Electronic Signature Hygiene

This article by DLA Piper explains the importance of having a strong electronic signature process. Simply having someone electronically sign a document is not enough to ensure it will hold up in court. Two recent cases show why it's crucial to have a process that authenticates the signer, captures their intent, and ensures the document's integrity.

In the first case, Malone v. Hoogland Foods, LLC, the court couldn't confirm that the plaintiff intended to sign the document. The plaintiff claimed he didn't realize entering his user ID and password would act as his signature on the employment contract. Because he didn't read what was on the screen and didn't click any button, the court ruled that there was no clear intent to sign.

In the second case, Read v. Eastside Medical Center, LLC, the court found that just having a typed electronic signature was not enough. The defendant couldn't prove that the plaintiff personally placed the signature on the agreement. The court emphasized that more evidence is needed to show that the document wasn't altered and that the signature was genuine.

These cases highlight the need for a tamper-evident document and audit log, like the one SignatureAPI provides. This means having a system that makes any changes detectable, ensuring the document remains secure and unchanged since signing. A tamper-evident audit log would show detailed elements of the signing process, helping to verify the authenticity of the signature.

By following these steps, companies can make sure their electronic signature processes are robust and defensible. This will help in enforcing signatures and ensuring documents hold up in court if ever disputed. In summary, having a clear, secure, and well-documented electronic signature process is essential for protecting the validity of electronically signed documents.