the action is brought.
(2) The right of a holder in due course to enforce the obligation of a party to pay the instrument is subject to defenses of the obligor stated in paragraph (1)(a), but is not subject to defenses of the obligor stated in paragraph (1)(b) or claims in recoupment stated in paragraph (1)(c) against a person other than the holder.
(3) Except as stated in subsection (4), in an action to enforce the obligation of a party to pay the instrument, the obligor may not assert against the person entitled to enforce the instrument a defense, claim in recoupment, or claim to the instrument (s. 673.3061) of another person, but the other person’s claim to the instrument may be asserted by the obligor if the other person is joined in the action and personally asserts the claim against the person entitled to enforce the instrument. An obligor is not obliged to pay the instrument if the person seeking enforcement of the instrument does not have rights of a holder in due course and the obligor proves that the instrument is a lost or stolen instrument.
(4) In an action to enforce the obligation of an accommodation party to pay an instrument, the accommodation party may assert against the person entitled to enforce the instrument any defense or claim in recoupment under subsection (1) that the accommodated party could assert against the person entitled to enforce the instrument, except the defenses of discharge in insolvency proceedings, infancy, and lack of legal capacity.
History.—s. 2, ch. 92-82.

F.S. 673.3051 on Google Scholar

F.S. 673.3051 on CourtListener

Amendments to 673.3051


Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 673.3051

Total Results: 14  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Any Kind Checks Cashed, Inc. v. Talcott, 830 So. 2d 160 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).

Cited 9 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 48 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 800

...on to pay the draft is subject to (1) all defenses Talcott could raise "if the person entitled to enforce the instrument were enforcing a right to payment under a simple contract," and (2) a claim of "recoupment" Talcott could raise against Guarino. § 673.3051(1) & (2), Fla....
Copy

Citibank, N.A. v. Dalessio, 756 F. Supp. 2d 1361 (M.D. Fla. 2010).

Cited 4 times | Published | District Court, M.D. Florida | 2010 WL 5137601

...hat the instrument contains an unauthorized signature or has been altered; (5) without notice of any claim to the instrument described in section 673.3061; and (6) without notice that any party has a defense or claim in *1367 recoupment described in section 673.3051(1)....
Copy

Am. First Fed., Inc. v. Lake Forest Park, Inc., 198 F.3d 1259 (11th Cir. 1999).

Cited 2 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 1999 WL 1247766

...gate, of any unpaid tax.... " Fla. Stat. Ann. § 201.17(2) (West 1999). 2 A holder in due course takes an instrument free from defenses which might have been available between the original parties. See U.C.C. § 3-305 (1972); Fla. Stat. Ann. § 673.3051(2) (West 1993). detailed in 12 U.S.C....
Copy

HSBC Bank USA v. Buset, 241 So. 3d 882 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018).

Cited 1 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal

...the interest of the holder, but the borrower cannot make this argument on its own; instead, the person making that claim must be “joined in the action and personally assert[ ] the claim against the person entitled to enforce the instrument.” § 673.3051(3)....
Copy

Aquasol Condo Assoc. v. HSBC Bank USA (Fla. 3d DCA 2018).

Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal

...the borrower cannot make this argument on its own; instead, the person making that claim must be “joined in the action and personally assert[ ] the claim against the person entitled to enforce the instrument.” § 673.3051(3). Even then, ownership is not relevant to standing so much as the question of who is the ultimate beneficial owner of the proceeds of the foreclosure, an issue not normally or necessarily part of a foreclosure case....
Copy

Broide v. Alvarez, 90 So. 3d 857 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012).

Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2012 WL 1934415, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8736

...Because the Operational Agreement is invalid and because that agreement was the sole consideration for the Note, the Note is unenforceable for lack of consideration. See § 673.3031(2), Fla. Stat. (2004) (“The drawer or maker of an instrument has a defense if the instrument is issued without consideration.”); § 673.3051(l)(b), Fla....
Copy

In re Elowitz, 550 B.R. 603 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2016).

Published | United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. | 75 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 1237, 26 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 205, 89 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 823, 2016 Bankr. LEXIS 2206

....The “holder” of an instrument qualifies as • a "holder in due course” if it meets additional criteria. See Fla. Stat. § 673.3021 , A holder in due course has greater rights with respect to a negotiable instrument than a mere holder. See Fla. Stat. § 673.3051 (2): see also, Davis v....
Copy

Heritage Real Est. & Dev. Co. v. Gaich, 620 So. 2d 1118 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993).

Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 7072, 1993 WL 242583

...5th DCA 1988); FBA Corp. v. General Air Services, Inc., 479 So.2d 321 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Atrio Consolidated Industries, Inc. v. Southeast Bank, 434 So.2d 349 , 350 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Davar Corp. v. Tropic Land Improvement Corp., 330 So.2d 482 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); § 673.3051(1)(c), Fla....
Copy

Hobley v. Metz, 630 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).

Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3, 1994 WL 1269

a defense or claim in recoupment described in § 673.3051(1). . Section 673.3081(2), Florida Statutes
Copy

Carrillo Dev., LLC v. Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC, 193 So. 3d 4 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015).

Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 19222, 2015 WL 9315732

...We affirm the final judgment of foreclosure, concluding that there was competent substantial evidence to support the trial court’s determinations that Bayview had standing, and that Bayview was a holder in due course as provided in section 673.3021(1), Florida Statutes (2010). See § 673.3051, Fla....
Copy

Cabrillo Dev., LLC v. Bayview Loan Servs., LLC (Fla. 3d DCA 2015).

Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal

...losure, concluding that there was competent substantial evidence to support the trial court’s determinations that Bayview had standing, and that Bayview was a holder in due course as provided in section 673.3021(1), Florida Statutes (2010). See § 673.3051, Fla....
Copy

Am. First Fed. v. Lake Forest (11th Cir. 1999).

Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

...§ 1821(d), it had not exhausted its administrative remedies, and thus the court did not have subject matter jurisdiction to consider its 2 A holder in due course takes an instrument free from defenses which might have been available between the original parties. See U.C.C. § 3-305 (1972); Fla. Stat. Ann. § 673.3051(2) (West 1993). -7- claim.3 Section 1821(d)(13)(D) provides: Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, no court shall have jurisdiction over– (i...
Copy

Gregory Mirmelli v. Harvey Silverman, Etc. (Fla. 3d DCA 2022).

Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal

...possession[.]”); see also First Nat’l Entm’t Corp. v. Brumlik, 531 So. 2d 403, 404 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988) (“Failure of consideration is a personal defense which cannot be asserted by the maker of a negotiable instrument against a holder in due course.”); § 673.3051(2), Fla....
Copy

Aquasol Condo Assoc. v. HSBC Bank USA (Fla. 3d DCA 2018).

Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal

...the borrower cannot make this argument on its own; instead, the person making that claim must be “joined in the action and personally assert[ ] the claim against the person entitled to enforce the instrument.” § 673.3051(3). Even then, ownership is not relevant to standing so much as the question of who is the ultimate beneficial owner of the proceeds of the foreclosure, an issue not normally or necessarily part of a foreclosure case....