0

For example, say I was starting a new job and needed to sign multiple documents to start. I agree to the majority of the documents but there is one document I don't want to sign, so instead I sign that document with my weaker hand. The idea being the signature looks different compared to my other signatures.

Later down the line the company wants to sue me for breach of contract. (The breach pertaining to the document I signed with my weaker hand.) Could I claim that I never signed it and offer as proof the fact that the signature is wildly different to the signatures on the other documents? Could this argument hold up anywhere?

Note: I know this is a silly question, and no I have no intention of doing this at all.

Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
9

The primary question, in case of such a lawsuit, is whether you accepted the terms of the contract. You could accept the terms verbally, or you could accept them with a signature, or you could even accept by behavior (such as showing up to work). If you breach the contract and you want to make the argument that you didn't accept the offer (or some identifiable part of the offer), the plaintiffs would have a "yes you did" piece of paper to support their side. Now you would have to advances a very dangerous claim, that you didn't sign the document and that the signature there is a forgery. This is dangerous, because you perjured yourself in so testifying (it would eventually come down to you testifying, that you didn't sign the document). It's really beyond the scope of Law SE to get into forensic graphanalysis debates, but you should expect that the other side will have compelling expert testimony that you did in fact sign the document, with your other hand.

In a civil suit (breach of contract), the other side would have to show that it is most likely that you did agree to the terms. It isn't just about the signature, it's about all of the evidence, which would include eyewitness testimony ("I saw him sign it", "I gave him the pile of papers and he returned them all, signed" or a later conversation "Remember that you agreed to X" – "Yeah, whatever").

Improve this answer
2
  • I think it could also be said that the contract was implied-in-fact (by accepting employment) and that all other employees are required to sign it. It may not even be necessary to have a signature in some cases, I could see a company saying "here are the terms of your employment, if you agree, start on Monday" which would be implied-in-fact acceptance and they would only have to prove that they gave those documents to you as a condition of employment.
    – Ron Beyer
    Commented Dec 18, 2018 at 3:40
  • Showing up to work would be clear evidence that you accepted the job offer, but not necessarily acceptance of a separate condition incorporated by vague reference into the offer, for example an agreement to change your cell phone provider to X, or whatever he is concerned with. Depends on whether the clearly knows of this condition of employment and continues to be employed there.
    – user6726
    Commented Dec 18, 2018 at 19:22

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .