Del. C. » Title 10 — Procedure · CHAPTER 39. Pleading and Practice · Courts and Judicial Procedure
Delaware Code

10 Del. C. § 3927 (2026)

Unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section DE-DELCdelcode.delaware.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) To the extent authorized by court rule, any matter, except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) of this section, that is required or permitted by the laws of this State to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the sworn declaration, verification, certificate, statement, oath, or affidavit, in writing of the person making the same, such matter may, with like force and effect, be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the unsworn declaration, verification, certificate, or statement, in writing of such person which is subscribed by him or her, as true under penalty of perjury, and dated, in substantially the following form:

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of Delaware that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on the ______ day of ________________ (month) ________________ year.

________________(Printed Name)

________________ (Signature)

(b) This section shall be inapplicable to the same extent as provided in § 5354(b) of this title.

80 Del. Laws, c. 283, § 1;  70 Del. Laws, c. 186, §  1; 
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 35 cases (33 in the last 5 years), 2019–2026 · leading case: U.S. Legal Support, Inc. v. Paul Lucido (Del. Ch. 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
U.S. Legal Support, Inc. v. Paul Lucido (Del. Ch. 2021). · cites it 3× “Cole Pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 3927 in Support of Plaintiff U.”
AlixPartners, LLP v. Giacomo Mori (Del. Ch. 2019). · cites it 2× “of Luca Failla Pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 3927 ¶ 11 (“Failla Decl.”). Throughout briefing, Defendant also refers Article 414 of the Italian Civil and Labor Procedure Code (“Article 414”).”
LPPAS Rep., LLC v. ATH Holding Co., LLC / Shareholder Rep. Servs. LLC v. ATH Holding Co., LLC (Del. Ch. 2020). · cites it 2× “Schlegel Pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 3927 in Supp. of Defs.’ Br. in Opp’n to Pl.”
O'Rourke v. PNC Bank (Del. Super. Ct. 2021). · cites it 2× “6 See generally Unsworn Declaration Pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 3927 in Support of Motion to Vacate Default Judgment Pursuant to Superior Court Rule 60(b) (Trans.”
Douglas Altabef v. Ilan Neugarten (Del. Ch. 2021). · cites it 2× “117, Affidavit of Jeffrey Grossman Pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 3927 in Support of Plaintiffs’ Omnibus Answering Brief in Opposition to Defendants[’] Motion to Dismiss ¶¶ 6–7.”
LIPPAS Rep., LLC v. ATH Holding Co., LLC (Del. Ch. 2022). · cites it 2× “of Sara Toscano Pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 3927 in Supp. of Defs.’ Opp’n Br.”
In re Straight Path Commc'ns Inc. Consol. Stockholder Litig. (Del. Ch. 2022). · cites it 2× “Gallagher, Esquire Pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 3927 Supp. Opening Br. Supp.”
David Lockton v. Thomas S. Rogers (Del. Ch. 2022). · cites it 2× “Jackson Pursuant 10 Del. C. § 3927 Defendants Thomas S. Rogers, Hank J.”
Cirba Inc. d/b/a Densify v. Turbonomic, Inc. (Del. Ch. 2022). · cites it 2× “of Gerry Smith Pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 3927 in Supp. of Pls.’ Mot. for Summ.”
Mercy Land Academy Inc v. Academy of Early Learning, Inc. (Del. Super. Ct. 2022). · cites it 2× “As a result of the challenges associated with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the Court has a standing order permitting the use of unsworn declarations under 10 Del. C. § 3927 in lieu of sworn verifications.”
Rushikesh Manche v. MVMT Labs, Inc (Del. Ch. 2026). · cites it 2× “¶¶ 6, 8; see also 10 Del. C. § 3927(a) (“To the extent authorized by court rule, any matter, except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) of this section, that is required or permitted by the laws of this State to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the sworn…”
Benjamin Snipes v. WorkCo, Inc. d/b/a Toku (Del. Ch. 2026). · cites it 2× “Young Pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 3927 in Support of Def.’s Answering Br.”
Show all 35 citing cases →
— 10 Del. C. § 3927(a) — 1 case
Rushikesh Manche v. MVMT Labs, Inc (Del. Ch. 2026). “¶¶ 6, 8; see also 10 Del. C. § 3927(a) (“To the extent authorized by court rule, any matter, except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) of this section, that is required or permitted by the laws of this State to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the sworn…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.