<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
</head>
<body>
<div>
<div>
<div style="direction: ltr;">Jenny,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div style="direction: ltr;">I am not at my computer just now,<span id="ms-outlook-ios-cursor"></span> but I am pretty sure the device did not go away, it just moved from one statute to another. Don’t fret for now, as I have a feeling you will get many replies
in the next few minutes identifying the new authority for that very useful device.
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div style="direction: ltr;">Best, Josh </div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="ms-outlook-ios-signature">
<div style="direction: ltr;">Joshua D. McKarcher</div>
<div style="direction: ltr;">McKarcher Law PLLC</div>
<div style="direction: ltr;">537 6th Street</div>
<div style="direction: ltr;">Clarkston, WA 99403</div>
<div style="direction: ltr;">(509) 758-3345</div>
<div style="direction: ltr;">(509) 758-3314 (fax)</div>
<div style="direction: ltr;">josh@mckarcherlaw.com</div>
</div>
</div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> wsbapt-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbapt-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com> on behalf of jcrspicatto@gmail.com <jcrspicatto@gmail.com><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, November 20, 2020 8:33:26 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> wsbapt@lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbapt@lists.wsbarppt.com><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [WSBAPT] Unsworn statements and self-authenticated wills</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="BodyFragment"><font size="2"><span style="font-size:11pt;">
<div class="PlainText">Effective July 1, 2021, RCW 9A.72.085 stops being effective. This part of<br>
the perjury statute authorizes the unsworn statement signed with the "I<br>
declare under penalty of perjury ." language to be admitted as testimony in<br>
court without notarization. As this is simpler than notarizing a witness<br>
statement to self-authenticate a will, I've relied on this perjury statute<br>
for years and had no trouble getting such self-authentication clauses<br>
accepted by Washington judges in probate proceedings. Starting July 1st,<br>
what happens? Do self-authentication clauses authorized by RCW 11.20.020(2)<br>
need to be notarized to be accepted as testimony, as was the case before<br>
9A.72.085 was adopted?<br>
<br>
Jenny Rydberg, JD<br>
206-550-5491<br>
<br>
"The vote is precious. It is almost sacred. It is the most powerful<br>
non-violent tool we have in a democracy." - John Lewis<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.***<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
WSBAPT mailing list<br>
WSBAPT@lists.wsbarppt.com<br>
<a href="http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt">http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt</a><br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</body>
</html>