Can Utah courts exclude handwriting evidence when challenging notarized documents? The Berkshires v. Sykes Explained

In The Berkshires v. Sykes, the Utah Court of Appeals addressed whether Utah’s acknowledgment statutes limit the evidence that can be presented at trial when challenging the authenticity of notarized real estate conveyances.

Background and Facts

The Berkshires contracted to purchase land in Orem for a residential subdivision. Hours before closing, defendant Sykes recorded decades-old easement documents that would render large portions of the property unusable. The easements purportedly ran through the middle of a house and occupied several acres with a 66-foot right-of-way. Sykes offered to make the documents “go away” for $1 million worth of lots. Plaintiffs sued for slander of title and interference with economic relations, claiming the documents were forgeries.

Key Legal Issues

The primary issue was whether Utah Code sections 57-2-10 and 57-2-14 of the acknowledgment statute precluded the trial court from considering expert handwriting testimony and other evidence when a notary public had certified the documents. Defendants argued these sections created an evidentiary hierarchy requiring courts to rely exclusively on the notary’s testimony as a “subscribing witness.”

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s admission of expert handwriting testimony and other evidence challenging the documents’ authenticity. The court concluded that the acknowledgment statute sections apply only to acknowledgment proceedings, not to trial proceedings where forgery is alleged. The court reasoned that imposing such evidentiary limits at trial would “only impede the trial court’s ability to assess all relevant evidence” and could “facilitate forgery in cases where the forger is assisted by a notary acting either negligently or as a willful accomplice.”

Practice Implications

This decision clarifies that Utah’s acknowledgment statutes do not create blanket evidentiary restrictions in litigation challenging document authenticity. Trial courts retain broad discretion to consider all relevant evidence, including expert handwriting analysis, when determining whether documents are forgeries. The case also demonstrates the importance of timely motion practice, as the court affirmed denials of defendants’ motion to amend pleadings and motion for partial summary judgment based on procedural deficiencies and untimeliness.