<<<If Mary Booker Painter is Mary B. Painter - Mary B. Painter is not a capacity - it's Mary Booker Painter...a person, not a capacity.>>>
I agree and disagree with you. In a document, yes, Mary Booker Painter and Mary B. Painter are persons. In CA cert, one human appears before the notary with one ID - Mary Booker Painter. There is no second person.....just a second name Mary B. Painter - in that same appearance, pulled from the Mary Booker Painter's ID.
Mary Booker Painter, Mary B. Painter listed on the CA cert are NOT two persons. The THEY pronoun doesn't apply. The SHE pronoun also doesn't apply because there are two names.
ONE human being appears. If the one human being (Mary Booker Painter) wants to be someone else in that same sitting, she must appear as that other person - Mary B. Painter. One human being can be 5 names in a *document* but in CA certs, one human being will be one name, one cert at a time. I would never, ever put multiple name variations for ONE human in a CA cert. The THEY pronoun cannot be used nor can the single person pronoun be used.
I've yet to hear a compelling explanation or a critical thought that would sway me towards the notion that multiple names for one person in the CA certs isn't capacity. Challenges such as "Prove you're right by case study or law" OR "I cannot see how CA wouldn't...." are not compelling explanations. They're just "I disagree with your way of operation so prove you're right by the law." This is one reason why posts that focused on what's normal for certain doc "worlds" muddies up these *gray area* discussions because readers get too caught up in what's okay for a document when the issue at hand is the CERT...and specifically the CA CERT. Who cares about the document, it's not the notary's domain.
I'm going to stick with overthinking the meaning of capacity. Others CA notaries can completely believe that I'm wrong, ignore me, dismiss what I wrote from my 9 years of GNW, and do what they see fit for their commission. Only s/he can defend his/her own commission and explain their actions before a judge. I just hope they can explain/defend their actions beyond "I did such-&-such because there's no law or no proof that I cannot do such-&-such." Good luck!!
|
| Messages in this Thread |
|  Something new for me. - Belinda/CA on 1/7/17 11:32am |
|  Re: Something new for me. n/m - LKT/CA on 1/7/17 11:59am |
| This is very common for me in commercial loan signings - ananotary on 1/7/17 12:06pm |
| Re: Something new for me. - LKT/CA on 1/7/17 12:08pm |
|  You are over thinking it. It's not uncommon for one document - ananotary on 1/7/17 12:10pm |
|  Re: You are over thinking it. It - LKT/CA on 1/7/17 12:26pm |
|  Got it. I would have provided two so I guess we agree. n/m - ananotary on 1/7/17 12:49pm |
|  Yes, agreed...separate certs in CA n/m - LKT/CA on 1/7/17 1:48pm |
| LKT , what CA code states that? - rengel/CA on 1/8/17 1:30pm |
| Re: LKT , what CA code states that? - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 1:54pm |
| Re: LKT , what CA code states that? -  VT_Syrup on 1/8/17 2:45pm |
| Brilliant, VT Syrup!! - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 3:33pm |
| Very common in Trusts & Estates world .. - BobbiCT on 1/7/17 12:55pm |
| Very common in CA also. n/m - ananotary on 1/7/17 1:25pm |
| Re: Very common in Trusts & Estates world .. - LKT/CA on 1/7/17 6:21pm |
| Re: Very common in Trusts & Estates world .. - VT_Syrup on 1/7/17 6:33pm |
| Re: Very common in Trusts & Estates world .. - LKT/CA on 1/7/17 8:58pm |
| Re: Very common in Trusts & Estates world .. - LKT/CA on 1/7/17 9:23pm |
| I'm sorry, but I agree with what VT was getting at - Linda_H/FL on 1/8/17 8:05am |
 |  Re: I - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 9:44am |
| Re: Something new for me. - Laurie Manzanares on 1/8/17 12:02am |
| Wait - I have a question... - Linda_H/FL on 1/8/17 9:48am |
| Yep, Linda is correct - Blueink_TN on 1/8/17 9:55am |
| Re: Wait - I have a question... - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 10:41am |
| Re: Wait - I have a question... - Laurie Manzanares on 1/8/17 10:44am |
| One FINAL thought - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 10:58am |
| Re: One FINAL thought - ananotary on 1/8/17 11:26am |
| Re: One FINAL thought - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 12:32pm |
| Re: One FINAL thought - Laurie Manzanares on 1/8/17 11:43am |
| Re: One FINAL thought - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 12:35pm |
| Oh Lordy. n/m - ananotary on 1/8/17 12:52pm |
| Re: I agree we have agreed the whole time-lol n/m - Laurie Manzanares on 1/8/17 1:04pm |
|  Right? I even have a post above saying that. I guess the - ananotary on 1/8/17 1:09pm |
|  Again, where is the CA code that you are talking about? - rengel/CA on 1/8/17 1:47pm |
|  Re: Again, where is the CA code that you are talking about? - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 1:57pm |
| Re: Ca code section 1193 - Laurie Manzanares on 1/8/17 9:01pm |
|  Re: Ca code section 1193 - VT_Syrup on 1/9/17 8:58am |
| Re: Wait - I have a question... - linda/ca on 1/9/17 6:21pm |
| Re:Correction...should have spelled separate, not seperate. n/m - linda/ca on 1/9/17 6:24pm |
| Re: Something new for me. - Donna LaBelle on 1/8/17 2:37pm |
| Surprised how many notaries are not commenting. - Belinda/CA on 1/8/17 5:36pm |
| Well, I've been pretty busy filling sandbags and putting - Cheryl Elliott on 1/9/17 8:18am |
| Re: Well, I*ve been pretty busy filling sandbags and puttin - VT_Syrup on 1/9/17 9:07am |
| Re: Well, I*ve been pretty busy filling sandbags and puttin - LKT/CA on 1/10/17 4:47am |
| I do exactly as Cheryl. One acknowledgement - garland/CA on 1/10/17 1:50pm |
| Re: Something new for me. - jojo_MN on 1/8/17 7:20pm |
| Me too JoJo, but they can't use the capacity in CA.. n/m - Linda_H/FL on 1/8/17 7:48pm |
| Re: Something new for me. - JanetK_CA on 1/9/17 1:50am |
| Here's the California SOS language from handbook - Cheryl Elliott on 1/9/17 8:53am |
| It is very common in commercial loan signings for one person - ananotary on 1/9/17 11:03am |
| Re: It is very common in commercial loan signings for one person - JanetK_CA on 1/9/17 3:02pm |
| Thanks all. - Belinda/CA on 1/9/17 9:43pm |
| Re: Thanks all. - LKT/CA on 1/10/17 7:45am |
| Irrelevent - ananotary on 1/10/17 10:08am |
| Bingo! - LKT/CA on 1/10/17 11:59am |
| Yikes, we are all speaking to our experience - ananotary on 1/10/17 12:02pm |
| Re: Yikes, we are all speaking to our experience - LKT/CA on 1/10/17 12:51pm |
| It is common in commerical loans. It doesn't mean - ananotary on 1/10/17 1:23pm |
| Nope, won't accept as rhetorical.... - LKT/CA on 1/10/17 8:02pm |
| OK, you win. I should have stopped a LONG time ago. - ananotary on 1/10/17 11:16pm |
