A lawsuit filed in federal court Friday on behalf of Tracy Yoshimura, the Honolulu businessman who has spearheaded several petitions to impeach or recall Honolulu Prosecutor Keith Kaneshiro, alleges the city has violated federal law by failing to accept electronic signatures as valid.

The new lawsuit asks the federal court to block the city from rejecting electronic signatures on petitions to impeach or recall Honolulu Prosecutor Keith Kaneshiro. The lawsuit follows earlier efforts in state court which have unsuccessfully argued the same or a similar point of law.

The latest lawsuit, filed by Honolulu attorney Keith Kiuchi, argues that states are generally required to accept e-signatures by provisions of the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (ESIGN Act).

According to the complaint: “City Clerk Takahashi, Deputy Yost and the CITY have not presented any evidence that the CITY is exempt from the ESIGN’s general preemption of state law, nor have they presented any evidence of any written policy adopted by the CITY that would constitute an exemption to the ESIGN Act.”

The federal law allows states can choose to opt out, and Hawaii has made acceptance of e-signatures optional. However, the latest lawsuit alleges that the city already accepts electronic signatures for many purposes, provides for online voter registration. Further, the city has not adopted any rule authorizing their refusal to accept such signatures for this election-related purpose.

The federal law, along with state laws modeled on it, is summarized below.

These e-signature laws are intended to encourage the rapid adoption of digital signatures and decrease the use of antiquated paper methods. Under E-SIGN, a contract “may not be denied legal effect, validity, or enforceability solely because an electronic signature or electronic record was used in its formation.” 15 U.S.C.A. § 7001(a)(2). Similarly, under Section 7(d) of UETA, if a law requires a signature, an electronic signature satisfies the law. Furthermore, E-SIGN provides that any state’s law is preempted if and to the extent that it does not comply with UETA or its substantial equivalent. 15 U.S.C.A. § 7002. While these e-signature laws reinforce the validity of many types of electronic agreements, the laws do not cover certain types of documents, such as statutes, regulations, or other rules of laws governing wills, codicils, testamentary trusts, adoption, divorce, or other matters of family law, certain commercial transactions, certain court documents, and certain notices, generally do not affect substantive requirements of otherwise applicable substantive law, and contain requirements for creating enforceable agreements.

The relevant state law is found in Chapter 489E.

[§489E-18] Acceptance and distribution of electronic records by governmental agencies. (a) Except as otherwise provided in section 489E-12(f), each governmental agency of this State shall determine whether, and the extent to which, it will send and accept electronic records and electronic signatures to and from other persons and otherwise create, generate, communicate, store, process, use, and rely upon electronic records and electronic signatures.

No hearing on the federal complaint has been set.