How legally binding is someone's signature?

[StevenYoo]

my friend is selling her services as a piano teacher.

she wrote up a simple contract illustrating the different stipulations on hourly fees and penalties and such.

when a client signs the contract, how legally binding is that contract on its own?

does each and every contract have to be notarized or something?

should terms of the contract be breached, what can be done if the contract weren't notarized or something (if notarization was necessary)?

thanks in advance

 

[Schadenfroh]

is it signed in blood? or seaman

 

[waggy]

if its signed its legal. No it does not have to be notarized.

edit: here is a good way of looking at it. have you ever seen a notarized lease? or car papers? or such?

a contract can be written on Toilet paper with a crayon and still be legal.

but then again i am NOT a lawyer. but have had a few hundred contracts.

 

[StevenYoo]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
is it signed in blood? or seaman

well, Fleet Week here in NYC just ended, so the Navy boys have gone and fled.

so looks like it'll have to be blood.

 

[dirtboy]

It is a legal binding document. If you sign something, you are bound to it. Obviously there are exceptions, but from what it sounds like, your "friend" doesn't have any.

Every contract doesn't have to be notarized. If that was the case, everyone would be a notary, because everything would have to be notarized.

Contract law is pretty simple. If you agree to a certain set of terms, written or orally, you are bound to them, irregardless if the deal is good or bad. As long as you entered a contract in good faith, you knew the terms and you weren't forced into signing it, you've got nothing.

 

[glenn1]

It's a legal contract, although a very weak one. No, contracts do not need to be notarized. Since recourses/non-performance clauses for breach of contractweren't spelled out in the contract itself, any disputes between the parties arising as a consequence of the contract or its terms would probably need to be decided in a court.

Disclaimer: I am not an attorney, the above is not meant to substitute for professional legal advice.

 

[atomstryker]

irregardless isn't a word, a message from your friendly neighborhood grammar nazi

 

[tweakmm]

Very.

 

[Lonyo]

It's legal as long as it wasn't signed under duress (like a gun to the head - which I doubt given that it's not a very important document).

 

[Fingolfin269]

Google for 'Ted Williams'.

 

[Kelemvor]

If she wrote it up herself there's probably wording in it that leaves big holes open. I'd have her pay a hundred bucks or whatever and have an attorney that works with contracts look it over. My wife did this for her business and had to put stipulations and things in there.

 

[DigDug]

that leaves big holes open.

Contrary to pop culture's understanding of contracts, people aren't so quick to escap contracts based on small loophole. Courts often use their power of equity (read: fairness) to give effect to what the parties intended. Where a contract is breached and is being contested as invalid, courts will use the doctrines of ambiguity, mistake, and even duress as a way to effect the intent of the parties.

The law isn't as cut and dry as you think.

 

[PrincessGuard]

Hell, in some cases a contract does not even need to be written to be legally binding. As long as both parties agree to the terms the contract is valid and enforcable. Good luck proving it though.

 

[rh71]

Any good lawyer could find the faults of a contract, especially if you wrote it yourself. That's why self-written ones aren't very useful anyway. It's better than nothing though.. cause the client would have to pay for legal advice to get out of the contract in the first place so they'd be less likely to breach.

 

[DaveSimmons]

The contract and signature are certainly good enough for small claims court or Judge Judy.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: rh71
Any good lawyer could find the faults of a contract, especially if you wrote it yourself. That's why self-written ones aren't very useful anyway. It's better than nothing though.. cause the client would have to pay for legal advice to get out of the contract in the first place so they'd be less likely to breach.

actually contracts written by yourself for such things as the OP had then they are great. Even if there is a loophole (doubt there would be a big one. considering the reason for the contract) it does not matter UNLESS it contradicts something else in the contract.

even a lawyer won't help. as dig dug said the courts try to do what the contract intended. the only way it gets thrown out is in matters of duress or contradictions (saying $50 per lesson but someplace else say s $80 a lesson).

Now if it is something huge such as purchasing land, a business or involving a lot of money i would go to a contract lawyer to have it iron clad.

for small stuff its just not worth it or needed. I have signed into hundreds of contracts some of them were very basic and others were full of lawyeres where i had to have a lawyer read it to me. all were legal once i signed my name.

but again this is how i was told from my lawyer. I am not one in real life or my fantasies! (they suck) heh