Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affirmation Filing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Court reviews rule to allow unsworn declarations (affirmations) for electronic filings
Summary
A proposed rule would permit documents signed under penalty of perjury to be filed electronically without a notary under SDCL chapter 18-7, aiming to ease pro se filings such as protection orders; the court discussed wording that would make clear existing perjury statutes still apply.
The court reviewed a proposed new rule to allow filing certain documents by affirmation (unsworn declarations) rather than sworn oath, consistent with SDCL chapter 18-7.
Jeff Tronvold explained the rule implements the Uniform Unsworn Domestic Declarations Act (referencing SDCL chapter 18-7) so that documents signed under penalty of perjury may be filed electronically without requiring a notary. Tronvold said the two sentences in the draft that mirrored SDCL 18-7 "kinda lay out the requirements" and that he included a final sentence to clarify that filing a dishonest unsworn declaration could expose a filer to existing perjury penalties; he said that sentence could be deleted if the court preferred because it did not change the substance of the rule.
Court members asked clarifying questions about whether the proposal would create a new offense or simply apply existing perjury law to unsworn electronic declarations; Tronvold confirmed the latter. He told the court the change was intended in part to make it easier for pro se filers to submit documents such as protection orders electronically without a notary and that the rule was not intended to create new criminal penalties.
No final approval or vote on the text is recorded in the hearing transcript.
