Proper chain of custody is an essential element of data defensibility. That being said, I need to know the legality of using red ink on an official document. Basically, the sample ID number we use is written in red indelible ink so it's easy to differentiate between it and all of the other text on the chain of custody. It makes filing and retrieving much easier! I've searched online and I can't find a conclusive answer. The bulk of what I'm seeing suggests that it's perfectly legal but was frowned upon in the past because it didn't photo-copy or scan as well. Does anyone know of a code or statute that actually mandates ink color? I'm getting tired of hearing “only blue or black ink is acceptable” from the teeming masses without anything to back it up!
Thanks!

PS, I'm in South Carolina

Without knowing which State it is impossible to research that State's laws.

Dollars-to-doughnuts there is no such statute. Probably just some bureaucrat somewhere decided to insist on “only blue or black ink is acceptable”.

I agree with you that the “only blue or black ink is acceptable” rule is unreasonable. As a matter of fact, it seems that for your purposes it would be better to have the "original" marked with red ink.

As a state institution, can't you get a state-paid lawyer to give you an answer on this one?

I have seen scanners unable to read red ink.

And, yes, you would think a State Attorney would have the answer.

Thanks for the responses. I'm satisfied that it does not affect the defensibility of a document. I think the scanner issue may have been the origin. Old habits are hard to break!

If this document is possibly going to be used in a court of law the court rules are blue or black ink only. Attorneys must sign their pleadings in black ink only. The scanner quality of red ink has never been good and is quite questionable.

Why would you wish to have something in red ink anyway - just because it's supposedly "easier" to pick out? Maybe in your eyes it is, but not everyone I am sure would agree with you about this.

Twinkie, In a sea of black ink on paperwork that's also printed in black and white it seems pretty self evident that a different color ink is "easier" to pick out. I honestly don't think that's a subjective observation here. As far as the rules of blue or black ink only, where do you come by this knowledge pray tell? I've heard that from a few people equally as positive as you but I've yet to see any legal precedent for what you're stating as fact. That's what I'm searching for, a factual basis for your statement. I don't think it exists in a broad legal sense. You may find a banking institution that demands a certain color ink for whatever reason but that's unique to the institution. As far as scanner quality goes, that may have been the case 10 years ago but our mediocre office scanner picks up red as well as black, green or blue. In fact, I tested it and no one could tell which color was which. Not to mention, would the inability to scan something truly effect its inherent legality as a document?

Legally attorneys must sign in black ink. I worked in law offices for over 15 years as both a legal secretary and paralegal so I think I have a handle on what I'm talking about. Also when some client was signing their Last Will or signing a Complaint or other legal document they had to use black ink only.

You COULD, however, write the number in red ink and then in black ink. So what's so hard with writing the number twice? This way you would satisfy everyone.

You need to remember that not everyone has a super duper scanner in their office. Most courthouses don't have fancy anything anymore and would be hard pressed to even have a working copier!

You need to remember that you will not always be at that job doing what you are doing forever and someone else coming after you will not understand your rationale for using red ink as being easier to read. Sure, you can pick out the red ink easier, but why not do it in both red and black ink to be on the safe side?

Call up your local Court Clerk and ask them if the Court uses red ink on legal documents. They just might snicker when they answer your question so don't be offended if they do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twinkiedooter

Call up your local Court Clerk and ask them if the Court uses red ink on legal documents. They just might snicker when they answer your question so don't be offended if they do.

---

I'm in no way offended, I'm simply looking for proof positive that ink color has any bearing on legal defensibility. Despite your 15 years in a law office you haven't proven to me that writing in black ink was anything other than the preference of the firm you worked for. Likewise, if the local Court Clerk snickers at the red ink question it proves nothing other than the fact that they have been told to use black ink, unless of course they can quote a legal code or statute. I'm desperately searching for that which states ink other than black or blue is unacceptable. I have yet to find it. The most proof I can find to date is along the lines of what you're telling me. I appreciate your input but it seems to be based on circular logic. If I wrote my Will in red ink and died shortly thereafter it would be a legally binding document, would it not?

You work for the State. Presumably there are Attorneys on the State payroll. Ask one of them. Hopefully there is a section of law covering this and then "we" will have the answer.

I run a process service company. The Court Clerk will not accept an affidavit of Service written in red ink. I believe (and I don't really care) that's more about scanning/microfilming and less about legaltiy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raisingale

... I need to know the legality of using red ink on an official document. Basically, the sample ID number we use is written in red indelible ink ...

I’m getting tired of hearing “only blue or black ink is acceptable” from the teeming masses without anything to back it up!
Thanks!

PS, I'm in South Carolina

---

And I'm tired of reading the same thing from the "teaming masses" in this forum again, "without anything to back it up". Raisingale, for their benefit, let's reiterate:
-you are in South Carolina
-we are not talking about signatures.

Exactly what sort of documents, requiring sample ID numbers, are you dealing with?
Are you filing these documents with the state court, or some other agency?

When we have that information, perhaps I or someone else can have a look and try to come up with a meaningful answer.

Federal court rules as well as state and local court rules state that the documents themselves must be printed in black ink on white paper. The signatures must also be in black or blue ink depending on the state or specific court. It's the RULE - not the law. Two different animals.

If you are using numbering in red ink that would not be permissible for filing in a Federal, state or local court of law.

Sufficient for you now??

And also, it was not the preference of whatever law office I worked at either. I was going by the Court Rules whether local or Federal.

And sometimes the type font had to be a certain type font and spaced accordingly on the paper such as anything filed in Federal Court whether it was on a civil case or a criminal case or an Appellate Brief. I had to prepare for my attorney's signature and file documents that were filed in the Supreme Court of the United States. That paperwork had to strictly adhere to THEIR RULES of type font, black ink and spacing or it was returned by the Clerk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twinkiedooter

Federal court rules as well as ...
Sufficient for you now?????

---

No.

You can't find it, can you?

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure don't address the subject.

Section 117.05(3)(a), Florida Statutes, provides that the
Official notary seal—the rubber stamp type seal—must be affixed with “photographically reproducible
black ink.”

There is one showing color and it's a law in place for something legal and reproducible.

The problem with red is it doesn't fax well. And since most items of the court are faxed about it tends to come out discolored.

Here is another from the supreme court.

SUPREME COURT RULES - Rule 33

Closed, poster only wants to aruge