Most of us learned to sign court papers one way, in ink, and most clerks' offices in the Lowcountry still expect it. The pandemic changed the rule and the change stuck, but the practice at the counter did not always follow. This post sets out what the Supreme Court actually adopted, where the wet-ink requirement genuinely survives, what to do with a client or witness who cannot get to a notary, and how far South Carolina will go in honoring a notarization done electronically, or by video, somewhere else.

The short answer on electronic signatures in South Carolina family court: since May 2, 2022, any pleading, motion or other paper that a rule requires a party or lawyer to sign may be signed electronically under Rule 614 of the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules. The exception is a paper for which the law requires an original signature, and the rule names the example itself: an affidavit. An affidavit still has to be sworn before a notary in the notary's physical presence, but that notarization can itself be electronic if the notary is registered as a South Carolina electronic notary, and a notarization done in another state under that state's law is recognized here. Three of the finer points below are arguments rather than settled law, and each is marked.

Electronic signatures in South Carolina family court after Rule 614

From April 2020 through the spring of 2022 the Supreme Court's trial-court operations orders provided that "[a] lawyer may sign documents using 's/[typed name of lawyer],' a signature stamp, or a scanned or other electronic version of the lawyer's signature." The last of those orders expired on May 5, 2022. Three days earlier, by order dated May 2, 2022, the Court confirmed that the General Assembly had let the ninety-day review period run without objection, and the provision took effect as Rule 614, SCACR:

Where a rule of court requires that a pleading, motion, or other paper be signed by the party or the party's attorney, the document may be signed using 's/ [typed name of person],' a signature stamp, or a scanned or other electronic version of the person's signature, except in cases where an original signature is required by law, such as an affidavit. Regardless of form, the signature shall act as a certificate that the person has read the document; that to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief there is good ground to support it; and that the document is not interposed for delay.

The same order amended Rule 11(a), SCRCP, which now provides that "[t]he written or electronic signature of an attorney or party constitutes a certificate" under the rule, and the note to the 2022 amendment records that the earlier limitation of electronic signatures to e-filed papers "has been deleted from the rule." Rule 11 applies in family court through Rule 2(a), SCRFC; our earlier post on how the two rulebooks interact covers that mechanism. The practical result: a summons and complaint, an answer, a motion, a financial declaration's cover pleading, a proposed order submitted by counsel, all may carry a typed, stamped or scanned signature, and a clerk's office that returns one for lack of wet ink is contradicting a Supreme Court rule rather than enforcing one.

Where wet ink still matters: the affidavit exception

Rule 614 carves out "cases where an original signature is required by law, such as an affidavit." Rule 11(c), SCRCP, defines an affidavit as a written statement "sworn to or affirmed before an officer authorized to administer oaths," and the notary statutes supply the presence requirement. Under S.C. Code § 26-1-90(C)(1), a notary may not perform a notarial act if the signer "is not in the notary's presence at the time the notarial act is performed"; § 26-1-5(13) defines personal appearance as the signer and the notary being "in the physical presence of one another so that they may freely see and communicate"; and § 26-1-90(E) provides that a notary "shall not certify or authenticate a photograph or photocopy." In family court that reaches every Rule 21 affidavit, the sworn financial declaration under Rule 20, verifications, and affidavits of service.

The Supreme Court has shown what happens when the presence requirement is skipped. In In re Woods, 390 S.C. 446, 702 S.E.2d 562 (2010), a family court temporary-hearing affidavit from the client's out-of-state mother had been mailed to her and notarized by the lawyer's staff member; the lawyer "admits the document was not signed or affirmed by the client's mother in the notary's physical presence." In a separate matter the same office had a client sign a verification of a complaint that had not yet been drafted. The Court accepted an agreement for discipline by consent, issued a public reprimand, and required the lawyer and each employee to read the Secretary of State’s Notary Public Manual. The affidavit rules are enforced against the lawyer whose office notarizes them, and that is the reason to take the exception seriously even where the clerk's office does not.

Can you file a copy of a notarized affidavit?

This is an argument, not a decided question. Nothing in Rule 11(c) or Chapter 1 of Title 26 says the paper filed with the court must be the notary's ink original rather than a scan or photocopy of it; the statutes govern the act of notarizing, not what is filed afterward. The Clerk of Court Manual's family court chapter tells the clerk to review subsequent filings "for case number and proper signature" and to "return for signature" only where a required signature is "missing"; a copied signature is not a missing one. And under Barnes v. State, 433 S.C. 399, 859 S.E.2d 260 (2021), whether a filed paper complies with a requirement of form is "a question of law reserved for a judge," not a ground on which a clerk may refuse to file. Our reading is that a scanned affidavit that was in fact signed and sworn before a notary is a valid affidavit whose copy is on file, and that its weight is for the judge. We found no South Carolina decision holding a filed copy invalid because it was a copy, and none holding the opposite. Keep the original; a judge or opposing counsel can ask for it.

Electronic notarization in South Carolina: in person, but no ink

Since May 18, 2021 the Electronic Notary Public Act, 2021 Act No. 85, has allowed a South Carolina notary to perform electronic notarizations after registering with the Secretary of State, paying a fifty-dollar fee, passing the electronic notary test and selecting an approved technology vendor (§ 26-2-20(A)). The signer signs the electronic document electronically; the notary attaches an electronic certificate carrying the notary's name as commissioned, electronic seal, commission expiration date and electronic signature (§ 26-2-60(A)). The Uniform Electronic Transactions Act supplies the legal effect: "A law requiring a signature or record to be notarized, acknowledged, verified, or made under oath is satisfied if the electronic signature of the person authorized to perform those acts . . . is attached to or logically associated with the signature or record" (§ 26-6-110).

The limit is presence. Section 26-2-50(A)(1) allows an electronic notarization only if the principal "appears in person before the electronic notary public at the time of notarization," and the Secretary of State describes the process the same way: electronic notarization "requires that the notary public and the signer must be in the presence of one another when the notarization takes place." South Carolina has not adopted remote online notarization. For a client who can come to the office, though, a staff member registered as an electronic notary lets the firm produce affidavits, verifications and financial declarations with no ink anywhere.

One open question, flagged. Rule 614 excepts papers for which "an original signature is required by law." Whether an electronically signed and electronically notarized affidavit satisfies that phrase has not been decided by a South Carolina court. Section 26-6-110 is the answer we would give a judge, and in our view the right one, but it is an argument until a court says so.

Out-of-state notaries and remote online notarization

The out-of-state witness, the affiant in Woods, is the everyday problem, and the Uniform Recognition of Acknowledgments Act, S.C. Code § 26-3-10 et seq., has answered the simple version of it for decades. Section 26-3-20 defines notarial acts to include "the administering of oaths and affirmations . . . and attesting documents" and provides that they may be performed outside this State "for use in this State with the same effect as if performed by a notary public of this State" by, among others, a notary public "authorized to perform notarial acts in the place in which the act is performed." Section 26-3-30 makes the notary's signature and title prima facie evidence of authority. A witness in Charlotte who signs before a North Carolina notary has given you a South Carolina affidavit.

Remote online notarization changes the arithmetic. The National Association of Secretaries of State counts forty-seven states and the District of Columbia with a law allowing remote e-notarization. South Carolina and Georgia are not among them; Mississippi's 2020 notarial-acts statute permits electronic notarization only with the signer physically present; and California's law does not fully take effect until 2030. Alabama has had it since 2021. North Carolina enacted a Remote Electronic Notarization part (G.S. 10B-134 to 10B-134.26) in 2022, but the Secretary of State has not yet issued the first license under it; in the meantime North Carolina notaries use the emergency video notarization statute, which the General Assembly extended "to 12:01 AM on July 1, 2027 or until the first license is issued for Remote Electronic Notarizations." The pattern in those states is that the notary must be inside the commissioning state and the signer may be anywhere. Florida says an online notary "physically located in this state may perform an online notarization . . . regardless of whether the principal or any witnesses are physically located in this state" (Fla. Stat. § 117.265(1)); Virginia says an electronic notarial act "shall be deemed to have been performed within the Commonwealth and is governed by Virginia law" (Va. Code § 47.1-13(D)).

Whether South Carolina honors such an affidavit is an argument, not a holding. Read with the deeming language, a Florida or Virginia remote notarization is a notarial act performed in Florida or Virginia by a notary authorized to perform it there, and § 26-3-20 gives it "the same effect as if performed by a notary public of this State." That is the better reading in our view. The counter-argument is that the act was "performed" where the signer sat, and if the signer sat in Mount Pleasant, by a notary with no South Carolina authority; another state's characterization of where its notary acted does not bind a South Carolina judge, and no South Carolina appellate court has applied § 26-3-20 to a remote notarization. The fact pattern most likely to draw an objection is the South Carolina client signing from home before an out-of-state online notary. The fact pattern least likely to is the out-of-state witness who appears by video before a notary in her own state, which is the Woods problem solved lawfully.

Practice pointers

• •Sign pleadings, motions and proposed orders electronically if you want to, and cite Rule 614, SCACR, and Rule 11(a), SCRCP, if the counter objects. Under Barnes the question of form is the judge's in any event.
• •Treat every affidavit and every sworn financial declaration as requiring physical presence before the notary, whether the notary works with paper or electronically. Mailing a document out for signature and notarizing it on return is the conduct Woods was disciplined for.
• •Consider registering a staff notary as an electronic notary with the Secretary of State. For clients who can come in, it removes ink from the file entirely.
• •For an out-of-state affiant, the cleanest route remains a notary in the affiant's own state, in person; § 26-3-20 has recognized it since 1972. A remote online notarization by a notary commissioned in a RON state is the second route, and we would cite § 26-3-20 and the other state's deeming provision if it were challenged.
• •Keep the electronic certificate, the audit trail and, for a scanned affidavit, the ink original. If an affidavit is attacked, the notary's authority and identity verification are what § 26-3-30 and the RON statutes turn on.
• •Remember that Rule 21's affidavit and page limits, described in our post on the 2025 amendments to Rule 21, apply regardless of how the affidavit is signed.

Frequently asked questions

Can a family court clerk refuse a pleading because the signature is typed, stamped or scanned?

Not under Rule 614, SCACR, which has permitted exactly those signatures since May 2, 2022, or Rule 11(a), SCRCP, as amended the same day. The exception is a paper for which the law requires an original signature, such as an affidavit.

Does an affidavit still need a wet-ink signature?

It needs to be sworn before a notary in the notary's physical presence. That can be done in ink, or electronically before a registered South Carolina electronic notary. Whether the electronic version satisfies Rule 614's "original signature" exception is an open question; the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act says a law requiring an oath is satisfied by an electronic notarization.

Can I file a scanned copy of a notarized affidavit?

No rule or statute we found requires the ink original to be the paper on file, and under Barnes whether the copy is sufficient is the judge's question, not the clerk's. That is our reading rather than a holding. Keep the original.

Is remote online notarization available in South Carolina?

No. South Carolina allows in-person electronic notarization only. The National Association of Secretaries of State counts forty-seven states and the District of Columbia with remote e-notarization laws; Georgia and Mississippi are the other holdouts, and California's law is not fully effective until 2030.

Will South Carolina honor an affidavit notarized by video in another state?

Section 26-3-20 recognizes notarial acts performed outside the State by a notary authorized in the place where the act is performed, and RON states deem the act performed where the notary sits. Our reading is that this recognizes the affidavit, but no South Carolina court has decided it, and a South Carolina signer using an out-of-state online notary is the case most likely to be challenged.

Working with Klok Law in the Lowcountry family courts

Klok Law appears in all three Lowcountry family courthouses and handles family law matters in Charleston, Berkeley and Dorchester Counties, including referrals and co-counsel arrangements. Call Klok Law at (843) 701-1695 to discuss your options.

This article is for general information only and is not legal advice. For advice about your specific situation, contact Klok Law at (843) 701-1695.

This article is for general information only and is not legal advice. For advice about your situation, contact Klok Law at (843) 701-1695.