4 ms·

Interesting. I think that the assumption that a thumbs up is the same of a full contractual acceptance (vs "ok, I received it" or "contract looks good, let me

• lolinder 3y ago
  Yes, the judge explicitly calls out in his decision that it counted as a signature because it was consistent with their prior negotiations (emphasis added): > In my opinion the signature requirement was met by the {{THUMBS UP}} emoji originating from Chris and his unique cell phone ... which was used to receive the flax contract sent by Kent. There is no issue with the authenticity of the text message which is the underlying purpose of the written and signed requirement of s. 6 of the SGA. Again, based on the facts in this case – the texting of a contract and then the seeking and receipt of approval was consistent with the previous process between SWT and Achter to enter into grain contracts. > This court readily acknowledges that a {{THUMBS UP}} emoji is a non-traditional means to “sign” a document but nevertheless under these circumstances this was a valid way to convey the two purposes of a “signature” – to identify the signator (Chris using his unique cell phone number) and as I have found above – to convey Achter’s acceptance of the flax contract.
  • local_crmdgeon 3y ago
    What a reasonable opinion