On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 09:33:19 -0500, jmcquown >
wrote:

>On 2/21/2013 8:59 AM, James Silverton wrote:
>>>
>> I have an ink stamp; they don't cost much, last for a long time and
>> don't have me looking for those tacky stickers.
>>
>> --
>
> ink stamps: Not related to charities, but my mother used to bemoan
>the fact her handwriting had gotten so bad her signature was sometimes
>almost illegible. After my dad died I drove her to the lawyer's office
>to sign some papers. She made the same comment. I suggested she have a
>signature stamp made. She asked is that legal? The lawyer said of
>course it's legal.
>
>People get checks like that all the time. Before the days of direct
>deposit you can be darn sure the head of a large company wasn't
>personally signing everyones' paycheck. They had a machine for that.
>Sig. stamps if it was a smaller company.
>
>I may go the signature stamp route myself. I type much more than I
>write so my handwriting is starting to get a little sloppy.

If you can type as well as you claim (120 wpm) there is no way your
handwriting is shaky. And a rubber stamp sig is not always legal or
acceptible unless notarized, and even then many institutions won't
acept a rubber stamp sig... they'll require you give someone power of
attorny to sign for you.