Which description correctly defines accord and satisfaction in contract law?

• A. It is a substituted contract.
• B. It requires a written release.
• C. It involves one party tendering a negotiable instrument marked as payment in full.
• D. It always requires new consideration.

Answer: (C)

Accord and satisfaction happens when a debtor offers to settle a debt by performing something different from the original obligation, and the creditor accepts that alternative performance as full settlement of the claim. The classic way this occurs is the debtor giving a negotiable instrument (like a check) that is clearly marked “payment in full” or “full settlement,” and the creditor accepts it as discharging the debt. Once accepted, the original obligation is considered satisfied, and the debtor isn’t liable for the remaining amount.

This description fits best because it captures the essential exchange: a different performance (the instrument) is offered in place of the exact original payment, and the creditor’s acceptance of that instrument as full payment ends the dispute. The other notions describe related, but distinct, ideas—replacing the contract itself, requiring a written release, or needing new consideration in every case—which aren’t accurate highlights of accord and satisfaction.