I assumed it referred to some kind of deed where title is split in some manner between two trusts. It's possible for a person to be trustee of more than one trust, and I've seen that before. For example, a person could have their own trust and be successor trustee for a parent's trust on a property that was co-owned by both.
Since capacity is irrelevant here in CA, I think the decision of whether one or two ack certs are needed should be up to the document recipient (or perhaps the signer). Most of the time where I've seen a person signing more than once, there's only been one cert, but that's usually where they're signing as trustee and as an individual. On commercial loans I've seen, where a person can be signing in various capacities, they usually have a separate cert for each capacity.
I think the biggest concern, if more than one certificate is used, is to be certain there's plenty of cross-referencing to ensure both are tied to that specific document. Are the pages numbered? Is the name of the document included in a footer at the bottom of each page? The ideal would be for there to be a bar code at the bottom. If none of these things exist, you can write in some info under the certificate (which I have done many times). Examples could include writing in the name of the document it's attached to and/or adding something like "page 5 of 5", etc.
If you're the signer vs. the notary, I think you would be within your rights to request the notary do that, if appropriate, since you're the one against whom a separated certificate could be used in some fraudulent manner.
[BTW, in my personal opinion, adding capacity to an optional section of a notary certificate seems to go against the CA prohibition against certifying capacity. While it's true that it wouldn't be in the body of the certificate we sign off on, do you think any document recipient is going to make that distinction? I doubt it. IMO, they're still going to look at that as if the notary is stating that data as a fact.]
|
