Posted by Denise Grant on 2/25/11 1:07pm
Msg #374169

message#329483

Hello this is from wife of Dr. Michael Brownstein, I am Denise Grant, the notary public for his office.
I understand the law and the notary rules and checked and double checked with the State of California, Notary Office regarding my duty as a notary public for my husband's signature only the letters the office creates regarding changing gender.
These letters are not "subject to" surgery and are requested by the patient. The surgeon signs his letter and I notarize his signature on these letters ONLY. This comes after the surgery is complete. Only a handful of patients request a letter.
Per the Notary Public, State of California, this has been authorized by them as OK.
Just letting you know, dont waste your time with us, but thank you for your sharp eye. Mine was there also BEFORE taking the test.
I have been a notary twice before in the past and understand the law, rules and regulations.
Thanks for watching out for all of us.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 2/25/11 1:19pm
Msg #374170

I'm unclear why you even brought this up over a year

after the original posting...unfortunately, IMO, all you've done is managed to bring attention again to your errors...

So perhaps you can explain...since you say you know your law, rules and regulations....

1. Why did you use an acknowledgement when a jurat is required?

2. Why are you still using the outdated, incorrect acknowledgement that does not comply with CA law?

IMWTK

Reply by Denise Grant on 2/25/11 1:27pm
Msg #374171

Re: I'm unclear why you even brought this up over a year

I JUST found this site and read this is horror! I was provided the documents, Jurats and so forth at the day of my test from the Notary testers and State of California! I assume they know what to hand out. I will let them know you and others are "upset" about my notary attachments, jurats vs. acknowledgments and will double check (again) with our State.
It did comply with the California law. The judge at every single solitary court hearing has allowed every document brought forth to the judge and has never been kicked back in California to our office for correction. However, my notary is coming due and I am going to research this (again) so everyone is happy with my work which I stand by.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 2/25/11 1:29pm
Msg #374174

Re: I'm unclear why you even brought this up over a year

Page 11-12 of the CA notary handbook with proper forms for acks and jurats

http://www.sos.ca.gov/business/notary/forms/notary-handbook-2010.pdf

Reply by Stephanie_CA on 2/25/11 1:38pm
Msg #374179

Re: You should not assume anything...it is your commission.. n/m

Reply by Denise Grant on 2/25/11 1:28pm
Msg #374172

hope this was your "clearance"

Does this clear this up for you?

Reply by JAM/CA on 2/25/11 1:30pm
Msg #374175

It makes no difference what you told the Secretary of State, your notarization was wrong. You had no venue, the wording "personally known" stopped being used in 2008 and wording was added at the end of the statement of particulars, "I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct".

Bottom line, this was an improper notarization for the State of California.

Reply by Stephanie_CA on 2/25/11 1:37pm
Msg #374178

Re: I agree with JAM... n/m

Reply by Denise Grant on 2/25/11 1:38pm
Msg #374180

I didnt "tell" them anything, I "asked" them. But as you suggested, I shall and will acquire the notarization for these letters using this one you are suggesting and use it accordingly.
Thank you for the heads up and oversee, I appreciate this.

Reply by JAM/CA on 2/25/11 1:46pm
Msg #374183

I am not "suggesting" anything. The law is quite clear per the Notary Public Handbook what is necessary regarding the correct notarial verbiage for California. Which brings me to another question. Did you draft this document?

Reply by Stoli on 2/25/11 1:40pm
Msg #374181

Are you suggesting that you will reissue a corrected cert? n/m

Reply by Denise Grant on 2/25/11 2:03pm
Msg #374191

Re: Are you suggesting that you will reissue a corrected cert?

is Stoli short for something?

Reply by Glenn Strickler on 2/25/11 1:49pm
Msg #374184

Denise,

I don't understand why you would bring this up again. No one was talking about it and you really have to search to find the year old posting. I am on this site every day, and I don't even remember it. It's ironic that this involved a doctors, as opening old wounds is always dangerous and sometimes, even fatal.

Now you have called everyone's attention once again to it and now everyone will look to see what the subject was about.

You need to be careful what you ask for .........

Reply by Denise Grant on 2/25/11 2:01pm
Msg #374189

i saw this today for the first time!

Sorry I have out with b/cancer and my mom too. I am just one year back after 5 surgeries.
I am perhaps behind with the information and only joined this group today. When I saw what people wrote about how money will buy anything I was appalled by those comments and the negative discussions of my work and the LOL's. I shall and will proceed from today forward with the correct information. If there is a judge out there who wishes to change his mind about the approvals of the letters in the past then I shall do so.

Reply by Glenn Strickler on 2/25/11 2:13pm
Msg #374195

Re: i saw this today for the first time!

I am sorry for your medical problems. I have close family members who have been there, done that, and I hope for your continued good health.

I understand your view and that you want to defend yourself. However the time to do that would be if the subject ever came up again. Then you could explain it. We all make mistakes, and from what I know, yours (if in fact you made one, I don't want to debate that here, as I really don't remember it) has been forgotten. Once that post turned the corner and wasn't on the first page any longer, it was forgotten .... at least until today. Take it from one who has a lot of skeletons in the closet. Sometimes, it's just better th leave the door closed and locked.

Again, best wishes for you remaining cancer free. People who have gone through that and still have the strength to get back online here and engage, well you are indeed a strong person.

Reply by Calnotary on 2/25/11 1:54pm
Msg #374186

"but thank you for your sharp eye. Mine was there also...

BEFORE taking the test."


LOL!

Reply by Stoli on 2/25/11 3:24pm
Msg #374218

The gender change operation for Chaz Bono found on TMZ

Marian posted about the 03/29/10 Msg #329483

Documents were filed with the Los Angeles Superior Court March 24, 2010.

What a public display for a very private matter. In question was the outdated, notary acknowledgment format, including the absence of venue, and the supposed conflict of interest between the notary and the doctor. The 'personally known to me' wording was changed five years ago.

Previous posts brought up the potential conflict of interest between husband and wife/notary, as the notary stands to benefit financially from the transaction. Many notaries were unhappy with the careless execution of the document, let alone that the document is copyright protected by Michael L. Brownstein, MD.

That's a novel idea--copyright a state form...

Wouldn't it stand to reason that a copyright protected document must be issued with the EXACT language each time it's issued?

Anyway, California notaries were offended by the careless execution and public display of a very private matter.

By the way, the court relies on the notary to attach the correct certificate.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 2/26/11 5:58pm
Msg #374379

Re: The gender change operation for Chaz Bono found on TMZ

"California notaries were offended by the careless execution and public display of a very private matter."

I find this statement a little ironic, given that you chose to put the name of the individual in question in the subject line of your post. Isn't that adding a tad to the public display? I think your point could have been made without doing that, and that action seems contradictory to what appeared to me to be your point in that sentence. Just an observation...

Reply by BrendaTx on 2/25/11 4:56pm
Msg #374238

Denise asked a questions/explained her position...

She came, she looked, she learned something.

Welcome, Denise!

Reply by SheilaSJCA on 2/26/11 3:27am
Msg #374290

Re: Denise asked a questions/explained her position...

Denise,
Welcome to the forum, you will truly be enlightend and enterained here.
You are one brave woman to come here and bring up old news, that does not show you in the best light, and I commend you for wanting to learn and do things properly.