Breach of Contract and UETA

[degraffm]

Does the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act (UETA) of California apply for an employment contract that was sent by the employer to the employee as an attachment via email? The employer and My husband had signed a contract before He began work with this company. After repeatedly asking for a copy and the employers replies of “I forgot it”, or “I’ll bring it tomorrow.” He finally sent him a copy via email. The email just has “employment contract” in the subject line and the contract is attached. Now, he has been terminated without “good cause” and the employer says that a contract does not exist because it is not a "signed" hard copy.

 

[degraffm]

Additional info about UETA

A little background on the UETA…

On September 16, 1999, California Governor Gray Davis signed Senate Bill 820 (the "Act"), making California the first state in the nation to adopt the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act ("UETA"). The underlying purpose of the Act is to ensure that electronic contracts (records and signatures) have the same legal effect as their hard copy counterparts. The Act further provides that if a law requires a record to be in writing, or if a law requires a signature, an electronic record satisfies those requirements. The Act will take effect on January 1, 2000.

The Act is designed to facilitate rather than mandate the use of electronic contracting; indeed, it only applies to transactions where the parties have agreed to conduct their transaction electronically. (The company has printed business cards with email addresses on them which I believe proves they have agreed to conduct business transactions via email.)

Certain transactions are excluded from the Act, including: (1) those involving wills, codicils, or testamentary trusts; (2) transactions under California Commercial Code sections that specifically deal with electronic records; (3) certain transactions that by law must be signed or initialed separately from the record; (4) certain transactions governed by various consumer protection laws (e.g., notice of mortgage late fees, non-judicial foreclosure notices, statements of finance charges); (5) any transaction under the Automobile Sales Finance Act or the Vehicle Licensing Act; (6) certain transactions in which notice to prospective purchasers must be given by telephonic sellers; and (7) retail installment sales contracts under the Unruh Act.

Regarding the admissibility of evidence, the Act provides that in a judicial proceeding, a record or signature may not be excluded solely because it is in an electronic format.