SB 1320 - Under current law, certain business records are required to be notarized in order to be entered into evidence in a court proceeding. This act repeals those requirements and provides that such records shall not be deemed invalid for the reason that it uses an electronic signature or that it does not include a notarization. Additionally, any affidavit falsely made shall subject the signer to criminal penalties for perjury. This act is identical to a provision in SB 143 (2205), in SB 397 (2025), in SCS/SB 1400 (2024), in SS/SCS/HCS/HB 1659 (2024), and in SCS/HCS/HB 2700 (2024). KATIE O'BRIEN

2026 Regular Session

Repeals notarization requirements for certain business records in court, allows electronic signatures, and imposes perjury penalties for false affidavits.

Hearing Cancelled S Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence Committee

Summary of SB 1320 (Missouri, 2026)

Purpose and intent

SB 1320 repeals certain notarization requirements for specific business records that are offered into evidence in court. The bill clarifies that records using electronic signatures or lacking notarization are not automatically invalid. It also establishes criminal penalties for perjury related to any affidavits that are falsely made.

Key provisions and changes

Repeal of notarization requirement: Under current law, some business records must be notarized to be admissible as evidence. SB 1320 repeals these notarization prerequisites for those records.

Acceptance of electronic signatures: Records that use electronic signatures would no longer be deemed invalid solely because they are electronically signed.

No notarization requirement: Records lacking notarization would not be invalid for lack of notarization.

Criminal penalties for false affidavits: If an affidavit is falsely made, the signer could face criminal penalties for perjury.

Consistency with prior measures: The bill is described as identical to provisions in several earlier bills (SB 143/2025, SB 397/2025, SCS/SB 1400/2024, SS/SCS/HCS/HB 1659/2024, SCS/HCS/HB 2700/2024).

Who/what would be affected

Litigants and parties presenting business records as evidence in Missouri courts: They would gain more flexibility in how records are verified, particularly permitting electronic signatures and eliminating mandatory notarization as a prerequisite for admissibility.

Notaries and attestation processes: The role of notarization for these records would be reduced or eliminated, changing how certain documents are prepared and authenticated.

Affidavits and affiants: The potential for perjury charges increases if affidavits are falsely made, reinforcing accountability for sworn statements.

Procedural and timeline considerations

The bill changes evidentiary standards by statute, affecting admissibility of certain business records in court going forward.

It references duplicative language previously enacted in several related bills, indicating alignment with established, similar reforms in prior sessions.

The summary does not specify effective date; typically, Missouri bills include an effective date (e.g., July 1 following passage or a specified date). Readers should verify the bill’s final text for the exactEffective Date and any transitional provisions.

Potential impacts

Judicial efficiency: Removing notarization requirements could streamline evidentiary procedures and reduce administrative delays.

Reliability and integrity: Electronic signatures are deemed acceptable, which may necessitate robust evidentiary standards for authenticity and chain-of-custody in practice.

Risk of perjury: Strengthened penalties for false affidavits may deter fraud and improve honesty in sworn statements.

Accessibility: Businesses and individuals may experience clearer, faster documentation processes for records used in litigation.

If you want, I can tailor this summary to a specific audience (e.g., policymakers, legal practitioners, or the general public) or compare SB 1320 to the linked prior bills for a deeper cross-reference.