Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 3-303
Oklahoma Code Comment
Value relates to the issue of whether one is a holder in due course. Absent consideration, the maker or drawer has a defense to the payment of the obligation that may also prevent holder-in-due-course status. See UCC § 3-302(a)(2).
Outside Article 3, consideration constitutes value, but a different rule applies in Article 3. Under Section 3-303, an instrument issued for value is also issued for consideration; however, the opposite may true.
It is possible to have consideration for the issuance of an instrument without such consideration rising to the level of value. In such a situation, the payee would not be a holder for value, and thus could not be a holder in due course. For example, if A issues a check to B in consideration of B's promise to sell A a car there is consideration for the check, but there is value only if B transfers the car to A.
Forbearance to sue upon a past due promissory note constitutes sufficient consideration for a new promise to pay. A & 5 Distributing Co. v. Nall-Tucker, Inc., 428 P.2d 254 (Okla. 1967); Hudson Houston Lumber Co. v. First State Bank of Ringling, 132 Okla. 125, 269 P. 1054 (1928). Surrender however, of an unenforceable promissory note is not sufficient consideration for an accommodation indorser. Bradstreet v. Crosbie, 123 Okla. 1269, 253 P. 63 (1926).
A negotiable instrument taken in satisfaction of an antecedent debt is taken for value. Citizens Bank, Booneville, Ark. v. National Bank of Commerce, Tulsa, Okla., 334 F.2d 257 (10th Cir. 1964). The depository bank which advances and pays a payee's check has a security interest in the check, and thus takes the check for value. Peoples Bank of Aurora v. Haar, 421 P.2d 817 (Okla. 1966). Exchanging a note and mortgage for a new note and mortgage is both sufficient consideration and constitutes value, although the security may be worthless. Maze v. Austin, 135 Okla. 71 273 P 994 (1929).