Posted by Crystal Henning on 12/19/06 4:54pm
Msg #166749

Notarizing a photograph in California

I am a bit confused and urgently need some advice pleeeease! Thank you in advance

I have a physician at my company that has a document with a photograph attached...I am supposed to notarize his sig after the written statement, but also have part of my seal overlapping the photograph stating that the photo matches the person and that the sig matches the sig on the ID.
Well first off, I know that I can't sign that statement as it is not within CA jurisdiction, but what exactly are the rules with the photograph in general? I am reading in my class handbook (i haven't found the line in the CA handbook yet) where it says you can not notarize a photograph or other such items that does not have a place to sign, but if it is a document with a photograph stating that it is an exact copy then you can notarize that...............but this doesn't fall in that category as it is not a COPY...so does this mean that I can't notarize this doc at all? I don't want to tell them 'no' unless I know exactly what the law states....any help??

Thanks!

Reply by rengel/CA on 12/19/06 5:32pm
Msg #166752

My first blush answer would be - No can do. We notarize signatures, not documents.
BUT, if it were me being asked to do this I would call
Secretary of State
Notary Public Section
Location: 1500 11th Street, 2nd Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone Number:
(916) 653-3595
Please let us know how this turns out, it's interesting, to say the least.

Reply by Crystal Henning on 12/19/06 5:35pm
Msg #166753

Thank you for the help
I actually didn't think that I had my NNA membership yet, but I found out I did and found my membership number and called them....they flat out told me 'no' pretty much. So the answer is you can not notarize a photograph.

Thanks everyone

-Crystal

Reply by christiSocal on 12/19/06 5:39pm
Msg #166754

I would think no too, however, I wouldn't take the nna's word for it. They are often wrong... (jmo)

Reply by rengel/CA on 12/19/06 6:51pm
Msg #166773

The number I gave you was for the Secretary of State - the office who commissioned you. The NNA is NOT the authority in California, they are a commercial organization only.
I would ALWAYS call the SOS first.

Reply by Kate/CA on 12/19/06 5:47pm
Msg #166755

Page 15 of the California Handbook tells you the only two items that you can certify in the state of CA.

Reply by Susan Fischer on 12/19/06 5:59pm
Msg #166756

In OR, one may notarize a statement about the photo

and must overlap the stamp to include the photo and the statement (for example: the statement ' I certify that this is a photograph of myself...a photo of John Doe's broken leg') to which it is attached as a protection device, which allows the receiving agency to know the photo is the one attached to the statement at the time of notarization. We, therefore, are not notarizing the photo, just someone's statement that *they* certify it is a photo of whatever. The stamp links the statement page to the photo attached. On a larger photo, the notary may stamp and sign right on the photo - but the statement being notarized must also be on the photo, perhaps on the back. There is a caution not to stamp over a face on the photo - but I suspect stamping over anything material wouldn't be a good idea. (like a crash scene, where I wouldn't necessarily know what may be 'material' or not.)

Reply by Kate/CA on 12/19/06 6:32pm
Msg #166763

Re: In OR, one may notarize a statement about the photo

You are right, in CA you can notarize a signature of a person making a statement that he/she certify, that etc. You can not place your stamp on any writing in CA, this I would take to also include on a copy of a picture as it would nulify the notarization. Your stamp should be in the notar certificate area.

Reply by Susan Fischer on 12/19/06 6:42pm
Msg #166769

Re: In OR, one may notarize a statement about the photo

In OR, SOS states on website that stamp may be on photo if there is room, and must overlap onto attached page if there is a statement page attached. Interesting point.

Reply by MistarellaFL on 12/19/06 8:38pm
Msg #166791

Not from CA, but a thought....

Could you make a copy of the photograph, and have the notarial certificate on the back of the copy? Perhaps a jurat, the signer attesting that the photograph is him?

Reply by BrendaTx on 12/19/06 8:43pm
Msg #166793

Re: Not from CA, but a thought....

Interesting thread. Talking from Texas here...I have seen Photographer's Affidavits by someone taking the picture. The photograph is attached to it and the affidavit states what it is.

How about Photographed Subject's Affidavit? Then, all the notary would have to do is notarize the signature on the affidavit.

Remember, I am in Texas...not in CA...so just throwing in something to think about. California has lots more rules/different laws...think it through...even call your SoS!

Reply by Gary_CA on 12/19/06 9:56pm
Msg #166813

Our handbook specifically forbids...

placing our stamp on anything that does not have notary language...
certifying anything except a POA or a copy of our own journal (though it does even include language for notarizing a statement by the custodian of an original that says this doc is a true copy)
stamping or embossing half on something like the edge of a photograph or half on a cert and the other half on the doc, stuff like that.

But I don't see why you couldn't put a custodian statement on the back of a photo and notarize it... I certify that this is a true and unaltered photo of the mailmain biting my dog and that I have the original in my possession, yada yada yada... and notarize the sig on the photo... or a color copoy of the photo on a statement.

If you fill in the yada yada it's probably UPL... but if I were on the receiving end of a notarized photo (okay a foto with some notarized statement about it...) I'd want a sworn statement that the photo has not been altered... since that's so easy and so common now.

Just my two cents, not a legal opinion and worth less than you paid for it.

P.S. I'd bet a lawyer that works auto claims or even an insurance adjuster could answer this for you right of the top of his head.

Reply by BarbaraL_CA on 12/19/06 10:09pm
Msg #166815

Re: Example of document with photo...

http://www.avma.org/education/ecfvg/application.pdf


Above is a link to for certification for American Veterinary Medical Association which must include a recent photo. There is a place for the seal that overlaps the photo - this would be a gold seal with embossed imprint. I did this for someone who works for the San Diego Zoo and Wild Animal Park.

Reply by TitleGalCA on 12/19/06 10:35pm
Msg #166820

Re: Our handbook forbids...Officious Jerks United meets here

***stuff like that***.

The OJU is alive and ready to pounce on posts like this. There is no "stuff". There is no "like that". You better well quote the law or you'll be attacked. Generalization is prohibited on Notary Rotary. Generalization is an open invitation for attack. Forget practical application. Not acceptable.

Gary, I can't get away with that language....so why should you? For the readers here...better quote rhyme and verse, government code and civil code. If you can't, then don't bother helping anyone. It's useless.

Otherwise? Expect to get bit by sharks.

Reply by BrendaTx on 12/19/06 10:38pm
Msg #166821

OJU! ROFLMAO! But only in the most professional way possible n/m

Reply by Gary_CA on 12/19/06 11:51pm
Msg #166835

Ouch...

right in the butt that shark bit me...

Somehow I have it in my pointy little head that you can't do the seal accross two pages thing... I remember thinking, hmmm... that's a good idea.... oops, says you can't do it.

But in vain did I search the handbook for that tidbit. So I thought, hmmm... I remember reading it in some boring book.... must be in my class notes... In vain did I search my class notes.

7 times 70 the handbook says not to place a notary seal on any document that does not include notary language. I suppose an Officious Jerk could interpret that to include placing half of the seal on such a document, but that would be a stretch. There is a little statement about not stamping over any writing so that the stamp will be clear and the document will record, but that's not what I was looking for.

I didn't intend to be an OJU, but I see that I was mistaken.

So go ahead.... Bite me!

Reply by BrendaTx on 12/21/06 6:25am
Msg #167054

Re: Ouch...Garillio (short for Gary).

I think Tgal was saying you had good info in your post but be dang sure you quote chapter and verse of the handbook ... and never, ever use "stuff" as a noun. She wasn't saying you were an OJ...just that you should be drawn and quartered like herself for using "stuff" in your post.

BTW - I see your point now about what you said in your post. Interesting view...veddy interesting.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 12/20/06 3:53am
Msg #166856

Re: Our handbook specifically forbids...

My turn to be among the OJU...

"But I don't see why you couldn't put a custodian statement on the back of a photo and notarize it... "

The signer can, but the CA notary cannot. You're right, it's probably UPL. But if the signer does, than the notary can notarize their signature using a stamp or attached certificate. Problem solved...

Reply by Gerry_VT on 12/20/06 12:53pm
Msg #166928

Re: Our handbook specifically forbids...

Stamps on conventional photos usually smear, whether applied to the front or the back. It's a different story for digital photos on plain paper. With luck, the signer will decide to scan the photo and print it on plain paper.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 12/21/06 2:50am
Msg #167048

Good point...

Whenever I've done this in the past, it's been on a copy. I provided the notary verbiage and they copied it, along with the photo, onto one page. They then wrote their statement and signed it on the copy and I added the necessary notary stuff.