House Bill 44 makes two related changes to North Carolina law. First, it clarifies when electronic signatures may satisfy the “signed by hand” requirement for reciprocal attorneys’ fees provisions in business contracts under G.S. 6-21.6. The bill states that an electronic signature can qualify if it reflects an affirmative act by the signer, such as typing a name or signing on a touchscreen with a finger or stylus, and it also recognizes manual signatures transmitted as electronic images. It preserves existing exclusions for consumer contracts, employment contracts, government contracts, insurance contracts, and certain debt instruments governed elsewhere in statute.
Second, the bill updates notary commission application procedures under G.S. 10B-5. It keeps the requirement that an initial notary application signature be written with pen and ink, but clarifies that the Secretary of State may allow electronic submission of applications and may establish a process for submitting the applicant’s signature before commissioning, including electronic submission. The act is effective when it becomes law.
Impact
The bill amends the statutes governing business-contract attorneys’ fees and notary commission applications. In practice, it broadens and clarifies the acceptable use of electronic signatures in a narrow commercial-contract context while preserving the requirement that the parties’ assent be affirmative and traceable. It also modernizes notary application administration by authorizing electronic filing processes, though it retains the handwritten signature requirement for an initial application. The changes primarily affect businesses, contracting parties, courts or arbitrators applying fee-shifting clauses, and the Secretary of State’s notary commission process.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill was broadly supported, passing second reading 113-1. No committee transcripts were provided, so there is no recorded floor or committee debate to indicate organized opposition or major concern. The near-unanimous vote indicates general agreement with the bill’s technical, clarifying purpose and its limited modernization of electronic signature and notary procedures.
Contention
The main policy issue is the scope and reliability of electronic signatures. The bill attempts to balance modernization with safeguards by limiting electronic signatures to affirmative actions that evidence acceptance and execution, while still requiring handwritten signatures for initial notary applications. Another point of potential contention is the preservation of existing carve-outs: the bill does not extend these rules to consumer contracts, employment contracts, insurance contracts, or debt instruments governed by G.S. 6-21.2, which means its effect is intentionally narrow. No specific opposition is documented in the provided materials, and the vote record suggests little controversy.