also the notary attached a stamped notarial certificate to the back of the affidavit.
What am I missing? What was the notaryâs error? Seems to me that itâs more of an error on the part of the âform creatorâ.
3 Likes
Election interferance?
Google it, but I see only a venue error on that page. The media said the notaryâs stamp was on a second page, that Iâm guessing was a compliant notarization. I would have left the notary portion blank and wrote â see attached notarizationâ and not tried to modify the certificate.
5 Likes
I donât know what the law in Colorado says. In my state, the notary law at 26 VSA § 5362
a) A notary public may perform a notarial act as authorized by and in accordance with the requirements of this chapter or otherwise by law of this State. [emphasis added]
So an election form would have been created by the government agency in charge of elections; in Vermont that would be the Secretary of State. Presumably that would have been done in response to an official rule, adopted under the authority of some law. So wonder if filling out a form created in accordance with law makes it an authorized notarial act, even though it doesnât follow the requirements in the notary law.
2 Likes
Good point Ashton. The document requires a jurat and to prevent any misunderstanding they actually explain what signing under penalty of perjury means.
A lesson to all of us. When theres a dispute the first thing a lawyer looks for is notary error. A technically thatâs usually overlooked.
I found a story about it from The Detroit News. Apparently the candidate was disqualified from the Michigan ballot, but the form was notarized in Colorado. Since the form wasnât created by the State of Colorado, the notary has no excuse for not following Colorado notary law.
1 Like
The Candidate form was created by Michigan. If Iâm reading the MI statues a Notary doesnât have to apply a stamped seal on the document as long as the notary details are recorded on the document.
Since the signature was notarized in Colorado it must meet Coloradoâs Notary Laws.
The document states âCertification and Acknowledgementâ so no Jurat required? The Notary should have reached out to someone more familiar with MI Statutes on how an out of State Notarization should be handled.
"MICHIGAN LAW ON NOTARIAL ACTS (EXCERPT)
Act 238 of 2003
55.287 Signature of notary public; statements; stamp, seal, or electronic process; effect of illegible statement.
Sec. 27.
(1) A notary public shall place his or her signature on every record upon which he or she performs a notarial act. The notary public shall sign his or her name exactly as his or her name appears on his or her application for commission as a notary public.
(2) On each record that a notary public performs a notarial act and immediately near the notary public's signature, as is practical, the notary public shall print, type, stamp, or otherwise imprint mechanically or electronically sufficiently clear and legible to be read by the secretary and in a manner capable of photographic reproduction all of the following in this format or in a similar format that conveys all of the same information:
(a) The name of the notary public exactly as it appears on his or her application for commission as a notary public.
(b) The statement: "Notary public, State of Michigan, County of __________.".
(c) The statement: "My commission expires __________.".
(d) If performing a notarial act in a county other than the county of commission, the statement: "Acting in the County of __________.".
(e) The date the notarial act was performed.
(f) If applicable, whether the notarial act was performed using an electronic notarization system under section 26a or performed using a remote electronic notarization platform under section 26b.
(3) A notary public may use a stamp, seal, or electronic process that contains all of the information required under subsection (2). However, the notary public shall not use the stamp, seal, or electronic process in a manner that renders anything illegible on the record being notarized. A notary public shall not use an embosser alone or use any other method that cannot be reproduced.
(4) The illegibility of the statements required under subsection (2) does not affect the validity of the transaction or record that was notarized."
All true. My main concern lies in the fact that the notary is being held accountable. It is clear to me that the individual overseeing Mr. Cornellâs campaign should have ensured that their candidate signed in the state where he was running.
2 Likes
Since the candidacy is symbolic anyway, the issue could be an opportunity to attack the Michigan Secretary of State. It could be claimed the horrible design of the form was deliberate so all the forms submitted were âdefectiveâ and the SOS could pick and choose which ones to let through.
I donât think itâs reasonable to require a presidential candidate to travel to each state to get any required candidate form notarized.
1 Like
I think thatâs logical, Ashton, and now everybody in the country thinks that it was a notary error and knows the name of the notary whose reputation is undoubtedly ruined. The question being, had the notary crossed out the Michigan hybrid certificate and attached a compliant Colorado certificate, would the document still have been rejected? my guess is yes and yes it was probably politically motivated.
1 Like
There were many errors in this. This is a Michigan form but she was supposed to comply with Colorado statutes. Her title was supposed to be in there; she left unfilled blanks; she seems to have dated it for Cornel West; she didnât stamp the notarization; and thereâs no notarial act. I suppose she should have attached her own certificate to it.
In addition to all that has been said, one must love these States who require a document to be notarized, but donât leave room for the stamp.
1 Like
YeahâŠand donât actually include any cert. wording at all nor accept any additional page with cert. and notaryâs signature, stamp, the venueâŠetc., etc. The Sec. of State should slap their own state upside the head and get 'em to complyâŠat least with their own stateâs rules!!
1 Like
Dang, the Michigan Secretary of State is not up for election in 2024. Maybe Michigan voters can give Jocelyn what she deserves in 2026.
The notary should have put the Country of Boulder as the place where the notary was commissioned instead of the line through and writing State of Colorado. Also the notary should have initialed the line through. Finally, I agree that the best thing would have been to write âSee attached certificateâ. It would have cleared things up.
I agree that some method of completely replacing the certificate should have been used, since the existing language was hopeless outside of Michigan.
In a different context, if a certificate that came to a CO notary had a space to fill in the county where the notary was commissioned, it should be changed to indicate the notary was commissioned by the State of Colorado, because notaries there are commissioned by the state SOS. They are not commissioned by any county official or agency.
Similarly, if the CO notary found the phrase âin and for the County of _____â that should be changed, since they are in a certain county, but they are acting on behalf of the state, not the county.
The change might be to entirely replace the certificate with a compliant one.
2 Likes
Thanks for the clarification on Colorado. I am in Virginia and when asked what county I was commissioned in, my response is the City of Chrsapeake. That means that even though I am commissioned by the Commonwealth of Virginia, they have me listed as receiving my commissioned in the County of Chesapeake City because I picked up my commission and took my oath in Chesapeake, an independent city in Virginia.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.