Notaries Public; the modernization of certain legal, notarial, and court services using electronic means; provide
SB 90 would modernize Georgia law governing real estate closings, notarial acts, and related court-services practices by expressly authorizing certain uses of electronic means. The bill defines and regulates “real estate closing using electronic means,” “in person electronic notarization,” and remote notarization, and it sets detailed requirements for identity verification, audio-video technology, record retention, and the physical location of attorneys and notaries. It also permits attorneys to conduct real estate closings electronically under specified conditions and allows notaries to use an electronic seal of office for authorized electronic or remote acts.
The bill also codifies and clarifies what counts as the practice of law in the real-estate-closing context, expressly prohibits “witness-only closings,” and reinforces restrictions on the unauthorized practice of law. It creates or expands civil remedies and enforcement tools for violations, including injunctive relief, damages, treble damages in some cases, attorney’s fees, and potential class actions for certain real-estate closing and notarial violations. The bill further imposes criminal penalties for aiding or abetting unlawful closings or notarial acts, with misdemeanor penalties for initial offenses and felony penalties for repeated violations.
SB 90 would amend Title 15 and Title 45 of the Georgia Code, primarily affecting the regulation of attorneys, notaries public, mortgage lenders, technology providers, and parties to residential and commercial real estate closings. It would authorize and regulate electronic and remote notarization, establish standards for electronic real estate closings, and create explicit statutory prohibitions and penalties for improper closing practices and unlawful notarial acts. The bill would also expand private rights of action and enforcement mechanisms, including class-action availability in some contexts, while limiting class actions for certain consumer claims tied to unauthorized practice of law.
The bill’s overall policy direction appears favorable toward modernization and digitization of real-estate and notarial services, with a strong emphasis on consumer protection and procedural safeguards. Because there were no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the supplied materials. The text itself suggests a consensus-oriented effort to update Georgia law while preserving attorney supervision and anti-fraud protections.
The main points of potential contention are the bill’s strict regulation of electronic closings and remote notarization, its prohibition on witness-only closings, and its significant enforcement provisions. Attorneys, notaries, lenders, and technology providers could be affected by the detailed compliance obligations, recordkeeping requirements, and criminal penalties for aiding violations. Another likely area of dispute is the bill’s expanded civil liability framework, including class actions, treble damages, and limits on arbitration clauses, which may be viewed as strong consumer-protection measures by supporters but as exposure to litigation by industry stakeholders.