I get a magazine from the NNA because of my membership in the NNA, am I the only one that sometimes wonders
WTF is writing some of the articles. I’ve seen a few in which what they said was obviously very wrong. Anyone else notice this too?
“California, for example, prohibits the use of hybrid certificates in many cases. If the documents will be filed in California, the Notary must complete a jurat or acknowledgment certificate prescribed by the state, but not a form that combines both. If, however, the document is going to another state and requires an acknowledgment, a Notary may be able to complete a hybrid acknowledgment certificate in which the signer acknowledges their signature and is stated to have taken an oath.”
CA notaries can’t notarize hybrid certificates regardless of where they are going… because a Jurat has to have specific
wording REGARDLESS OF WHERE IT IS GOING TO BE FILED. A quick check produced this:
"Chapter 197, Statutes of 2014 amends California Government Code section 8202 to require the addition of the following specific disclaimer to the top of the form jurat: “A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.” The disclaimer must be legible and in an enclosed box.
The jurat (PDF) must be in the form set forth in California Government Code section 8202."