ATTEST - The Law Mind Legal Dictionary

ATTESTAuthored

The Law Mind • 1258 words

Definition

To attest is to witness the execution of a written instrument — to observe its signing and subscribe one's own name as evidence of that fact. The term carries two related but distinct senses in legal usage:

1. ATTESTATION AS WITNESSING: To be physically present at the execution of an instrument, observe the act of signing or acknowledgment, and subscribe one's name to the instrument in testimony of that observation. This is the primary legal meaning and governs the formal requirements for wills, deeds, and other instruments requiring attested witnesses.

2. ATTESTATION AS CERTIFICATION: To certify the genuineness, correctness, or authenticity of a document — typically a copy — by official signature, seal, or endorsement. In this sense a court clerk, notary, or other certifying officer attests that a copy faithfully reproduces the original. This meaning is procedural and appears in contexts such as certified copies of court records, official documents offered in evidence, and authenticated public records.

The common thread is testimonial authority: whether witnessing an act or certifying a document, the person who attests vouches by signature that something is genuine.

---

Common Language

Modern common usage (Wiktionary): To affirm to be correct, true, or genuine; to certify by signature or oath; to supply or be evidence of; to put under oath.

Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): To bear witness to; to certify; to affirm to be true or genuine. Also, to give proof of; to manifest — as in, the ruins of Palmyra attest its ancient magnificence.

In ordinary English, "attest" extends broadly to any act of bearing witness or furnishing evidence, including abstract or figurative senses (a building's grandeur "attests" to former wealth). In legal usage, the term is narrower and more formal: it requires a human witness who was physically present, observed the relevant act, and subscribed the instrument. The figurative sense is legally irrelevant. The certification sense (sense 2 above) is a recognized legal extension but is not the same as the witnessing sense (sense 1) and the two should not be treated interchangeably in document analysis.

---

Common Confusion

ATTEST vs. ACKNOWLEDGE: Attestation and acknowledgment are frequently conflated but serve different purposes. To attest is to witness and subscribe an instrument as it is being executed. To acknowledge is for the executing party to declare before an authorized officer (typically a notary) that the signature on the instrument is genuine. A deed may require acknowledgment by the grantor and attestation by witnesses — these are separate acts performed by different people at different steps in execution. Historical instruments and older statutes sometimes use the terms loosely; researchers should examine context carefully.

ATTEST vs. SUBSCRIBE: Subscription is the physical act of signing one's name. Attestation includes subscription but is not reducible to it — it also requires that the witness was present and observed the execution. Burrill's draws this distinction explicitly: where a statute requires attestation, mere signature without observation of execution does not satisfy the requirement.

---

Core Elements

For attestation of a witnessed instrument (particularly wills), the functional requirements recognized across sources are:

PRESENCE: The witness must be physically present at the execution — present to observe the testator or grantor actually sign, or acknowledge a prior signature.

OBSERVATION: The witness must have the opportunity to see that the instrument is being executed; the principal object, as Anderson's notes, is that witnesses "may see that the same is properly and fairly executed."

SUBSCRIPTION: The witness must sign the instrument as a witness, in that capacity.

REQUEST: In many formulations, attestation occurs "at the request" of the executing party, distinguishing a formal witness from an incidental bystander.

Failure of any element may invalidate the attestation, and depending on jurisdiction and instrument type, may void the underlying instrument.

---

Why It Matters in Research

The word "attest" is load-bearing in will and deed execution requirements, and small variations in how historical statutes define it can determine whether an instrument is valid. Researchers working in probate and estates materials should track the specific statutory language in effect at the time of execution — whether the jurisdiction required witnesses to sign "in the presence of" the testator, "in the presence of each other," or both. These requirements have shifted significantly across jurisdictions and eras, and the Law Mind Trusts, Estates & Probate Encyclopedia entry on attested wills addresses these formality variations directly.

In the certification sense, "attested copy" appears throughout procedural and evidence materials. An attested copy is distinguished from a mere copy by the certifying officer's signature and — typically — official seal, which in many jurisdictions renders the copy self-authenticating or admissible without further proof. Historical practice varied on whether attestation alone was sufficient or whether it had to be accompanied by a certificate of the officer's authority.

Researchers using Burrill's, Bouvier's, or the older Black's editions should note that these sources tend to emphasize the witnessing sense and give less systematic treatment to the certification sense. Anderson's is most useful for understanding the practical boundaries between attest, sign, and subscribe. For instruments from the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the request requirement deserves close attention — some authorities treated it as formal and others as merely customary.

---

Historical Dictionary Support

The six source dictionaries converge closely on the core witnessing sense. Burrill's provides the most analytical treatment, explicitly noting that where attestation is required, mere presence without subscription does not satisfy the term, and that subscription without presence likewise falls short. Bouvier's and Anderson's largely agree, with Anderson's adding the useful gloss that strict attestation requires the witness to have "witnessed the execution" rather than merely signed after the fact.

Black's (both editions) adds the certification sense and identifies it as a distinct technical use by certifying officers — a dimension that Bouvier's and Burrill's do not address as directly. The Black's formulation ("assurance of the genuineness and correctness of a copy") remains the clearest statement of that secondary meaning.

The Rapalje & Lawrence excerpt included in the source material does not address "attest" directly — the excerpt covers "attaint," a distinct and largely obsolete term. Researchers should not conflate the two. Attaint appears in Rapalje & Lawrence in its historical sense as a proceeding to challenge a jury's false verdict; it shares Latin roots with "stained" or "corrupted" and has no connection to attestation.

None of the historical dictionaries engage with evidentiary self-authentication doctrine, which has become a significant context in which attested and certified copies operate under modern evidence rules.

---

Jurisdictional Note

Will execution formalities — including how many witnesses are required to attest, whether witnesses must sign in each other's presence, and what degree of "presence" satisfies the requirement — vary materially by jurisdiction and have changed over time within jurisdictions. The Uniform Probate Code has influenced many states toward less rigid attestation requirements, while others retain stricter traditional formulations. For certified copies, federal and state procedural rules each specify what constitutes a sufficient attestation to support admissibility.

---

Encyclopedia Cross-Reference

Attested Wills — Formalities, Witnesses, and the Function of Execution Requirements (The Law Mind Trusts, Estates & Probate Encyclopedia)

---

ATTESTmain

Black's Law Dictionary • 1891

To witness the execution of a written instrument, at the request of him who makes it, and subscribe the same as a witness. This is also the technical word by which, in the practice in many of the states, a certifying officer gives assurance of the gen- uineness and correctness of a copy. An "attested" copy of a document is one which has been examined and compared with the original, with a certificate or memoran- dum of its correctness, signed by the persons who have examined it.

ATTESTmain

Bouvier's Law Dictionary • 1928

To witness or testify. To bear witness to; to witness by observation and signature. To witness the execution of an instrument, and to subscribe the name in testimony of such fact. To bear witness to, usually in writing, as to signify, by the subscription of one's name, that one has witnessed the execution of a particular instrument. To certify to the verity of, to vouch for. Anderson. See ATTESTATION; ATTESTING WITNESS. ATTESTATION (Lat. ad, to, testari, to witness). The act of witnessing an instrument in writing, at the request of the party making the same, and subscribing it as a witness. 3 P. Wms. 254; 2 Ves. Ch. 454; 3 Α. Κ. Marsh. 146; 17 Pick. 373. Deeds, at common law, do not require at- testation in order to be valid; 2 Bla. Com. 307; 3 Dane, Abr. 354; 12 Metc. 15;3 Washb. R. P. 572; 7 Allen 149; and there are several states where at common law it was not necessary; 1 S. & R. 73; 1 Hayw. 205; 13 Ala. 321; 12 Metc. 157. In many of the states there are statutory requirements on the subject, and where such exist they must be strictly complied with. One wit- ness is necessary Idaho, Maryland, Ne- braska, Nevada (if signed by mark only), New York (as to delivery), North Carolina, Utah, and Wyoming, and in Mississippi one is sufficient; 17 Miss. 325; two are required in Connecticut, Florida, Kentucky, Michi- gan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina, Vermont, Wash- ington, and Wisconsin; and also in Georgia, one being the officer taking the acknowl- edgment; and in Louisiana, two male witnesses besides the officer; and in Ten- nessee, Texas, and Virginia two are re- quired if there be no acknowledgment. In Maine and Massachusetts one witness is re- quired when there is no acknowledgment, and in Alabama, one when the signature is by mark. In Arkansas, California, Colo- rado, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, and West Virginia, no witness is required. In Delaware and the District of Columbia there is no statute, but by almost if not absolutely unvarying custom there is at least one witness. In the Territories there is no legislation requiring it, but it is generally safe to have two witnesses, one being the officer taking the acknowledg- ment, when it is not practicable to consult local statutes. See 8 Conn. 289; 2 A. Κ. Marsh. 429; 13 N. H. 38; 6 Wheat. 527; 1 McLean 520; 5 Ohio 119; M'Mull. 373;8 Minn. 525; 11 Minn. 443; 2 Greenl. Ev. § 275, n.; 4 Kent 457. The requisites are not the same in all cases as against the grantor and as against purchasers; 2 A. K. Marsh. 529. See 3 N. H. 38; 18 id. 38. The attesting witness need not see the grantor write his name: if he sign in the presence of the grantor, and at his request, it is sufficient; Jar. Wills 87-91; 2 B. & P. 217. Wills must be attested by competent or credible witnesses; 2 Greenl. Ev. § 691;9 Pick. 350; 1 Burr. 414; 4 Burn, Eccl. Law 116; who must subscribe their names at- testing in the presence of the testator: 7 Harr. & J. 61; 3 Harr. & MH. 457; 1 Leigh 6; 1 Maule & S. 294; 2 Curt. Eccl. 320; 3 id. 118; Carth. 79; 2 Greenl. Ev. § 678; 84 Ala. 53; 114 Mo. 536. And see 18 Gray 103; 12 Cush. 342; 1 Ves. Ch. 11; 2 Washb. R. P. 682; but he need not sign in their presence; 64 Md. 138; 91 Tenn. 183. The term "presence" in a statute requiring the subscription of witnesses to a will to be made in the presence of the testator, means "conscious presence; " 85 Va. 546. In the attestation of wills devising land, three witnesses are requisite in Connecticut, Georgia, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hamp- shire, South Carolina, Vermont and Dis- trict of Columbia; two are sufficient in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Michi- gan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Mon- tana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wash- ington. West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyom- ing, Arizona, Indian Territory, New Mexico, and Oklahoma. In Louisiana, for a will not executed before a notary, there must be five witnesses of the place of pro- bate or seven of other places. No sub- scribing witnesses are required in Pennsyl- vania except in the case of wills making gifts to charity. A person may attest a will by making his mark, although the person who writes his name fails to sign his own name as a wit- ness to the mark; 51 Ark. 48. Persons signing as witnesses must do so after the testator has signed the will; 87 Ga. 379. If a will is signed by only two witnesses where three are required as to realty, it is inoperative as to the realty but valid as to the personalty; 32 Fla. 18.

ATTESTmain

Rapalje & Lawrence • 1888

(95) ATTAINT.-LATIN: attinctus, stained, "for that if the petty jury be attainted of a false oath they are stained with perjury." Co. Litt. 294 b, 391 b. (1) A person was said to be attaint when he was under attainder (q. v.) (Co. Litt. 390 b.) (2) An attaint, or writ of attaint, was anciently a proceeding "to enquire whether a jurie of twelve men gave a false verdict, that so the judgment following upon it may bee reversed, and the partie restored to all that he hath lost." (Finch Law 484.) For this purpose a jury (called the "grand jury") was summoned by a writ of attaint to try the validity of the verdict of the first, or, as it was called for distinction, the "petty jury," and if the second jury's verdict was contrary to the first, not only was the first verdict set aside, but the first jury lost all civil rights and became liable to many barbarous punishments. Proceeding by attaint was abolished by 6 Geo. IV. c. 50, 60. (Sm. Ac. 173.) At the present day, when a verdict is suspected of being false or erroneous, a motion is made for a new trial. See TRIAL. ATTEMPT, (to discharge a pistol with inten: to kill, what is not). 5 Park. (N. Y.) Cr. 105. (to enter blockaded port). 4 Cranch (U. S.) 185; 1 Binn. (Pa.) 304. (to sell, in chattel mortgage). 4 Biss. (U. S.) 128. ATTEMPT TO ADMINISTER, (in an indictment). 4 Car. & P. 369. ATTEMPTING, (distinguished from "persisting in an intention"). 4 Cranch (U. S.) 185. ATTEND TO MY BUSINESS, (in power of attorney). 6 Yerg. (Tenn.) 167.

ATTESTv.

Websters Unabridged Dictionary (1913) • 1913

To bear witness to; to certify; to affirm to be true or genuine; as, to attest the truth of a writing, a copy of record. Facts . . . attested by particular pagan authors. Addison. To give proof of; to manifest; as, the ruins of Palmyra attest its ancient magnificence. To call to witness; to invoke. [Archaic] The sacred streams which Heaven's imperial state Attests in oaths, and fears to violate. Dryden.

ATTESTn.

Websters Unabridged Dictionary (1913) • 1913

Witness; testimony; attestation. [R.] The attest of eyes and ears. Shak.

attestverb

Wiktionary (English) • 2026

Wiktionary contributors • CC BY-SA 4.0 • via Kaikki
Extracted and formatted for display by Law Mind. Source link opens the current Wiktionary page and its contributor history; it is not a frozen copy of this extract.

To affirm to be correct, true, or genuine. | To certify by signature or oath. | To certify in an official capacity. | To supply or be evidence of. | To put under oath. | To call to witness; to invoke.

Explore the full Law Mind legal research platform.

Subscribe Encyclopedia Sign In