Posted by Marian_in_CA on 3/29/10 6:07pm
Msg #329483

Bad, bad CA notary...

Okay, if you are going to notarize a document for an individual that will more than likely make the news, don't you think you'd make sure you're not doing it wrong??

See: http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk/tmz_documents/0329_chastity_wm.pdf

This document was posted to TMZ earlier -- a court filing for Chasity Bono (Sonny and Cher's child), who underwent gender reassignment surgery and now wants a legal name change.

If you scroll down to the last page, which is the one notarized, the notary actually issued a acknowledgment with the wrong wording.

The 'personally known to me' wording has been gone for 5 years now... her commission expires in 2011, which means she took the class wherein this was discussed, she took the exam where this was covered... and yet she let something like this go... AND be filed in court? Not only that, but the venue is completely missing.

Not surprisingly... you'll note her seal was manufactured by the NNA. Every single time I see bonehead stuff like this, the notary got their seal from the NNA.

Reply by Calnotary on 3/29/10 6:24pm
Msg #329489

how about a jurat instead...

sworn to this day of Feb. 3rd 2010 in SF,CA but since this notary is current to her notary law she will be using the wrong jurat, LOL. JMHO.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/29/10 6:27pm
Msg #329491

Yup. That doc is one big screw-up. n/m

Reply by jba/fl on 3/29/10 7:05pm
Msg #329500

It looks to me that page 5 is a form that the doctor's office prints, judging from the copyright notice on the bottom. Doesn't make it right/correct though.

Reply by RonA/CA on 3/29/10 7:13pm
Msg #329501

Where is the "I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct statement?". I'm surprised this document even got filed!!

Reply by jba/fl on 3/29/10 7:16pm
Msg #329503

Money and celebrity will by you anything. n/m

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/29/10 7:26pm
Msg #329506

Re: Money and celebrity will by you anything.

In this case, it isn't even the celebrity that's involved in the notarization. It's the doctor's statement.

I just don't get how any CA notary out there right now can be THAT dumb. At his point, we've all had to sit through the 6-hour training and we KNOW what the required wording is.

It makes me so annoyed, because this is a public official putting her signature and seal on a public record for all the world to see how much of an idiot she is.

At the worst, I'm guessing that the physician's statement might not be stipulated in court and he'd have to appear and testify. But still... the notary is responsible, and I can't beleive this got past a notary, an attorney and the court clerk.

Reply by BrendaTx on 3/29/10 7:37pm
Msg #329508

Re: Money and celebrity will by you anything.

*But still... the notary is responsible, and I can't beleive this got past a notary, an attorney and the court clerk.*

In Texas, there has been case law to determine that clerks are never responsible for determining the correctness of a notary certificate. As long as it has the signature and seal, it's accepted.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/29/10 7:16pm
Msg #329502

Yeah, that's what it looks like, too... but you'll note the notary's name is pre-printed in the wording. That's even worse.

I'm guessing this person works in the Dr's office and this is a routine thing that they do.

Still.... it's incorrect, and there is no excuse for it.

I would be mortified if it were my sign and seal on that. Stuff like that is not only grounds for a hefty fine, but revocation of one's commission and/or conviction of a misdemeanor, too.

Reply by MW/VA on 3/29/10 7:37pm
Msg #329507

Every law is a question of enforcement. I wonder if they

anyone ever bothers to enforce notary law unless a crime is committed.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/29/10 7:43pm
Msg #329509

Re: Every law is a question of enforcement. I wonder if they

Technically speaking... failure to execute one's duties as a notary *is* a crime. At least, according to CA law... it' is considered a misdemeanor.

Reply by Calnotary on 3/29/10 8:18pm
Msg #329513

This is where the E&O,notary bond policy kicks in, no?

Errors within the notary certificate.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/29/10 10:09pm
Msg #329520

Re: This is where the E&O,notary bond policy kicks in, no?

TO protect the public.... yes. But, it still doesn't release the notary from liability or make it right. It is still wrong... and the notary can still get in to trouble. Bonds are just there for the public... E&O is there to protect the notary financially (if they have it).

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 3/29/10 8:17pm
Msg #329512

"I'm guessing this person works in the Dr's office"

Yup Just Googled her and she is the Patient Coordinator/Office Manager at Dr. Michael Brownstein's office

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/29/10 10:16pm
Msg #329521

good detective work! n/m

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/29/10 10:19pm
Msg #329522

Hold up... looks like she's his wife! n/m

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/29/10 10:24pm
Msg #329523

Re: Hold up... looks like she's his wife!

Link:

http://www.forge-forward.org/conference/workshops/bios.php


My head is swimming. Granted, it's not illegal for her to notarize her husband's signature. But this one doesn't pass my COI stink test.... at least personally, I'd never notarize my husband's signature for anything he would do involving his work or income. Isn't that just a "duh" kind of thing?

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 3/30/10 8:16am
Msg #329541

Re: Hold up... looks like she's his wife!

Wow!! good detective work on your part now Marian.

Maybe they thought as they had different last names it wouldn't be noticed.

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 3/29/10 9:04pm
Msg #329514

Marian: Where do you find this stuff!?! n/m

Reply by Joan Bergstrom on 3/29/10 9:48pm
Msg #329516

CA Ack wording changed Jan 1, 2008 n/m

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/29/10 10:06pm
Msg #329519

Either way... still wrong....

especially considering all of the other issues. It's not just wording.

Reply by LKT/CA on 3/29/10 11:59pm
Msg #329527

<<<.....and I can't beleive this got past a notary, an attorney and the court clerk.>>>

Hee, hee!! I network with six attorneys.....none of them recognize appropriate notarial procedure.

Reply by rengel/CA on 3/30/10 12:27am
Msg #329528

"The 'personally known to me' wording has been gone for 5 years now..."


Actually this has only been gone from California for 2 years now. It started in 2008. Check the sos website and look at the 2007 sample acknowlegment, it still shows up there.

Mistakes happen, people do things incorrectly without caring, and the world still turns.

I wouldn't get my panties in a wad over this.

My .02

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/30/10 1:13am
Msg #329530

No, you and Joan are right. I misspoke on that one. It was 2008, not 2005. Both years were significant for changes, and I mixed them up.

All the same, though... it looks like this is a document that this individual actually prepares herself for the office. I'm not so sure it's a simple mistake. 2 years is plenty of time to get up to speed on current regulations and to pay attention to what she's doing.

Plus, it appears as if she's the signer's wife... and as I mentioned above, not expressly wrong per se, but... I think it's pushing the line of conflict of interest significantly. All told, I think this particular notary just needs some re-education. But, I know that it's indiciitve of many, many notaries in our state who notarize as part of their employment and just do things automatically without paying attention.

Part of the job is to stay up to date on notarial law... clearly something this individual isn't doing.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 3/30/10 2:49am
Msg #329531

"many notaries in our state who notarize as part of their employment and just do things automatically without paying attention. "

Couldn't agree more -- and I've met a good many of them. It never occurs to them to even check. They're just automatically putting stamps on documents because they're asked to. Scary...