Is it proper or improper for a clerk to stamp the judge's signature on the docket when the judge is not present?

• A. Improper
• B. Proper
• C. Both
• D. Neither

Answer: (A)

A judge’s signature represents personal approval and legal authority. When the judge is not present, stamping the judge’s signature on the docket would falsely show that the judge personally endorsed the entry, which could mislead and compromise the integrity of the court record. Clerks handle routine docketing and authentication tasks, but they do not extend the judge’s authority by stamping a signature unless there is explicit, documented authorization and a procedure that permits it. The proper approach is for the judge to sign the document themselves when possible, or for the clerk to reflect the judge’s order through an authorized method that is clearly allowed by court rules or a standing directive. If a protocol does exist that allows sign-on-behalf signatures, it must be narrowly limited, clearly documented, and strictly followed. Without that, stamping the judge’s signature in the judge’s absence is improper.