---
title: O.C.G.A. § 11-3-308. Proof of signatures and status as holder in due course.
collection: code
id: 11-3-308
cite_as: O.C.G.A. § 11-3-308 (2025)
canonical_url: https://georgiacommons.org/code/11-3-308
md_url: https://georgiacommons.org/code/11-3-308.md
text_url: https://georgiacommons.org/code/11-3-308/text
source_url: https://www.legis.ga.gov/api/document/docs/default-source/joint-features-document-library/t11-(v9)-2022-pdf.pdf?sfvrsn=b5451bbd_0#page=401
date: 2025
status: active
corpus_version: 2025-supplement-89aa39ab3c68
license: CC0-1.0
publisher: Georgia Commons, an independent project of Georgia Civic Data. Not the State of Georgia. Not legal advice.
up: https://georgiacommons.org/code/11-3.md
previous: https://georgiacommons.org/code/11-3-307.md
next: https://georgiacommons.org/code/11-3-309.md
index: https://georgiacommons.org/code/index.md
version: the only printed version
in_force: true
current_through: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly
heading_path: COMMERCIAL CODE / NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS / ENFORCEMENT OF INSTRUMENTS
---

# O.C.G.A. § 11-3-308. Proof of signatures and status as holder in due course.

(a) In an action with respect to an instrument, the authenticity of and authority to make each signature on the instrument is admitted unless specifically denied in the pleadings. If the validity of a signature is denied in the pleadings, the burden of establishing validity is on the person claiming validity, but the signature is presumed to be authentic and authorized unless the action is to enforce the liability of the purported signer and the signer is dead or incompetent at the time of trial of the issue of validity of the signature. If an action to enforce the instrument is brought against a person as the undisclosed principal of a person who signed the instrument as a party to the instrument, the plaintiff has the burden of establishing that the defendant is liable on the instrument as a represented person under subsection (a) of Code Section 11-3-402.

(b) If the validity of signatures is admitted or proved and there is compliance with subsection (a) of this Code section, a plaintiff producing the instrument is entitled to payment if the plaintiff proves entitlement to enforce the instrument under Code Section 11-3-301, unless the defendant proves a defense or claim in recoupment. If a defense or claim in recoupment is proved, the right to payment of the plaintiff is subject to the defense or claim, except to the extent the plaintiff proves that the plaintiff has rights of a holder in due course which are not subject to the defense or claim.

## History

Code 1981, § 11-3-308, enacted by Ga. L. 1996, p. 1306, § 3.

## Law Reviews

For comment discussing imposition upon holder in due course of a greater burden of proof under this section of Uniform Commercial Code than that previously required under Uniform Negotiable Instruments Law before its repeal, in light of Budget Charge Accounts, Inc. v. Mullaney, 187 Pa. Super. Ct. 190, 144 A.2d 438 (1958), see 10 Mercer L. Rev. 211 (1958).

For note, “The Law of Evidence in the Uniform Commercial Code,” see 1 Ga. L. Rev. 44 (1966).

For comment on Perini Corp. v. First Nat’l Bank, 553 F.2d 398 (5th Cir. 1977), see 27 Emory L.J. 393 (1978).

For article discussing parol evidence in the law of commercial paper, see 13 Ga. L. Rev. 53 (1978).