Effective August 1, 2010
Provides for oaths or affirmations without notarization and the acceptability of electronic signatures and documents in civil commitment proceedings. Provides that the committing court may determine that an entity’s electronic signature system does not provide sufficient assurance of authenticity of signed documents or that an electronic signature system different from that described in this law provides sufficient assurance of authenticity.
Please remember that the interpretation and analysis presented here is not intended to be legal advice. If you are seeking legal advice please contact us for a free consultation and actual examination the issues that your case may present.
CHAPTER 220–H.F.No. 3187
An actrelating to civil commitments; providing for oaths or affirmations without
notarization and the acceptability of electronic signatures and documents;
amending Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 253B.23, by adding a subdivision.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 253B.23, is amended by adding a
subdivision to read:
Subd. 3a. Signatures on documents and statements under oath. (a)
Notwithstanding sections 358.07 to 358.09, written statements or documents made within
this state in connection with proceedings under this chapter are deemed to be made under
oath or affirmation without notarization if the person signing the document attests, at the
end of the document, in substantially the following form:
“I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of Minnesota that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on ……………………….(date) in the county of ……………………….(county name)
in the state of Minnesota.
….. (signer’s address and telephone number).”
A document that is sworn to or affirmed under this paragraph without notarization
must include a telephone number and address where the signer can be contacted.
(b) If a document is required to be signed in order to be effective, an electronic
document qualifies as a signed document:
(1) without the person’s physical signature, if an entity has an electronic signature
system that meets a minimum security standard of two-factor authentication, such
as name and password, or biometric identification that is uniquely reconcilable to a
single actor and that results in a nonmodifiable document after the electronic signature
is affixed, and the document indicates an electronic signature in some manner, such as
“s/………………………………….(name of signer)”; or
(2) with the person’s physical signature, if the document is optically scanned into
the entity’s records.
(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (b), the committing court may determine that an
entity’s electronic signature system does not provide sufficient assurance of authenticity of
signed documents or that an electronic signature system different from that described in
paragraph (b) provides sufficient assurance of authenticity.
(d) An electronically transmitted facsimile of a document, including a document
described in paragraph (a) or (b), may be filed with the committing court and received into
evidence in the same manner and with the same effect as the original document.
(e) Nothing in this subdivision alters any statute, rule, standard, or practice for
accepting documents for filing or admitting documents as evidence, except with respect to:
(1) the manner of making written statements under oath or affirmation;
(2) the acceptability of electronically transmitted facsimile copies; and
(3) the acceptability of electronic signatures.
Paragraph (b) addresses only the acceptability of documents obtained from an entity’s
electronic records system and does not determine whether the committing court is required
or permitted to accept electronic filing of documents.
Presented to the governor April 6, 2010
Signed by the governor April 6, 2010, 4:21 p.m.