Unsigned Orders - NOT legal - NOT Binding!

Unsigned Orders - NOT legal and NOT Binding


And, by law, you are GUARANTEED a hearing!

[5] Judgment 228 282

228 Judgment
      228VII Entry, Record, and Docketing
            228k277 Judgment Roll or Record
                228k282 k. Signature. Most Cited Cases

Use of “signature stamps” to affix judicial signatures is discouraged as not only questionable and inappropriate generally, but also as posing risk that stamp will be obtained by unauthorized persons.



In Dobrow v. Dobrow, 50 Md.App. 465, 471, 439 A.2d 596 (1982), we commented on the use of signature stamps by judges in another county. We noted: “[T]he Master's proposed order was presumably approved and stamped with a facsimile signature of the Chancellor on February 18, 1981....” Id. at 467, 439 A.2d 596. We admonished the trial court: “We suggest the immediate end to the **859 use of facsimile signatures on original orders and decrees. Without the original signature of the reviewing judge there is nothing in the record to support a conclusion that the Chancellor ever personally saw the order.” Id. at 471-72, 439 A.2d 596.

[5] The use of “signature stamps” to affix judicial signatures is not only questionable at the least, and inappropriate generally, it may be highly risky as well. If the stamp exists, there is a risk that it will be obtained by unauthorized persons, and used by them to execute unauthorized orders, i.e., commitments, releases, judgments, dismissals. The potential for mischief is unlimited.

**********************************************************************************

134 Divorce
      134IV Proceedings
            134IV(L) Trial or Hearing
                134k150.1 Decision and Findings by Referee or Master
                      134k150.1(3) k. Objections and Exceptions, and Hearing Thereon. Most Cited Cases

Trial court erred in entering, or allowing master to enter, immediate order transferring child custody without conducting oral argument before court and apparently without reviewing file and master's recommendations. Md.Rule S74A, subd. f(2) (1996).

[4] Judges 227 24

227 Judges
      227III Rights, Powers, Duties, and Liabilities
            227k24 k. Judicial Powers and Functions in General. Most Cited Cases

Judge may not delegate judicial duties and responsibilities that are exclusively his or hers, and may not grant authority to perform those functions to bearer of his or her signature stamp.

[5] Judgment 228 282

228 Judgment
      228VII Entry, Record, and Docketing
            228k277 Judgment Roll or Record
                228k282 k. Signature. Most Cited Cases

Use of “signature stamps” to affix judicial signatures is discouraged as not only questionable and inappropriate generally, but also as posing risk that stamp will be obtained by unauthorized persons.

[6] Reference 327 100(4)

327 Reference
      327III Report and Findings
            327k100 Objections and Exceptions, and Hearing Thereof in General
                327k100(4) k. Requisites and Sufficiency of Objections and Exceptions. Most Cited Cases

Entire transcript of hearing before master need not be provided by party filing exceptions but only that portion of transcript containing testimony necessary to rule on exceptions. Md.Rule 2-541(h)(2); Rule S74A, subd. e (1996).


THE USE OF "SIGNATURE STAMPS"
In Dobrow v. Dobrow, 50 Md.App. 465, 471, 439 A.2d 596 (1982), we commented on the use of signature stamps by judges in another county. We noted: “[T]he Master's proposed order was presumably approved and stamped with a facsimile signature of the Chancellor on February 18, 1981....” Id. at 467, 439 A.2d 596. We admonished the trial court: “We suggest the immediate end to the **859 use of facsimile signatures on original orders and decrees. Without the original signature of the reviewing judge there is nothing in the record to support a conclusion that the Chancellor ever personally saw the order.” Id. at 471-72, 439 A.2d 596.

[5] The use of “signature stamps” to affix judicial signatures is not only questionable at the least, and inappropriate generally, it may be highly risky as well. If the stamp exists, there is a risk that it will be obtained by unauthorized persons, and used by them to execute unauthorized orders, i.e., commitments, releases, judgments, dismissals. The potential for mischief is unlimited.