Section 28:7-105 - Reissuance in alternative medium(a) Upon request of a person entitled under an electronic document of title, the issuer of the electronic document may issue a tangible document of title as a substitute for the electronic document if:(1) The person entitled under the electronic document surrenders control of the document to the issuer; and(2) The tangible document when issued contains a statement that it is issued in substitution for the electronic document.(b) Upon issuance of a tangible document of title in substitution for an electronic document of title in accordance with subsection (a) of this section: (1) The electronic document ceases to have any effect or validity; and(2) The person that procured issuance of the tangible document warrants to all subsequent persons entitled under the tangible document that the warrantor was a person entitled under the electronic document when the warrantor surrendered control of the electronic document to the issuer.(c) Upon request of a person entitled under a tangible document of title, the issuer of the tangible document may issue an electronic document of title as a substitute for the tangible document if: (1) The person entitled under the tangible document surrenders possession of the document to the issuer; and(2) The electronic document when issued contains a statement that it is issued in substitution for the tangible document.(d) Upon issuance of an electronic document of title in substitution for a tangible document of title in accordance with subsection (c) of this section: (1) The tangible document ceases to have any effect or validity; and(2) The person that procured issuance of the electronic document warrants to all subsequent persons entitled under the electronic document that the warrantor was a person entitled under the tangible document when the warrantor surrendered possession of the tangible document to the issuer.Apr. 27, 2013, D.C. Law 19-299, § 9, 60 DCR 2634.Former § 28:7-105, concerning construction against negative implication, was derived from Dec. 30, 1963, 77 Stat. 719, Pub. L. 88-243, § 1. The 2013 revision of this article deleted former § 28:7-105, a statute that provided that courts could apply a rule from Parts 2 and 3 by analogy to a situation not explicitly covered in the provisions on warehouse receipts or bills of lading when it was appropriate. Per the official commentary appearing under § 28:7-101: "this is, of course, an unexceptional proposition and need not be stated explicitly in the statute. Thus former Section 7-105 has been deleted. Whether applying a rule by analogy to a situation is appropriate depends upon the facts of each case."