29

In medical establishments such as doctors' offices or blood draw facilities I have been presented with a digital signature pad and told to sign one or more times. Usually the person handing it to me will give an extremely vague notional explanation of what it is that I am signing. I do not get to see the document nor am I given a copy. For all I know, I could be signing up for Colombia House. While I always go along with this, a voice in my head keeps telling me that there's something wrong with this setup.

Are these signatures really legally binding? If I was shown one of these documents under oath, I could honestly say I had no knowledge of what the content was. Can I have 'had the intention' to sign a document without ever seeing it? I only signed a blank screen with limited or no other context. Should I be refusing to sign? Even if they show me something, how do I know that's what my signature is being applied to?

For reference here's a picture of the kind of device I am talking about:

enter image description here

Main question: at a high-level, what are the legal implications of a 'free-floating' digital signature?

JimmyJames
  • 716
  • 6
  • 13
  • 18
    These often say "I acknowledge having received, read, understood, and agreed to this organization's Privacy Policy" or other policies. I've made a habit of actually asking for a copy of those documents, which leads to almost universal annoyance at the inconvenience that someone asked at all. Frequently, they can't even find a copy of the document. At that point, some places' employees just say "it's on the website" even when it actually isn't. (Someone will answer soon about contracts of adhesion.) – WBT Sep 29 '21 at 17:00
  • 7
    @WBT It's pretty ironic that the thing that they don't offer up for you to read is often about how you have supposedly read something. It just seems like completely lunacy to me. I mean, no one reads the EULA but at least you are given an opportunity to do so. – JimmyJames Sep 29 '21 at 21:02
  • 1
    This seems like a side effect of an over-liitigious system. In the UK I have never been asked to sign anything for a blood sample. The mere fact that I actually turned up for the appointment is presumably sufficient declaration of "intent". OTOH I have always been asked to sign for surgery done under global anesthetic, and the medical staff always explained exactly what the procedure and any risks were before requesting a signature. – alephzero Sep 30 '21 at 19:12
  • 1
    But in UK hospitals the medical staff always ask for verbal permission to do anything, even as trivial as taking one's temperature. (Well, I suppose the temperature probe might explode while it was in my ear, but I don't think that is a likely possibility!) – alephzero Sep 30 '21 at 19:14
  • @alephzero As a Brit expat living in the US, I don't think the US is a particularly litigious society any more than any other country, really - but there's definitely a perception of it being litigious (weird fact: there's nothing like those godawful Claims Direct and Accident Group (rip) ads on US TV where I live in WA). – Dai Sep 30 '21 at 19:16
  • 1
    @alephzero It's an interesting point given that law in the US is rooted in English common law. The difference might be related to the patchwork system of US healthcare. Likely the signature was related to authorizing the release of my data to my doctor and/or insurer. – JimmyJames Sep 30 '21 at 20:01
  • 1
    @alephzero Also some of the litigiousness of the US is exaggerated. The example thrown around is the 'coffee was too hot' case. I have a friend who got Pho soup at a drive-thru and it was so hot it melted the container and gave him 3rd degree burns on his genitals. It wasn't a minor thing. He was the in hospital for a while. – JimmyJames Sep 30 '21 at 20:04
  • I'll use this issue as a reminder to always get your own copy of a document before you sign it. Being able to view it on a website is not sufficient, save your own static copy. Many documents of this type change over time, and you want a solid record of the exact version of the document that you agreed to. Older versions are not always accessible - even for office staff - so it's important that you hold onto a copy. It's rare for someone to maliciously change a document after signing, but a clerical error or misunderstanding can cause problems if you don't have a copy as evidence. – bta Sep 30 '21 at 21:38
  • There is this great scene in Amazon's Upload: "Have you never gotten an app? Ever?" – Peter - Reinstate Monica Oct 01 '21 at 09:25
  • My experience in an American ER when our toddler had a fever was very similar. We needed to give them a carte blanche to charge us whatever they later chose. They couldn't even give us an approximate number; it was even hard to list the parties we'd pay because they all work on their own account: Hospital for the room, nurse in the reception, nurse with the doctor, and the doctor, and medication. Possibly the janitor. One basic tenet for a valid contract in Germany is that both parties must agree on their mutual entitlements and obligations; this would not have been binding. – Peter - Reinstate Monica Oct 01 '21 at 09:31
  • Needless to add that the bill for measuring fever and looking in his throat (all inside 15 minutes) was 600+ dollars; we called and complained, and they lowered it by 300 dollars. Ridiculous, arbitrary scamming. – Peter - Reinstate Monica Oct 01 '21 at 09:32

2 Answers2

18

You are entitled to at least see, and probably get a copy of, any document you sign. If you insist, they will have to show you or give you a copy. It may well be that they are supposed to give you a copy even if you do not ask. But if you are going to insist, allow a bit of extra time at such appointments.

If they describe the document, even in rather general terms, your signature is probably binding, unless they have significantly misrepresented the document. If they tell you it is consent to be treated and it is actually an agreement to purchase a timeshare, that would be fraud and the document would not be valid, but that would be very unlikely. There might be some provision that you do not like, but such agreements are usually fairly standard, and also usually not very negotiable if you want service at that office. Still, it is better practice to at least look over and get a copy of any document you agree to.

David Siegel
  • 113,558
  • 10
  • 204
  • 404
  • 6
    I was thinking of a nightmare scenario where I go in for a blood draw and get infected with something because the phlebotomist used a dirty needle. Then I found out I signed a document that released the company from liability in that situation. I doubt that would be a valid legal contract for a medical facility in NYS but something along those lines would be concerning. – JimmyJames Sep 29 '21 at 19:19
  • 1
    Am I correct to think that, in general, if there is a provision in one of these documents that as relevant in court, my acceptance of that provision is likely something I could challenge in court unless they can demonstrate that I was informed of it? Along the same lines, if they don't tell me anything substantial about what I am signing, can my acceptance of whatever it states be challenged? – JimmyJames Sep 29 '21 at 20:59
  • 9
    @JimmyJames In your "nightmare scenario" I doubt a waiver would be valid even if you read every word of the document, signed it in ink, and had it notarized. Gross negligence generally cannot be waived. As to your more general question, anything can be challenged, but the success I am not so sure of. If the provisions were routine and reasonable, they might be treated as binding. – David Siegel Sep 29 '21 at 21:05
  • 1
    Do you know of any particular legal authority supporting this? I'm not particularly familiar with contract law, but is there considered to be a meeting of the minds regarding a document that one party was not even shown before being asked to sign it? – Ryan M Sep 30 '21 at 02:57
  • 1
    @Ryan M I would need to do some looking, I have no clear authority at hand, and i could well be incorrect. When the document is in fact routine, and the signer understood the general purport, quite possibly there was a meeting of the minds. But I am not at all sure how a court would rule if presented with this fact pattern and a serious dispute over the document. – David Siegel Sep 30 '21 at 03:05
  • 1
    @RyanM I think you are on the right track here. But maybe I should elaborate on my premise. I understand it as described in the accepted answer here which is to say that a contract is binding only if both sides have agreed to it. A signature is simply evidence of that. But I don't see how I can agree to something without knowing what it is. The signature in this case is only evidence that I signed my name. – JimmyJames Sep 30 '21 at 18:12
6

Are these signatures legally binding?

Yes

At law, if you sign a document, you assert that you understand it and agree to be bound by it - it doesn't matter if you have read it.

Now, everyone knows that most of us sign many documents without informing ourselves fully of the consequences. Judges both know this and, no doubt, do this themselves. However, this is not an excuse for a practical and pragmatic reason - if we could disclaim our signature just because we claimed later that "I didn't read it", then signatures would become worthless as evidence.

While you have to have the opportunity of reviewing the document (and I'm sure they'll show it to you if you ask), you don't have to review it. But, if you don't, that's on you.

If I was shown one of these documents under oath, I could honestly say I had no knowledge of what the content was. Can I have 'had the intention' [sic] to sign a document without ever seeing it?

I don't understand how you claim that you lacked the intention to sign something that you signed. Are you claiming that your writing hand became possessed by a ghost or a demon and signed the document itself? Does your hand sign documents while you are asleep?

You consciously picked up a pen and signed the document - therefore, you intended to do so. Provided that you were not coerced, drunk, drug-affected or under some other legal incapacity, your intention was clear. And no, the fact that it takes time to read and understand the document and we are all time poor is not coercion.

I only signed a blank screen with limited or no other context. Should I be refusing to sign?

I can't give you legal advice.

You need to do your cost-benefit analysis. Are the costs of taking the time to read the document, either thoroughly or by skimming, more or less than the risks of agreeing to an unknown liability?

If you are buying a house, a car or a mortgage, almost certainly yes. These are big, long-term commitments that will substantially impact your finances for many years.

If you are signing up for a pay-by-month phone or internet plan, maybe not. The commitment is small and easy to get out of, the terms between providers will be very similar and there is a fair amount of consumer protection and the risks are correspondingly low.

If you are signing a medical consent form? Well, in most of the world this would fall into the mobile phone plan category. In the United States, it's probably more of the mortgage category because involuntary servitude appears to be legal there for prisoners and people who owe money for medical bills [that's a joke - just not the funny type of joke].

Even if they show me something, how do I know that's what my signature is being applied to?

Because they told you it was. Legally, that's called a representation and one of the grounds for voiding a contract is if one of the parties made a material misrepresentation about it.

Edit to address comments

A number of commenters have raised issues about proving that the document purported to be signed was the document that was actually signed, either in general or in the particular circumstances. Those are irrelevant to the question!

On the facts as stated: I signed a document I didn't read, am I bound by it? The answer is an unequivocal and emphatic: Yes.

The facts may be disputed, and the method used may impose some difficulty on proving the facts if they are disputed, but that is the question: If I can prove I didn't sign the document, am I bound by it? That also has an unequivocal and emphatic answer: No. And the answer is the same even if you did read it. But it's a totally different question.

Dale M
  • 208,266
  • 17
  • 237
  • 460
  • The last time I did a mortgage refinance, the notary would give us the page to sign, describe what the page meant, and her opinion of how important that particular page was. It was still up to us to understand what we signed, but it was terribly nice to have a sense of which pages needed to be scrutinized, and which needed to be glossed. – Cort Ammon Sep 30 '21 at 06:10
  • 2
    My knowledge of law is very limited, so this comes from a point of logic: in the specific case described, the OP isn't signing a document. They're signing a blank screen (at least in the case of most digital signature pads I've seen), or one with at most a line of text on it, which is changeable anyway. Perhaps that one-line statement could be confirmation that that they've read a different document - would that be enough? – Chris H Sep 30 '21 at 10:30
  • 5
    "I don't understand how you claim that you lacked the intention to sign something that you signed. Are you claiming that your writing hand became possessed by a ghost or a demon and signed the document itself? Does your hand sign documents while you are asleep?" If I don't know what the document contains, how can I intend to agree to it? I have been handed a pad and asked to sign it. No more, no less. If I ask for someone's autograph and then paste it to a document, why would that be any less binding than my signature attached to nothing? – JimmyJames Sep 30 '21 at 14:48
  • 6
    @ChrisH In my experience, there is no single line of text on the pad and no way to see what is on the screen that the person asking me to sign it is looking at. Unless I am going to break through the glass and climb through the little window. – JimmyJames Sep 30 '21 at 15:03
  • 6
    Hypothetically, let's say I hand you a blank piece of paper with a little sticker that says 'sign here'. You say, "why?", and I say "don't worry about it, just standard stuff". You sign (for the sake of argument) and then I take the paper and run it through my printer and add a bunch of contract details. Would you say then that you intended to agree to whatever I printed on the contract? Would it hold up in court if I later sued you for breaking a contract of which you had no knowledge? – JimmyJames Sep 30 '21 at 16:18
  • 3
    @JimmyJames: at least in France - yes. We have the concept of signing "in white" (blanc-seign = signing off a space that has no text). You are bound to what someone will put in there (there used to be limitations about losing money but they are not enforced anymore) – WoJ Sep 30 '21 at 19:14
  • @WoJ That's interesting. It's probably too much to ask whether you know the differences between French legal principles and English common law principles. I always wonder though when I fill out a form for a mortgage and it says 'check here if X is true'. What stops someone from checking that later and/or how could prove I didn't check it? – JimmyJames Sep 30 '21 at 20:16
  • @JimmyJames What stops someone from checking that later and/or how could prove I didn't check it? → you have your copy, co-signed by the other party. Something added/changed on only one of the copies was necessarily done after the signatures exchange. – WoJ Sep 30 '21 at 20:25
  • @JimmyJames you said that you were told what you were signing (“vague notional explanation”). If what they produce later does not match the description then that’s misrepresentation and the agreement is void. If they change it after the fact then that’s fraud and they go to jail. What you asked is if it’s binding if you don’t read it and it is. This is true if you haven’t read it. It’s also true if you haven’t seen it. It’s also true if you don’t know what it is. It isn’t true if there is deliberate or accidental misrepresentation by the other party but then, that’s true if you had read it. – Dale M Sep 30 '21 at 20:42
  • 1
    While this answer is in principle vaguely true, there is a burden on the other party to show that you actually signed what they say you signed, not something else. If it's on a signature pad where the actual document is not shown, and a receptionist (they may not even know which one) allegedly told you something about what document you were supposedly signing, but they have no evidence of that, they're going to have a really hard time proving you "signed" something beyond what the normal expected terms for the interaction you were having might have been. – R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE Oct 01 '21 at 00:10
  • @R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE That’s not the question. The question is: if I sign a document without reading it am I bound and the answer is yes. There are other questions about what happens if there is a dispute about what document I signed but once that’s established by agreement or determination there is no doubt that I’m bound. – Dale M Oct 01 '21 at 00:16
  • 2
    It sound like @R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE had a similar thought to me. Simply, you're not signing a document unless you count a blank screen as a document. You're signing a machine that might possibly be on the same desk as a document. Even after the edits, you don't seem to have joined the gap between the blank thing being signed and the document verbally referred to. It would be interesting to see how that can be justified – Chris H Oct 01 '21 at 10:11
  • In the medical field, you are often signing an acknowledgment that the office is doing their job properly. For instance HIPAA, you are signing that they gave you the HIPAA notice. You aren't signing a legally binding document, you aren't even required to sign, you can decline it, it doesn't change anything. This is probably what it is if its a digital pad with nothing written on it. – rtaft Oct 01 '21 at 13:12
  • I think a lot of this conversation is due to different understanding of the 'document' with some folks assuming it's the thing you sign and other folks assuming it's the detailed document that you are signing for on another piece of paper or device. – Michael Durrant Oct 01 '21 at 13:20
  • @MichaelDurrant Perhaps I can clarify. I've had situations where I'm asked to sign a pad and I don't know what the signature is for, Maybe it's agreeing to a HIPAA notice. Maybe it's a release of my personal information to a 3rd party. In other words, I don't know what that signature is being applied to. If I'm not sure I'm even signing a contract or not, how can that be a binding agreement? Not everything is a contract. I mean, you can't take someone's college homework and write a contract around their signature and call it binding. – JimmyJames Oct 01 '21 at 15:16
  • @DaleM "That’s not the question. The question is: if I sign a document without reading it am I bound" Given that it's my question I can assure you that you are incorrectly interpreting it. R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE's interpretation is pretty spot on. – JimmyJames Oct 01 '21 at 15:18
  • @WoJ So, in France, does that mean that if I get a celebrity to sign their autograph on a blank piece of paper, I can write that they owe all their assets and future income and it's legally binding? I so, I think I've got a new retirement plan. – JimmyJames Oct 01 '21 at 16:01
  • Thinking more, the big distinction is 'seen' versus 'read'. I absolutely agree that if you are handed a contract and sign without reading, you are going to have a hard time getting out of it. But that's not the scenario. It's being asked to sign your name with no context of what it is being applied to. – JimmyJames Oct 01 '21 at 16:06
  • @JimmyJames: no, because they did not willingly sign a document that they knew would be filled in. If you sign a blanc-seign, it means that you agree on the (lack of) content, it is a contract like others (that can be challenged, and this is why you have witnesses etc.). Just to be clear: this is a extremely rare case, not your go-to contract! :) – WoJ Oct 01 '21 at 16:51
  • @WoJ "this is a extremely rare case" I would expect so. I'm struggling to imagine a case where this makes sense for the signer. Maybe something related to elder care? In any event that's a little different than this situation where you are supposedly agreeing to something already defined it's just unknown or unclear what that is exactly. – JimmyJames Oct 01 '21 at 18:42