Posted by jba/fl on 8/31/11 11:59am
Msg #395878

Misinformation here lately.

There has been a lot of misinformation here lately. Please, you must cite your sources and be careful in what is posted. When you cannot support what you are saying yet someone who may not know reads it, there can be problems resulting.

Take your time, be thoughtful

Reply by Ilene C. Seidel on 8/31/11 12:09pm
Msg #395879

I agree with you. We get upset our blood pressure is out the roof and we say things that are blown out of proportion. Cool down before posting.

Reply by jnew on 8/31/11 12:38pm
Msg #395884

You can probably say that about any news source these days. I always learned that reading to understand is better than reading to believe.

Reply by jba/fl on 8/31/11 12:40pm
Msg #395885

reading to understand is better than reading to believe

Great quote - I think I will go read! LOL

Reply by Glenn Strickler on 8/31/11 12:44pm
Msg #395888

Words well spoken ....

When it comes to legal matters, our best source of information is still our states' SOS, Handbook and /or an
attorney.

Reply by Teresa/FL on 8/31/11 12:53pm
Msg #395893

Not just here, but on other forums too

I saw an incorrect post on a LinkedIn group and felt compelled to correct it. The poster was a Florida notary and she proceeded to tell me that she probably should have stated it differently, but that did not get the point of the post.

My point was that she had posted incorrect information on a public forum and others might believe that what she was posted was true...

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 8/31/11 1:15pm
Msg #395896

Hi, jba/fl: I'm assuming you're referring to Buddy's post from yesterday. But just in case you're not, this is my response to your post directed at me regarding his comments. I'll post it here because that thread is so far back nobody will find it anymore! Here goes:

Buddy's post that I was referring to:

"We all know that the degree would require a Jurat but we can't tell the customer that. So a Jurat would have to be on the same piece of paper as the degree or the customer would have to ask for one."

So, yes, he is correct in saying that a copy of the degree with accompanying written statement would require a jurat. He should have cited CA procedure. Instead, he got bombarded by FL law citations which likely intimidated him and, frankly, are way over my head, too. He probably headed for the hills with his tail between his legs after getting whacked by Sylvia - I'd do the same if I ever attracted Sylvia's scorn!

Buddy just needed to stick to his guns, search out the facts before he admitted he "guessed." Bad choice of words. In his case, it was a lucky guess, something he remembered from notary school maybe ...

p.s. I don't know Buddy, I'm not defending him; I just don't want us to go overboard. In the pantheon of bonehead posts here, I don't think this ranks too high. He just didn't present it correctly and have the information at hand to back it up.

Still, your adivce to think before you post information relating to how we do our jobs is right on. And following your advice, I should have told Jayhawk to refer to state law instead of suggesting the document custodian route. I had no iead ya'll in FL could do what you and Syvia described, so maybe Kansas has got its own thing going, too ....?

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 8/31/11 1:33pm
Msg #395899


" He probably headed for the hills with his tail between his legs after getting whacked by Sylvia - I'd do the same if I ever attracted Sylvia's scorn"

Wow! I don't see as I "whacked" him - I was pointing out his "everyone knows" response.

He had said that everyone knows a degree needs a jurat. Maybe he should have said everyone in CA should know that in CA it needs a jurat.

He in no way "attracted my scorn". Believe me, if I was scorning anyone they would know it, it would be unmistakable.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 8/31/11 5:53pm
Msg #395931

"Maybe he should have said everyone in CA should know that in CA it needs a jurat."

I don't believe this is true, either. Please see comments I just added to that thread in message #395929.

This may be a reference to part (b) of the following quote from California Government Code:

"§ 8202. Execution of jurat; administration of oath or affirmation to affiant; attachment
to affidavit
(a) When executing a jurat, a notary shall administer an oath or affirmation to the affiant and
shall determine, from satisfactory evidence as described in Section 1185 of the Civil Code,
that the affiant is the person executing the document. The affiant shall sign the document in
the presence of the notary.
(b) To any affidavit subscribed and sworn to before a notary, there shall be attached a jurat
in the following form:"

If you take it out of context, (b) could be (mis?)interpreted to mean that any affidavit must have a jurat. However, this paragraph is talking about how to execute a jurat, not under what circumstances a jurat is "required". The point of this item is the form that a jurat must have, not that an affidavit must have a jurat, imo. Seems to me that documents requiring a jurat are often affidavits, but we shouldn't assume that the reverse is always true unless that is specified. I've always understood that we (at least in CA) are not to make the determination of which type of notarization is required for any situation.

I've read here previously (probably from PAW) that Florida notary law DOES have requirements about affidavits requiring a jurat. Is that correct?

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 8/31/11 6:14pm
Msg #395935

"I've read here previously (probably from PAW) that Florida notary law DOES have requirements about affidavits requiring a jurat. Is that correct?"

Yes - Fl Statutes that a notary public may not take an acknowledgment in lieu of an oath if an oath is required.

So, if the document is a sworn statement we cannot use an acknowledgment, we have to use a jurat.

Paul , when faced with a document with a sworn statement and the notary certificate was an acknowledgment he always attached a jurat.

Reply by jba/fl on 8/31/11 6:15pm
Msg #395936

Yes-affidavits require jurats.(p.13 FL. manual for Notaries) n/m

Reply by Buddy Young on 8/31/11 10:08pm
Msg #395952

Re: Gold Girl, thanks, that's exactly what I was thinking

But said it wrong. How did you know what I was thinking?
Anyway, after being raked over the coals, and rightly so, I just left it alone.
I will be more careful in the future how I say things, and thanks again Gold Girl

Reply by Notarysigner on 8/31/11 3:22pm
Msg #395914

Re: I wanted to show my support for

What you're saying! My damn Pc just crashed and I just
Took it to the shop
Posting from my iphone is a PITA so I'm
Off for awhile