Rivertime Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Are there statutes or case law that speak to this issue? I’m in California and I have not been able to find anything on this issue. It would seem to me that there should be some sort of minimum standard that describes what would determine if something is readable or not. You know, something like “must be able to be read clearly with the un-aided eye” or “must be readable with 2X magnification.” If anyone knows anything about this issue, I’m sure there are those, besides me, that would appreciate any input you could offer.Thanks,rt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomnTex Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 For a normal legal document, it must be no smaller than 6 pt. font. I am sure that as far as clarity goes, it must be readable by the naked eye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racecar Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Plaintiff argues that because the print size employed in the release is less than eight point, it is per se unenforceable under the holding of Conservatorship of Link (1984) 158 Cal. App.3d 138 [205 Cal. Rptr. 513]. We disagree.In Link, supra, the appellate court dealt with a release described as five and one-half-point print that was "so small that one would conclude defendants never intended it to be read." (Id. at p. 141.) The critical language was contained in the third paragraph of the document, in a complicated 193-word sentence. (Id. at p. 143.) The court stated that "[a]s a matter of public policy, the typeface size of the crucial language in a release should be no smaller" than eight- to ten-point type generally required by the Civil Code for various contracts. (Id. at pp. 141, 142.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rivertime Posted October 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 This is great info, thanks.Now, how about readability? I'm preparing for my trial and the only copy of an alleged cardmember agreement they have is very degraded because it has been copied so many times and the only way to make out what it says is with a 10X magnifying loop (some of it is unreadable with any power magnification). I realize common sense tells you that is should be inadmissible, but I'm just wanting to make certain.Thanks again and keep the comments coming.rt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1stStep Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 If you haven't used your limit of items to request, I'd make this one a specific solo item... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts