S.C. Code Ann. § 36-9-104

Control of deposit account

Known as the Uniform Commercial Code

The act spans §§ 36–36 (519 sections).

Applied in 5 court decisions — leading case Swindler v. Swindler (2003)

Most recently applied in Swindler v. Swindler (July 2003)

1962 Code SECTION 10.9-104; 1966 (54) 2716; 1988 Act No. 494, SECTION 5; 2001 Act No. 67, SECTION 12.

How often courts cite this section

citing decisions per year

Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.

(a) A secured party has control of a deposit account if:

(1) the secured party is the bank with which the deposit account is maintained;

(2) the debtor, secured party, and bank have agreed in an authenticated record that the bank will comply with instructions originated by the secured party directing disposition of the funds in the deposit account without further consent by the debtor; or

(3) the secured party becomes the bank's customer with respect to the deposit account.

(b) A secured party that has satisfied subsection (a) has control, even if the debtor retains the right to direct the disposition of funds from the deposit account.

Official source: South Carolina Legislature. Reproduced from public-domain South Carolina statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.