S.C. Code Ann. § 36-1-202

This is the official text of S.C. Code Ann. § 36-1-202, part of South Carolina’s Code Ann — part of the compiled statutory law of South Carolina, published by the state as "Code Ann." Browse the sections below, each linked to its official government source.

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.

SECTION 36-1-202. Notice; knowledge.

Official statutory text

(a) Subject to subsection (f), a person has "notice" of a fact if the person: (1) has actual knowledge of it; (2) has received a notice or notification of it; (3) from all the facts and circumstances known to the person at the time in question, has reason to know that it exists. (b) "Knowledge" means actual knowledge. "Knows" has a corresponding meaning. (c) "Discover", "learn", or words of similar import refer to knowledge rather than to reason to know. (d) A person "notifies" or "gives" a notice or notification to another person by taking such steps as may be reasonably required to inform the other person in ordinary course, whether or not the other person actually comes to know of it. (e) Subject to subsection (f), a person "receives" a notice or notification when: (1) it comes to that person's attention; or (2) it is duly delivered in a form reasonable under the circumstances at the place of business through which the contract was made or at another location held out by that person as the place for receipt of such communications. (f) Notice, knowledge, or a notice or notification received by an organization is effective for a particular transaction from the time it is brought to the attention of the individual conducting that transaction and, in any event, from the time it would have been brought to the individual's attention if the organization had exercised due diligence. An organization exercises due diligence if it maintains reasonable routines for communicating significant information to the person conducting the transaction and there is reasonable compliance with the routines. Due diligence does not require an individual acting for the organization to communicate information unless the communication is part of the individual's regular duties or the individual has reason to know of the transaction and that the transaction would be materially affected by the information. OFFICIAL COMMENT Source: Derived from former Section 1-201(25)-(27). Changes from former law: These provisions are substantive rather than purely definitional. Accordingly, they have been relocated from Section 1-201 to this section. The reference to the "forgotten notice" doctrine has been deleted. 1. Under subsection (a), a person has notice of a fact when, inter alia, the person has received a notification of the fact in question. 2. As provided in subsection (d), the word "notifies" is used when the essential fact is the proper dispatch of the notice, not its receipt. Compare "Send." When the essential fact is the other party's receipt of the notice, that is stated. Subsection (e) states when a notification is received. 3. Subsection (f) makes clear that notice, knowledge, or a notification, although "received," for instance, by a clerk in Department A of an organization, is effective for a transaction conducted in Department B only from the time when it was or should have been communicated to the individual conducting that transaction. Editor's Note 2014 Act No. 213, SECTION 51, provides as follows: "SECTION 51. This act becomes effective on October 1, 2014. It applies to transactions entered into and events occurring after that date."

Status: in_force · Read it on the official government site

Need a lawyer in South Carolina?

Find a South Carolina lawyer
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.