I agree with Mike/TX, who is once again being a voice of reason. As a general rule, I don't read signers' documents. I scan them for completeness, make sure the signers have valid ID and are competent to acknowledge or swear/affirm to the truthfulness of the the document contents, and I complete my certificate. In my state, an acknowledgment certificate says that they "personally appeared" before me, I identified them via "satisfactory evidence" and that they "executed the document" in their authorized capacity. For jurat, it says that they "personally appeared", took an oath or affirmation as to the truthfulness of the the doc they signed and provided "satisfactory evidence" of their identity.
The notary certificate which I have to sign simply describes the events that have taken place and states that I certify that those statements are true. As I see it, that's essentially the extent of my role and responsibility. Period, end of story. Of course verbiage from other states varies, but that's the essence. Maybe we need to review the so-called "idiot box" now required for CA notaries that has been ridiculed so much on this forum, because I think it's pertinent to this discussion:
"A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document."
Generally speaking - unless your state notary law specifically says something to the contrary (like prohibiting you from notarizing a document that you KNOW contains false information), we are not responsible for the contents, appropriateness or legality of the document itself.
|
| Messages in this Thread |
|  After the Fact, Witness Statement? - TacomaBoy on 9/25/16 3:08am |
|  Notarize, don't Analyze... - Linda_H/FL on 9/25/16 8:16am |
|  Analyze, then Notarize! - Peggy Taylor on 9/25/16 1:15pm |
|  Peg, your scenario is entirely different from - Linda_H/FL on 9/25/16 1:28pm |
|  Yes Linda, I Know The Scenario Was Entirely Different . . . - Peggy Taylor on 9/25/16 1:37pm |
| Whether the document was drawn properly is not my business. -  C. Rivera Chicago Notary Services on 9/25/16 2:59pm |
| Not my concern to tell them this...they have to - Linda_H/FL on 9/25/16 3:26pm |
| Linda, your concern for your clients is clear, none. And its - C. Rivera Chicago Notary Services on 9/25/16 7:22pm |
|  Cari, you don't know me so you know nothing... - Linda_H/FL on 9/26/16 8:18am |
|  Linda, it doesn't feel good to get judged here does it? - C. Rivera Chicago Notary Services on 9/28/16 8:07am |
| Re: After the Fact, Witness Statement? - Art_PA on 9/25/16 9:22am |
| I agree. If the witness statement was not notarized at the - MW/VA on 9/25/16 9:30am |
| I would've notarized the document as the legitimacy of the - C. Rivera Chicago Notary Services on 9/25/16 3:29pm |
| Re: After the Fact, Witness Statement? - Luckydog on 9/25/16 1:35pm |
| I'm With You Luckydog . . . - Peggy Taylor on 9/25/16 1:42pm |
| Re: After the Fact, Witness Statement? - LKT/CA on 9/25/16 2:10pm |
| Re: After the Fact, Witness Statement? - MikeC/TX on 9/25/16 4:19pm |
| Agree w/Mike. n/m - C. Rivera Chicago Notary Services on 9/25/16 7:24pm |
 | Re: After the Fact, Witness Statement? - JanetK_CA on 9/25/16 8:19pm |
| Thanks, Mike. That's good info. n/m - MW/VA on 9/26/16 8:06am |
