Posted by SOCAL/CA on 5/14/10 11:58pm
Msg #336617
Louisana Note Notarized?
This statement is at the bottom of the Note for a refi of Louisana property:
"NE VARIETUR" for identification with an Act of Mortgage passed before me this_______day of
_________.
_________________________________________
Notary Public:
Notary Identification Number:
Should I attach a CA Acknowledgement?
|
Reply by LKT/CA on 5/15/10 12:28am
Msg #336620
I make it a rule to notarize with CA compliant Ack or Jurats *only* unless I get a written request to use another states notarial wording (only happened once that I can think of). I know what CA certs are supposed to say.
We can legally use another state's Ack so long as we do not include capacity. I have no idea if the other state's Ack certificate is correct. While notarizing a document does not make it legal, I would hate for a doc I notarized the signature on to be invalidated by a court in another state because the other state's Ack was non-compliant for that state [which there is no requirement that I *know* if it's compliant or not].
Therefore, YES, attach a CA compliant Acknowledgment. And going forward, stick with what you know....CA compliant Acknowledgments.
|
Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 5/15/10 1:00am
Msg #336623
This looks to me like a bunch of French gobbedygook that a LA notary would have to translate for us. Does the lender want you to notarize the signatures on the note? Or is it saying you identified the signers of the note - in which case you could just sign and date it like we do any other borrower ID form, omitting any stamp or a CA acknowledgement. I think we need a LA notary to the rescue here!
|
Reply by Marian_in_CA on 5/15/10 1:23am
Msg #336625
I'd go with the others on this...
BTW, "Ne Varietur" is just a fancy way of saying, "It is done." Well... more or less.  Literally, it means "It shall not be changed."
It's Latin... "Ne" meaning something like "Do not" or "Shall Not" and "Varietur" means "change" or "vary" or "alter".
All those college linguistic classes come in handy sometimes.
I'm not sure how necessary it is... it's my thinking that it is fairly traditional, just as the curly brace is on venue headings. I'm not sure though.
|
Reply by Robert/FL on 5/15/10 8:07am
Msg #336642
"ne varietur"
... love it. I'm going to start putting it at the end of all my notarizations :-)
And my dad laughed when I wrote an affidavit for him and put "Further Affiant Sayeth Naught" at the end.
|
Reply by Linda_H/FL on 5/15/10 8:27am
Msg #336644
I sure hope that little smiley means you're joking Robert... n/m
|
Reply by PAW on 5/15/10 9:07am
Msg #336656
Why?
According to Black's Law Dictionary:
ne varietur (nee vair-ee-ee-tar), n. (Latin "it must not be altered") A notation of identity that a person, usu. a notary, places on documents or translations of documents. -- In Louisiana, this notation is typically placed on a collateral mortgage note to bind and identify the note with the collateral mortgage.
|
Reply by Linda_H/FL on 5/15/10 9:09am
Msg #336657
So you consider it okay to add this to his FL acks? n/m
|
Reply by PAW on 5/15/10 9:21am
Msg #336659
Re: So you consider it okay to add this to his FL acks?
Considering the laxness of our certificates, a notary can add just about any wording they wish as long as the minimum elements are present and the form is substantially the same as directed in the statutes. So technically, I see nothing wrong with adding the statement at the end of an acknowledgment or jurat. IMO, it is akin to adding the word ONLY after a signer's name in the certificate.
|
Reply by PAW on 5/15/10 9:24am
Msg #336661
Re: So you consider it okay to add this to his FL acks?
I've seen that notation somewhere else, but not sure where. It may have been on a transcript from a university or college that I processed for an apostille. As I said, I'm not sure exactly where I've seen it other than LA notes and mortgages.
|
Reply by Robert/FL on 5/15/10 9:40am
Msg #336667
I don't see the problem
There's no harm in adding this or any other fancy language, "In Witness Whereof", "Be It Known", or my favorite "and who did not take an oath"
|
Reply by jba/fl on 5/15/10 9:36am
Msg #336664
"Further Affiant Sayeth Naught"
As a KISS proponet, I also would be laughing. I remember the first time I saw that...one of the attorneys at the law firm was submitting his expense report and lost a receipt. He submitted an affidavit ending with this phrase. Thought it funny at the time.
http://tinyurl.com/298hfky
|
Reply by Robert/FL on 5/15/10 9:39am
Msg #336666
Re: "Further Affiant Sayeth Naught"
That's just the way I was trained to draft affidavits and the way we have always done it. I never thought anything of it, to be honest.
|
Reply by Robert/FL on 5/15/10 9:45am
Msg #336669
And my legal document drafting skills tend to be
the complete OPPOSITE of "KISS"
But, I've been trained by attorneys so I suppose that can be expected
|
Reply by jba/fl on 5/15/10 9:47am
Msg #336670
yeah - some do tend to the "flowery" variety! LOL n/m
|
Reply by BrendaTx on 5/15/10 10:02am
Msg #336676
Re: "Further Affiant Sayeth Naught"
I don't think it's funny. I think it is standard affidavit language--I almost can't sign or type an affidavit without adding it! At the minimum, "Affiant states nothing further." has to be there for me to feel good about it.
Depends upon the age of the lawyer you are trained by. And, by the standards of formal language they use.
In my early days as a legal assistant (whatever you want to call what I was...sometimes he called me a paralegal, sometimes a bookkeeper, and so forth ) my lawyer dictated every jurat and every ack to state the document within the certificate that had preceded it and was being notarized. Fast forward a few years and I'm a signing agent and wondering why every deed of trust certificate did not state "The foregoing Deed of Trust was acknowledged before me, Nancy Notary, a notary public in and for the State of Texas, by Signer's Name..."
It sounds to me like Robert has been trained by lawyers who still engage the use of some of the formal language. While it might just be "legalese" to some, the truth is that if you learn to use it you realize the clarity it brings to accurate interpretation of the documents.
|
Reply by jba/fl on 5/15/10 10:12am
Msg #336679
Re: "Further Affiant Sayeth Naught"
to clarify: I thought it was funny as an expense report item. I was in the accounting dept. at the time - my first encounter with the term.
We paid him.
|
Reply by BrendaTx on 5/15/10 10:19am
Msg #336680
I knew what you meant...and was referring more to
Robert's dad. Younger lawyers I have worked with giggle, too.
|
Reply by Robert/FL on 5/15/10 10:21am
Msg #336681
Re: "Further Affiant Sayeth Naught"
The attorneys I work for have been attorneys for 37 and 19 years respectively. Before I was a notary, the attorney would dictate the full affidavit, starting with "Before me, the undersigned authority, ..." and ending with "Further Affiant Sayeth Naught" and the jurat. Just the "undersigned authority" language is seemed as obsolete by some. Even our state handbook doesn't use it in their sample affidavit.
|
Reply by Marian_in_CA on 5/15/10 11:27am
Msg #336686
In CA... that type of approach is seriously annoying...
"Before me, the undersigned authority, ..."
Any documents that begin with that are a NIGHTMARE to a California notary simply because we are so restricted to the wording of certificates. I've found that most of the California trained attorneys don't pull this kind of stuff. However, a lot of the uppity Ivy League ones do.
One of the law offices I work with has a guy who was new to the firm, and all of his drafts were in a format I couldn't notarize. He had been a lawyer back east for 15 years before moving to California. He got his law degree from Cornell, I think. Definitely New York somewhere.
He did not appreciate a notary schooling him at all. In fact, he called me stupid at one point. I just went to one of the other lawyers in the office and asked for help. This other guy came from UCLA and we'd been working together for several months so he understood my dilemma. He took the guy aside and told him things work a little differently on the West Coast, and showed him how the affidavit had to be separate from any and all notarial certificate language.
The NY guy was pretty ticked about it for awhile... said he was "lowering his standards" by doing that... but he did it.
|
Reply by Robert/FL on 5/15/10 12:50pm
Msg #336691
I wondered how that worked for CA notaries
The "before me, the undersigned" wording *IS* a part of the notary's certificate. Some notaries do not realize that. I know in California, since you can only use the wording provided by law, you can not use that preamble wording. I would think that an affidavit in California should just start with, "I, John Doe, hereby swear or affirm as follows:" followed by the statements and then the California-prescribed jurat.
|
Reply by Marian_in_CA on 5/15/10 1:17pm
Msg #336698
That's right... keeping it simple...
:)
After all, an affidavit is the statement of that person, right? Not the notary. So all the flowery preamble stuff is just confusing and muddled.
I like California's approach to it all -- keep each element distinct from the other. Keeping them mixed together creates a conflict of interest, in a sense.
I see tons and tons of affidavits where that preamble is there, and it just makes my head hurt.
Last week, I had one that read like this:
"I, (notary name), do hereby swear under the penalty of perjury that John Doe, proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person who appeared before me, and while under oath, swore to the following...."
Then it asked for the notary's signature and seal.
THEN, it had another statement below that:
"I, John Doe, acknowledge that the foregoing statements are correct."
Then asked for John Doe's signature.
I tell you, I could not stop laughing.
|
Reply by Robert/FL on 5/15/10 1:25pm
Msg #336701
But there is something to be said about the old "legalese"
I like the preamble affidavit wording allowed in Florida. IMO it means that the notary actually *took* the affidavit, as opposed to the signer making a sworn written statement and having it notarized. It's kind of the same, IMO there is a subtle difference. I don't know what California allows, but in Florida our statutes list administering oaths and taking affidavits as two separate acts (F.S. 92.50(1)).
As Brenda/TX said, although many find the older language to be a lot of "legalese", a lot of it is actually better clarification of what transpired. For example, compare our FL statutory acknowledgment:
"The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 13th day of May, 2010, by John Doe, who produced a Florida driver license as identification",
versus the "traditional" wording:
"I hereby certify that on this 13th day of May, 2010, before me, the undersigned authority, personally appeared John Doe, who produced a Florida driver license as identification, and he acknowledged to me that he executed the foregoing instrument as his voluntary act for the purposes therein expressed".
In my opinion - and I know that many prefer the "KISS" method - the traditional wording is a better description of what happened. Someone who has no knowledge of what a notarial acknowledgment is would probably be able to understand the traditional wording better than he would be able to understand the plain, statutory wording.
Less words does not necessarily mean that it is easier to understand. Similarly, I would prefer, "I hereby certify that John Doe personally appeared me and swore that the above statements are true and correct, and he then signed the document in my presence", rather than "Sworn to and subscribed before me".
|
Reply by Marian_in_CA on 5/15/10 1:54pm
Msg #336704
Re: But there is something to be said about the old "legalese"
It's not really about fewer words... in CA, it's about keeping elements distinct.
We do not "take affidavits" here the same way you might, we certify that certain events took place. IN the case of a jurat, for example, we certify:
• That the signer personally appeared before the notary public on the date indicated and in
the county indicated;
• That the signer signed the document in the presence of the notary public;
• That the notary public administered the oath or affirmation;
• To the identity of the signer.
That's it. The content of the document means nothing, really... and by involving us, in any way, in the content of a document causes problems. In CA, the notarial certificate is a completely separate, independent element to the document. That doesn't mean the certificate must be on a separate page, of course... it's just a unique element.
Think of it kind of like a book with it's distinct parts: table of contents, chapters, index, etc. It's all one complete item, but each part serves a specific purpose.
|
Reply by Robert/FL on 5/15/10 2:39pm
Msg #336708
Makes sense considering California law
but in Florida, and in most other states I would imagine, it is almost as if the entire affidavit *is* a notarial certificate. It is not like in the case of acknowledgments where the acknowledmgent is a separate document in and of itself. My understanding has been that in California there are no "true" affidavits, but rather, an affiant is making a statement and he/she swears to it before a notary public as with any other document requiring an oath. You've confirmed my understanding.
|
Reply by Notarysigner on 5/15/10 1:40pm
Msg #336702
Re: That's right... keeping it simple...
KISS I will not lie about John Doe signing this paper in front of me after providing required ID. I am a notary public___________________stamp. LOL
|
Reply by JanetK_CA on 5/17/10 2:34pm
Msg #336844
Re: That's right... keeping it simple...
"I see tons and tons of affidavits where that preamble is there, and it just makes my head hurt."
I can't tell you how happy I am to hear that I'm not the only one! Some are worse than others, of course, but trying to extricate my name from the content that the signer is swearing to always makes me crazy (at least on the inside...) 
|
Reply by LKT/CA on 5/15/10 9:01pm
Msg #336724
Re: I wondered how that worked for CA notaries
Yes, I often have to tell attorneys I network with and notarize for to be certain extra wording is not in the acknowledgment. When the admin assistant is preparing the paperwork, they will type in the date, my name, notary public, and the client's name so the whole thing is typed except for the county. Usually there's something like" in and for said state and county". I email the assistant the link to the SOS acknowledgment and jurat and inform them that they can personalize the certificate, removing the is/are....he/she/they and just put what's appropriate for the signer.......but remove the "in and for said state and county"....just copy what the SOS has - verbatim.
|
Reply by BrendaTx on 5/16/10 8:12am
Msg #336739
I just have to ask...Is this really necessary?
Is it really necessary to remove the "in and for said state and county" which doesn't change the meaning of the ack? If so, the Ca. state bar has a mess on their hands. Bless 'em.
I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just observing what a pita that would be in such a case to have a notary send a law office a demand to change such insignificant wording.
|
Reply by C. Rivera Chicago Notary Services on 5/16/10 9:48am
Msg #336741
and you didn't notarize it right? n/m
|
Reply by C. Rivera Chicago Notary Services on 5/16/10 9:50am
Msg #336742
Robert, did you notarize the affidavit for your father? n/m
|
Reply by Robert/FL on 5/16/10 4:14pm
Msg #336763
I *drafted* the affidavit, not notarized it n/m
|
Reply by Ilene C. Seidel on 5/15/10 6:03am
Msg #336627
If this is a Louisana property don't you have to comply with their acknowledgements?
|
Reply by Linda_H/FL on 5/15/10 6:39am
Msg #336632
Umm...Ilene, you're not serious, are you?
We are not required to follow out of state notary guidelines. We CAN use another state's certificates so long as they comply with our own state's laws, but our laws come first. And in the OP, this language doesn't even look like an acknowledgement and I wouldn't sign it since, by our FL guidelines, it isn't a true notarial act.
I'd call the hiring party, ask them what they're looking for here and proceed accordingly, attaching either an acknowledgement or jurat. But I would use MY state's certificates completed pursuant to MY state's laws, and I would NOT sign this particular statement at all.
MHO
|
Reply by SOCAL/CA on 5/15/10 7:27am
Msg #336636
Re: Umm...Ilene, you're not serious, are you?
The wording on the Mortgage and the Note are the same, so I am going to attach a CA compliant Acknowledgement to both.
Thanks for your responses.
|
Reply by Ilene C. Seidel on 5/15/10 7:30am
Msg #336637
Linda
I'm quite serious. Many years ago I closed a loan for an out of state property and included my states acknowledgement. The mortgage was returned to me and I was asked to comply with that states requirements in completing their acknowledgement since it was unrecordable. That's why I asked.
|
Reply by Linda_H/FL on 5/15/10 7:56am
Msg #336639
Re: Linda
"The mortgage was returned to me and I was asked to comply with that states requirements in completing their acknowledgement since it was unrecordable"
IMO that was an error on the TC's part or the recorder's part - there's reciprocity between the states and for the most part a notary's first duty is to follow their own laws and procedures and those certificates should be accepted in any other state.
MHO
|
Reply by jba/fl on 5/15/10 7:58am
Msg #336640
Ditto Linda n/m
|
Reply by Sylvia_FL on 5/15/10 8:28am
Msg #336645
Re: Linda
Ilene
I would have told them, sorry I am a Florida notary and have to follow Florida notary laws, so can only notarize in compliance with Fl statutes 117, if you want the notarization done per your state's notary laws (or the state the document is being recorded) then you must get the notarization done in that state and have the borrowers there in front of the notary.
|
Reply by SOCAL/CA on 5/15/10 8:40am
Msg #336649
Re: Linda
The message here is to follow "your" state's laws. Are you listening Robert/FL?
|
Reply by Robert/FL on 5/15/10 8:44am
Msg #336651
And your point? I always follow my state laws n/m
|
Reply by Sylvia_FL on 5/15/10 8:53am
Msg #336654
Re: Linda
Socal
My response was in regards to Ilene being requested to follow another state's laws for notarization. Nothing to do with Robert's post - I hope he isn't adding the Ne Varietur to his certificates. I think he was joking.
|
Reply by BrendaTx on 5/15/10 8:40am
Msg #336650
The Ne Varetur cert is required in LA...not an ack/jurat
If you won't do the Ne Varietur certificate required in La, then never, ever take a La. property loan.
Or, have a lawyer which can direct you on these obscure situations. Yes, I know what all the states laws say about confirmity, but it has to be done...so, if you are a signing agent, you need to put this tidbit in your bag of knowledge.
|
Reply by Robert/FL on 5/15/10 8:46am
Msg #336652
Re: The Ne Varetur cert is required in LA...not an ack/jurat
My research indicates that the "Ne Varietur" language is used to tie in the mortgage note to the mortgage. As common-law notaries we don't have the authority to do it; but then again Louisiana notaries don't have to use a stamp or seal so if you had to do it, you could just sign the statement as a signing agent and not affix a stamp. Just a thought.
|
Reply by SOCAL/CA on 5/15/10 8:57am
Msg #336655
Have a nice weekend everyone. :) n/m
|
Reply by Raynon Taylor on 5/15/10 9:30am
Msg #336662
Don't know if you had your question answered or not but there is no acknowledgement or jurat necessary to be attached to the note as you are not acknowledging anyones signature with this statement, you are stating that this document is not to be altered and identifying that is the note that went with the mortgage dated "such and such" a date. I don't know if California law allows you do this but our notes are "paraphed" which is what that language does and it might be kicked back if not. Hope this helps!
|
Reply by SOCAL/CA on 5/15/10 10:35am
Msg #336683
Re: Louisana Note Notarized? FYI
FYI-I finally got in touch with the title co. and yes I do attach a CA compliant Acknowledgement to the Note. I was told that this is required for LA properties.
|
Reply by Robert/FL on 5/15/10 2:41pm
Msg #336709
Re: Louisana Note Notarized? FYI
Well an acknowledgment is really not even remotely close to what they are actually asking the notary to do. "Ne Varietur" is for the notary saying which mortgage note goes with the mortgage in question. I know that notaries in California can't do that and I know the title company told you to attach an ack. but it sounds to me like it is very likely the document will be rejected in Louisiana. Not your problem of course.
This is similar to some other discussion we've had recently - there was some company in virginia or something that was askin the notary to certify that the mortgage note went with the mortgage.
|
Reply by BrendaTx on 5/15/10 3:30pm
Msg #336712
Re: Louisana Note Notarized? FYI
*but it sounds to me like it is very likely the document will be rejected in Louisiana. Not your problem of course. *
I hate to be jaded, but I think that the title company notary will actually complete it and just said to attach an ack to saying so. Just a guess based on my experience with La. oil field workers working over here in the oil & gas patches. "Further, affiant sayeth naught."
|
Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 5/16/10 1:08am
Msg #336736
The beat goes on
NE VARIETUR.
These words, which literally signify that it be not varied or changed, are sometimes written by notaries public upon bills or notes, for the purpose of identifying them. This does not destroy their negotiability. 8 Wheat. 338.
Source: Bouviers Law Dictionary 1856 Edition
|
Reply by Notarysigner on 5/16/10 10:12am
Msg #336743
Re: The beat goes on
Go! Goldgirl
|
Reply by Barbara A Demonte on 5/16/10 3:13pm
Msg #336759
Re: Louisana Note Notarized? FYI
"Well an acknowledgment is really not even remotely close to what they are actually asking the notary to do. "Ne Varietur" is for the notary saying which mortgage note goes with the mortgage in question. I know that notaries in California can't do that and I know the title company told you to attach an ack. but it sounds to me like it is very likely the document will be rejected in Louisiana."
You sound like your giving a legal opinion.
Seriously doubt the document will get rejected in Louisiana, especially since the TC gave the instructions to attach the CA acknowledgement. CA notaries must abide by the laws of their state or risk serious reprocussions, and since the borrowers are signing in CA they have to accept the CA acknowledgement.
|
Reply by Robert/FL on 5/16/10 4:15pm
Msg #336764
Re: Louisana Note Notarized? FYI
I'm not saying the notary did something wrong. She did what she was told. And I'm not giving a legal opinion, the definition of "Ne varietur" has been stated several times above and it is not nearly the same as the definition for "Acknowledgment".
|
Reply by JAM/CA on 5/16/10 5:32pm
Msg #336766
I have completed many Purchase Closings for Louisiana properties and you cannot notarize the Note with the wording that is on it. See meaning PAW put above. You would be certifying that the Note and Mortgage are indeed genuine.
I told the Attorney I worked with that in California we could not do that. I told her the difference between an Acknowledgment and a Jurat, she choice a Jurat for the Note. They do not have Jurat's.
|
Reply by JanetLA on 5/19/10 7:52am
Msg #337084
to JAM/CA
Your message says:
I told the Attorney I worked with that in California we could not do that. I told her the difference between an Acknowledgment and a Jurat, she choice a Jurat for the Note. They do not have Jurat's.
To clarify- Louisiana does have jurats if that is what your post meant.
Louisiana notary paraphs the note to identify it with a certain mortgage and it is indeed required. However, that is not to say that it will or will not be rejected by clerk of court's office here. There are many different schools of thought on that. Our clerk of court's office has recordations that do not meet any of legal mortgage requirements.
I must also mention that the info by one other poster stated that you can sign it and not notarize it. (because Louisiana does not require a stamp or seal). That is not exactly right either. The Louisiana notary uses his/her signature as the seal. The signature here is what notarizes it.
|
