Certify Electronic signature Form Myself

During my divorce I did the majority of the writing, paperwork, and delivery to save costs. Since saving cost was part of the reason I got quite creative with process serving. In the local court rules (every court jurisdiction has their own rules) there were only two restrictions. You couldn't do it yourself. The person signing that they did it had to be over 18 years old. There was no verification. There was no identification. There was no requirement that they show up to court to prove anything. A signature on the court approved form said they were over 18 and they delivered some papers. Good to go.My ex's attorney was doing her best job to raise billable hours and delays in the process. At some point in time she had made a mistake and brought a motion to an ex-parte court (only one party needs to be present ex-parte). The ex-parte court overlooked that this motion could only be ordered ex-parte with my signature on an agreeing form. I didn't agree! I got notice she did this on a Friday through the courts electronic forms processing. I couldn't see what she did until Monday. Because of other rules and process I only had that day to correct it. I didn't even get a certified copy until Tuesday!I didn't have time to go home and study it. I didn't have time to get legal help. I hammered it out on my laptop in the court lobby, printed it at Kinko's a block away, and then had another conundrum. Attorney's are supposed to make a good faith effort to tell the other party about ex-parte motions. Of course she didn't do that for me, but I was going to for her. I printed another set of complete documents that would move her motion from ex-parte to our actual assigned judge on the required 14 day calendar. A cover sheet explained this was my good faith message about an ex-parte action, and also moving her motion to the motions calendar.This would require a process server. I'm running out of time. I can't do it myself. The other attorney's office is across the street from the Kinko's in the downtown core.This is the epic part, and just revenge for the (dis)honest mistake and wasting my day. I walked outside the courthouse, found the stinkiest, liquor drenched bum I could find. I paid him $10 to go to her office, of a major law firm, in a top story of huge skyscraper, and deliver them and sign the paperwork saying he did it. I accompanied him, told the building lobby attendants he had legal business there and showed them her business card. Up the elevators, walked past the receptionist for the firm who just sat there open-mouthed. Same thing “he has legal business with ”. Down the hall, she was in a meeting with other attorneys. So he walked right in, dropped off the papers, now loaded with his stench, the other attorneys are backing away wondering what the hell, and I said “see you in 30 minutes if you object.”I made it back to the courthouse and to the ex-parte court in time to explain the error, the corrected paperwork, get a revised order canceling her order, and putting everything on the 14 day calendar. The accepting clerk asked if this had been served. Yes, here you are: a Service of Process document, properly signed by a drunk, snaggletoothed, unbathed bum.The 14 day extension gave me enough time to write a valid objection and her motion was denied. The actual issue was of little importance except it inconvenienced me. It would have been a pretty routine temporary change in a six year custody battle. She got petty about it, and I got petty back in spades.

A Quora inquiry is neither legal advice nor attorney work product. I am not your lawyer.While the answer others have given (“No”) is correct, I’d like to argue some of the reasoning.TL;DR:It’s not. As of right now, it’s only available in the U.S., although there have been plans announced to acquire a lawfirm in the UK. See: LegalZoom to make first UK acquisitionA note on other answers to this questionThe claim that “Mexico is not standardized” is at least as false as the claim that the U.S. is. Let me elaborate:For most of the reasons people need LegalZoom, which is fairly standardized documentation like wills, company charters of incorporation, or real estate deeds.Both the United States and Mexico are Federal countries, which means, among many other things, that some laws governing these documents (like tax laws stating how much tax should a corporation pay and how) are Federal, but most laws setting forth how the company is set up are State laws. (In Mexico’s case this is slightly different - most stock companies would be governed by Federal law, because they would be considered comerciantes (merchants) and therefore be subject to merchantile laws which are Federal - but I digress.)For the sake of example, if you wanted to incorporate a company in Mexico, you would have to go to a (State) Notary Public (who is a licensed attorney in Mexico), he or she would either draft the articles of incorporation or revise the ones you have drafted, seal the articles of incorporation and thereby issue a formal incorporation deed, then enroll the corporation into the Public Registry of Property (State) or Commerce (Federal) depending on whether the company is considered a merchant, and enroll the company with the Tax Registry (Federal).Depending on what the company does, its contracts and its activities will sometimes be regulated by State laws and sometimes by Federal laws - but this is at least as true for the U.S. as it is for Mexico.For example, in Mexico, only Federal authorities can authorize banks, whereas some U.S. states retain the power to issue State-only banking licenses; a Federal authorization is part of the myriad requirements needed to open a private hospital or import a medical device into Mexico, whereas in some limited cases, the U.S. allows State authorities to do it.As an important final note, it bears pointing out that, unlike the U.S., where State bar accreditation is required to practice law (which has raised interesting challenges for LegalZoom already - see Settlement Allows LegalZoom to Offer Legal Services in N.C.), in Mexico, all licensed attorneys can practice throughout the country. Recently, there have been attempts to change this through legislation, but to this date, they have not prospered.The ChallengeMany of the “traditional” criticisms for the lack of innovation in the global legal sector are doubly or triply true for Mexico, where the Chambers Tier 1 lawyers in each practice area have shown very similar names throughout at least the last 20 years. The pressure for top-tiered Mexican lawyers and lawfirms to innovate usually does not come so much from the innovative technologies making waves in other jurisdictions, but rather, from the competition that arises from the integration with (or assimilation by) “global” (but really mostly U.S.) law firms to smaller Mexican firms. (See for example Jones Day to Open New Office in Mexico City | Law.com, Baker & McKenzie, DLA Piper Beef Up Presence in Mexico | The American Lawyer, Greenberg Traurig’s Mexico City Office Celebrates 5th Anniversary | News | Greenberg Traurig LLP, to mention a few).In terms of legislation, Mexico is arguably on the vanguard of technology adoption - on paper. Contracts that are considered “commercial” acts for purposes of Mexican Federal commercial laws can, in theory, be valid if executed by e-mail, digitally signed, and even digitally signNowd if the law requires that they be, since at least 2005. The recent Fintech Law draft bill would have provided a fairly robust legal framework for a number of fintech market participants, from debt and equity crowdfunders to payment system providers and cryptocurrency exchanges, but it got suspended because of the earthquake and is in hiatus at least until Congress’s first ordinary sessions period.However, Mexican contracting parties have been slow and distrustful to adopt these new changes - I drafted my first memo on a client consult of the legality of digital contract in 2012, and saw my first digitally signed contract last week - this despite the fact that since 2003, the Mexican tax system requires all taxpayers to have an electronic signature that complies with the legal safety standards, and which can, in theory, be used to sign contracts.A lot of this resistance comes from the (correct or incorrect) appreciation in the market that Mexican courts would not necessarily understand or agree that a digital contract was concluded at a given point in time, despite the apparent clarity of “black letter law” in the matter.Nevertheless, many lawyers, including me, believe that this reluctance to embrace innovation can be overcome if and when more lawyers are the first to embrace these changes.The opportunityAs the 15th economy in the world, with a small-but-growing startup ecosystem greatly bolstered by government support across many administrations and more than one governing party, with many global corporations having a relatively strong presence, and with its proximity to the U.S., Mexico is an attractive destination for tourism, foreign investment, and even expats. These people all need legal services, and they would much prefer a service they are familiar with than a lawyer who, on occasions literally, doesn’t speak their language.In addition, the domestic market often complains about the fact that it does not understand what it is paying for when it retains legal services; especially when many lower-tier notaries and lawyers simply push forward their templates of legal documents and expect to charge for that.LegalZoom’s “self-help” offer of standardized documents with a ‘wizard’-type assistant to fill in blanks can be expanded fairly easily to include a repository of standardized Mexican documents in Spanish language, and rapidly complemented with natural language processing and machine translations (reviewed by Mexican lawyers who speak the client’s language) to prepare legal documents with their “courtesy translations” included for the client.Likewise, its more comprehensive offers, which include packages of legal consults with a licensed specialized attorney, can be resolved quickly by partnering with local firms much in the same way LegalZoom already does in the U.S. - without the added problem of needing one partner per state.In a limited number of cases, partnerships with notaries and digital certification service providers could allow LegalZoom to turn its standardized documents into actual signNowd deeds, certified digitally - thereby reducing duplication and messaging costs for both LegalZoom, its partners, and ultimately, the client.The marketA key factor for the success of a startup is its capacity to adapt its product to the markets it caters for. In this respect, LegalZoom’s market requires a fairly tech-savy customer - someone who, in addition to needing the service, at the very least owns a home computer and has relatively good internet access.Unfortunately, and despite a signNowly growing trend of further digital inclusion, this is still not true for an important sector of the Mexican market.The problemThe greatest resistance to change comes from the legal industry itself ( and by industry, I mean this in the broadest possible sense - including judges, officials and regulators). If judges cannot be convinced that the digitally signed contract is, in fact, a contract, or, for that matter, if trustees, banks, government officials and private counterparties still refuse to accept electronically signed documents or what they view as machine-generated content, LegalZoom would have to engage in costly litigation to get its document accepted.Furthermore, even this dire picture fails to take into account the reaction that traditional lawyers are likely to have to LegalZoom’s competition.ConclusionLegalZoom would, without a doubt, be welcome by clients in Mexico. Probably not so much by lawyers and regulators (but these resistances can be overcome). None of this is new for LegalZoom. The question, then, is whether the existing market for legal services in Mexico is best served by services provided in the form of a digital platform with self-help tools.I personally think it would be a great opportunity for LegalZoom.PostscriptLegalZoom - if you’re listening, should you ever take an interest in the Mexican market, some of us are very interested in seeing this change. It makes sense to signNow out to younger lawyers (myself included) and notaries public who can probably help.

There might be many reasons. These are some which I have encountered:a) cry for help: the problem is minor but persistent, or minor but manifold. The co-workers cannot resolve it so they have to ask the boss for help. For instance, I had a teammate who always came late. If the event prep started at 9am, she came at 9:30, just when the laborious prep work like arranging the tables and chairs was completed. She would gracefully take a seat, fire up the computer and look prim and proper while the rest of us fumed. We ended up complaining to the boss again and again as the girl was quite shameless and saw nothing wrong with what she was doing.b) tattle-tale: one of our HR heads was always whispering in the CEO’s ear. Every time there was a meeting of the heads of departments, she sat right next to the CEO, and frequently muttered, “I told you about it” whenever a problem was reported. I could hear her because I was taking minutes and sat near the CEO. She cultivated an all-knowing reputation to curry favour with the CEO. Her “power behind the throne” reign ended when we had a new CEO.c) sensitive matters: sometimes people aren’t comfortable talking to co-workers about certain matters. They want to preserve the working relationship. So they ask the boss to deal with it. Sensitive matters I’ve encountered are poor personal hygiene, unwillingness to assume responsibility, sexism and religious proselytizing.