4 ms·
That's not true. A court will accept emails and documents attached to them. scanned, name typed, or signed with ms-paint - all valid.
by TruthWillHurt 5y ago
That's not true. A court will accept emails and documents attached to them. scanned, name typed, or signed with ms-paint - all valid.
- rvnx 5y agoI had the case where one person was signing PDF using the annotate / drawing feature. Didn't work in court, the court claimed the contract was invalid (it was the situation of a founder of a company that was raising on a convertible debt).
- staticassertion 5y agoThat sounds totally absurd. Unless the stipulation was instead for a wet ink signature I just don't see how this could be the case. You can enter into a contract with even less than a signature (ie: just by accepting payment you can inadvertently end up in a contract), so the idea that a signature wouldn't work except in very specific cases seems pretty weird to me. I've had very few wet-ink, notarized signatures required of me. Some documents are weird though ie: a picture won't be accepted, but a scan will be, etc. God it's all so fucking stupid.
- late2part 5y agoCan you share the Pacer link?
- bdowling 5y agoThis is basically correct. A court will generally accept a writing into evidence as long as it is relevant and authenticated by a witness or certification.