The attestation clause | Right to a Final Copy

What it looks like

A short numbered section, often called "Pending Claims" or "No Claims Filed" or "Representations," with language like: "You confirm that you have not filed any claims, lawsuits, charges or internal claims against the Company, its subsidiaries and affiliated companies or any of their officers, directors, employees, agents or shareholders related to or arising out of your employment." It is placed among the routine recitals, near the return-of-property clause, where nobody reads carefully.

What it costs you

If you have an open complaint anywhere, with the Labor Commissioner, the Civil Rights Department, the EEOC, OSHA, the SEC, or even an internal ethics report, this sentence is false the moment you sign it. A false representation in a signed agreement can be used later to attack your credibility, to argue you defrauded the employer, or to defend the release against a challenge. Picture a fictional case: Jordan has an open complaint with a state agency, the agency is helping settle it, and the draft still carries exactly this sentence.

What the law says

There is no statute that forbids this clause. What makes it notable is the asymmetry: a false statement by the worker is a legal problem for the worker, while the employer that drafted it often has actual knowledge that it is false. Under California Civil Code 1572, a material misrepresentation that induces a contract is a form of fraud, and Civil Code 1689(b)(1) allows rescission of a contract entered into through fraud. Those rules run in both directions.

What to do instead

Search every draft for the words "have not filed," "no claims," "no charges," "no complaints," "represent" and "warrant."

If you have any open matter, say so in writing and ask them to strike the clause or add an exception listing it. This is a normal request and is almost always granted.

Never assume an internal HR complaint, an ethics hotline report or an open agency intake does not count. Clauses like this often cover claims made inside the company.

If the employer knows about your pending claim and still asks you to sign that you have none, keep that email. The sequence matters.

If you already signed one and had an open matter, do not panic and do not hide it. Tell a lawyer. The clause's enforceability is a real question, and the context of how it got there is relevant.

Why this clause exists

In a clean case, the sentence is housekeeping. An employer settling a dispute wants to know it is buying peace, not walking into a surprise agency charge next month. Asking a departing worker to confirm nothing is pending is a reasonable thing to want.

It becomes a trap in two situations.

First, when the employer already knows something is pending. If the separation is happening because of a filed complaint, a clause saying no complaint was filed is not housekeeping. When a state agency is handling the very complaint being settled, and the draft still says no claims have been filed, the employer cannot claim it did not know.

Second, when the clause sweeps far wider than anyone reading it would assume. A phrase about claims made inside the company can capture the complaint you made to your manager’s manager. “Charges” captures an EEOC intake you filed and forgot about. “Any of their officers, directors, employees, agents or shareholders” captures a complaint about a single coworker.

The two-line fix

You almost never need to fight this clause. You need to correct it:

Section [X] asks me to confirm that I have not filed any claims. For accuracy, I have the following open matter: [agency, case number, date filed]. Please either remove Section [X] or revise it to read “other than the matter identified in Exhibit A.” I am happy to sign once it is accurate.

Most employers will make the change, because an inaccurate recital is bad for them too. If they refuse, you have learned something important, in writing, before you signed.

If it is already signed

A signed false attestation is not the end of the world, and it is not your fault if the drafter knew the truth. But it is a question for a lawyer, not for the internet. See Where to get real help for free and low-cost California options.

The ideal

In the ideal process, a release releases claims. It does not ask you to swear a factual history of your working life. Where an employer legitimately needs to know about open matters, the agreement lists the matters it already knows about, invites you to add any others in an exhibit, and carves them out. A statement you sign should be one you can make true by reading it, not one that turns on what an intake form, a hotline call, or a forgotten agency email counts as.

Why it works

An attestation changes the cost of being wrong. A release settles a claim. A representation, if a claim later surfaces, can be framed as a misrepresentation and paired with a repayment clause, so the risk is no longer losing a lawsuit but owing back money you have already spent. Loss aversion, described by Kahneman and Tversky (1979), explains the weight of that shift: losing a sum you already hold hurts more than an equivalent gain pleases. The clause does not need to be enforced to work. It only needs to be imagined, once, at the wrong moment.

What employer-side guides say

These clauses are standard text in many separation agreements, often in a section headed “No Pending Claims” or “Representations,” where the worker “represents and warrants” that nothing is pending. Some template forms go further, stating the worker has reported all workplace injuries and all suspected violations of law, and received all wages. Standard does not mean harmless. It means you should expect the sentence, and read it as a statement you are making, not as boilerplate.