Okla. Stat. tit. 12A § 4-111
An action to enforce an obligation, duty, or right arising under this article must be commenced within three (3) years after the claim for relief accrues.
Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 4-111
Oklahoma Code Comment
1. This Section represents a change by bringing all Article of action under a 3-year limitation period. This is consistent with the former limitation period on actions based upon unauthorized indorsements in pre-revision Section 4-406, which has now been removed as surplusage. This will not reduce the limitation period on actions based on actual or implied agreements contained in the signature card or other agreements between the bank and its customer under 12 O.S. § 95 (as amended through 1992), because such actions would not "arise under this Article" This Section may well shorten the limitation period as it would relate to the original underlying obligation because, in many cases, the underlying obligation would be discharged (UCC § 3-310) so that the only right might be based on the breach of an Article 4 duty. The question of whether this change has retroactive effect should not arise because the limitation period for suits based on the breach of these duties has been 3 years under 12 O.S. §92 (1910). The issue of when the cause of action accrues either has been left to other law or is dealt with in specific sections, for example sub sections 4-207(e) and 4-208(f).
2. A cause of action based on the bank's payment of a check containing a forged drawer's signature accrues when the customer makes demand that the account be recredited. See Walker & Walker, Inc. v. Liberty Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., slip op., 64 Okla. B.J. 1496, 1993 W.L 150651 (Okla. May 11, 1993) The procedural posture of Walker only presented the court with the narrow question of when this cause of action accrued for purposes of the general statute of limitations on written contracts under 12 O.S. § 95 (First). The court did not determine when the limitations period commences if the drawer's signature was forged. The preclusion under Section 4-406 and its one-year statute of repose would still apply if the customer failed to examine bank statement and report unauthorized drawer's signatures. The case further does not decide whether the breach of the bank's implied duty not to pay items not properly payable under Section 4-401 is governed by Section 4-111 or by 12 O.S. § 95 (First), if a written agreement exists between the bank and the customer which incorporates the duty. Nor does it decide which statute applies if there is such a written agreement that does not incorporate the duty.