sanitation@lemmy.today to me_irl@lemmy.world · 2 days agome_irllemmy.todayimagemessage-square15linkfedilinkarrow-up1190arrow-down17
arrow-up1183arrow-down1imageme_irllemmy.todaysanitation@lemmy.today to me_irl@lemmy.world · 2 days agomessage-square15linkfedilink
minus-squaredeadbeef79000@lemmy.nzlinkfedilinkarrow-up12·edit-22 days agoThe act of signing is what is important, whatever squiggly line ensues is irrelevant. I remember being told to compare signatures in a retail job long ago. It just meant that my employer didn’t understand that either.
minus-squareGonzako@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 day agoYeah, on discovery they won’t say it’s the same. They’ll just ask if you signed it
minus-squareHereIAm@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up4arrow-down1·2 days agoWhy would just the act be enough? I could still come around the next day and say I never signed those papers, and the proof is my signatures never look the same? (As a hypothetical, normally you’ll have similarities still)
minus-squaredeadbeef79000@lemmy.nzlinkfedilinkarrow-up6·2 days agoTypically there is at least one witness too: the cashier, a lawyer, the other party. So, when there is a dispute that makes it to a court of some kind there’s evidence.
The act of signing is what is important, whatever squiggly line ensues is irrelevant.
I remember being told to compare signatures in a retail job long ago. It just meant that my employer didn’t understand that either.
Yeah, on discovery they won’t say it’s the same. They’ll just ask if you signed it
Why would just the act be enough? I could still come around the next day and say I never signed those papers, and the proof is my signatures never look the same? (As a hypothetical, normally you’ll have similarities still)
Typically there is at least one witness too: the cashier, a lawyer, the other party.
So, when there is a dispute that makes it to a court of some kind there’s evidence.
That’s true. 🙂