Md. Code, Commercial Law § 22-213
This is the official text of Md. Code, Commercial Law § 22-213, part of Maryland’s Code, Commercial Law — governs commercial transactions - Maryland's version of the Uniform Commercial Code.
Not legal advice. This page reproduces the official text of a government statute for reference only. Laws change, and how a statute applies depends on your specific facts. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed attorney in your state.
§22–213.
Official statutory text
(a) An electronic authentication, display, message, record, or performance is attributed to a person if it was the act of the person or its electronic agent, or if the person is bound by it under agency or other law. The party relying on attribution of an electronic authentication, display, message, record, or performance to another person has the burden of establishing attribution.
(b) The act of a person may be shown in any manner, including a showing of the efficacy of an attribution procedure that was agreed to or adopted by the parties or established by law.
(c) The effect of an electronic act attributed to a person under subsection (a) of this section is determined from the context at the time of its creation, execution, or adoption, including the parties’ agreement, if any, or otherwise as provided by law.
(d) If an attribution procedure exists to detect errors or changes in an electronic authentication, display, message, record, or performance, and was agreed to or adopted by the parties or established by law, and one party conformed to the procedure but the other party did not, and the nonconforming party would have detected the change or error had that party also conformed, the effect of noncompliance is determined by the agreement but, in the absence of agreement, the conforming party may avoid the effect of the error or change.
(b) The act of a person may be shown in any manner, including a showing of the efficacy of an attribution procedure that was agreed to or adopted by the parties or established by law.
(c) The effect of an electronic act attributed to a person under subsection (a) of this section is determined from the context at the time of its creation, execution, or adoption, including the parties’ agreement, if any, or otherwise as provided by law.
(d) If an attribution procedure exists to detect errors or changes in an electronic authentication, display, message, record, or performance, and was agreed to or adopted by the parties or established by law, and one party conformed to the procedure but the other party did not, and the nonconforming party would have detected the change or error had that party also conformed, the effect of noncompliance is determined by the agreement but, in the absence of agreement, the conforming party may avoid the effect of the error or change.
Status: in_force · Read it on the official government site
Dealing with a business matter in Maryland?
See all Maryland Business lawyers
About this page: Statute text is reproduced from official government publishers via the
Open US Law dataset
(Vaquill AI, snapshot v2026.08, CC BY 4.0). Primary legislative text like this is public domain under the government-edicts doctrine
(Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). We link every section back to its official source so you can verify it independently.