Florida Statute 673.4031 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XXXIX
COMMERCIAL RELATIONS

Chapter 673
UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE: NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS

View Entire Chapter

673.4031 Unauthorized signature.—

(1) Unless otherwise provided in this chapter or chapter 674, an unauthorized signature is ineffective except as the signature of the unauthorized signer in favor of a person who in good faith pays the instrument or takes it for value. An unauthorized signature may be ratified for all purposes of this chapter.

(2) If the signature of more than one person is required to constitute the authorized signature of an organization, the signature of the organization is unauthorized if one of the required signatures is lacking.

(3) The civil or criminal liability of a person who makes an unauthorized signature is not affected by any provision of this chapter which makes the unauthorized signature effective for the purposes of this chapter.

History.—s. 2, ch. 92-82.

F.S. 673.4031 on Google Scholar

F.S. 673.4031 on CourtListener

Amendments to 673.4031

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 673.4031

Total Results: 3 | Sort by: Relevance | Newest First

Copy

Gateway Am. Bank v. Lucky Jet Corp., 720 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).

Cited 7 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 14300, 1998 WL 821795

...Lucky Jet claimed in its lawsuit that Gateway cashed three forged checks drawn on Lucky Jet's account. Although Lucky Jet contends that it is well established that a bank is bound to know the signatures of its depositors and that payment on a forged check cannot be charged to the account of the depositor, see section 673.4031, Florida Statutes (1997), there are several statutory defenses that a bank can assert to avoid liability for paying a forged instrument....

Copy

Arkwright Mut. Ins. Co. v. Bank of Am., N.A., 212 F.3d 1224 (11th Cir. 2000).

Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 41 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 726, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 11737, 2000 WL 679165

...olations of Florida's version of the U.C.C. and for breach of the banking contract.1 Ordinarily, a drawee bank is absolutely liable to its customer for payment of a forged check. Because a forged check is not a "properly payable item," Fla. Stat. § 673.4031 (1993); see also Perini Corp....

Copy

Arkwright Mut. Ins. Co. v. Bank of Am., N.A., 212 F.3d 1224 (11th Cir. 2000).

Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

...account for violations of Florida’s version of the U.C.C. and for breach of the banking contract.1 Ordinarily, a drawee bank is absolutely liable to its customer for payment of a forged check. Because a forged check is not a “properly payable item,” Fla. Stat. § 673.4031 (1993); see also Perini Corp....