Case Information
*1 OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
Honor8ble 0. rooaroil L~~hlia E.ttorAay eouat~
Jlz ‘Sol18 County
‘he hate orrefully
9th raquettlnf! the opialon or n notnrlal oral wblo lty
your lottor 10 fooOd an llq
18 IA the tort2 Qnroribotl b
la inolud&i 4n6 F-1
1 ~rorlda a 8eal 0r grTl1.d in oanter ho roMs, ‘Siotary I-ubllo, ( around tho.msr&n (tho name of. tho oounty for ir rpyointad), a& k ahaX suthon- Sl43iol rota thrrow:th.* k l e4n that the rqllLoltor a notarlrl tho osnter, ba 8 rtrr of tire petite ia t marrin legaid, of l’ublia, COuAty tho *lWtaky Them rrqArerontr ha+0 been ‘the 8tme bOt Ofgt~“~~~~t LO~idltd\yO Of &!!Y 13, 1846. Aote, 81~~ Pitat lO~ill8t~0, &‘a al. x8 tho rod lnrelld beoause the notsry@~ nom ir alSO ‘48 think AOt- laeladod tberAOA?
‘. s~4eAliol 00310n law 00 psrtioulrr lA4orlptloli __ _ . rtir s.i o:rloi4i, ootsrlsl ~1, the PStBSS DCNQ. 009 Of th. Al,- As 46 C. J. !% i 83 As.. Jur. 537. In Texos, '6 aholoo. tar otbw stetss, most ln4orSptl4o4 ugoa notorlal ooal4 arm so IA a08 rotpdatod by l tatuto. 44 Gr 1. 622; .htlal.e 5360, l u>rrj 7 A. t. !I. 1668.
Tbsoo sbtutes hsro rorliiuslt bscn held dlrsotory VS. Thort~wn, 4: Arksaoor a, 4B AU. Rep. 49) 8nd ~ (sothrmd rsndator~ (Howltt VW. Xor~sn, 68 lore 460, Sb II. 8. 476). LS. to Ruli~ cars ku 32a; 39 An. Jur. 226-227. x0 oa#* dLr*otllJ ia point hsre bwA iotmd ia Taxon althou@ thr 0890 of StooksborrJr vs. ihan, 21 :;. 5. 694 (SrrhOd, tall. 5631, holds that the us8 or a 8041 saoh 89 1s pnsorlboC by lsw Lr aootsosry for a aotarlal authsntlartion. Torn8 a8818 are KoKellsr ‘la, Peak, 55 Texas t~l, Other
holding an l oknOa’hd~.m~At void 8kOlW tbo cotsr) laadvertanfly used the ~41 of the ?Ounty .%utt: 6nb Str:n&~leu ~4. Thomo>, 1 Pox. A9;. sir. Gas., ::oo. IOW, boldla~ tbaro to subnt6n- tiS1 oorapllsaoo with tho stntuta whore the ni~&:iol ssal had 18tMr6 T 0, S -4 3 batwton the ;olatr of the star rather thaa shout the outrr nf3rf.h 0: ths ooml.
?:A! odS8 or fu Nate, %d:Cso., UO. 10,093, hold6 that tha nottrial we1 tust UOAtOiA tbo Uau6 oi.thc notary, the court 48ylA(!r
‘Publio reals -- end s not~r)'s 4641 lo 4 pub110 SOUl -- am hrld to prows th+meelvaor IS any rtazp rhlet: I notary ohoooos to rfilx to his slenaturo an- to rsoocnltlon e8 bl8 Ofllolsl l ool? Suoh 4 tit186 ma us 4 burlorquo apoa the prO?i- oonutruotlon rtrlkos slono of nct.or 3oncro(lc. rklob mak06 b oth l ~~Ao- turs 4A?. 0081 nrasssory to the 8uth4ntlostSon ootory's MI. SRd if l $ l QUbliO Se@1 it JWOV66 it- oif, w6f it n8t 8hOS OD it4 rSO0 at it 16 that it prot@#; not Ody thbt it iS 0 0441~ but that it 1~ t&r 4061 or 4 norcr~ publio; snd ln order to 4Gow t&et it, that it lt la the soaL of tho ut;O orplOy nust bear his nouo.w
Thlo 4:klon ~4s Clsapprored la fr! ro ihlllip~, ?oa. Caa., NO, ll,OW, thu court boldlay tb6t the SSSl aead AOt OOA- taia th8 notwy*t mm8 rhrn not 40 rwqulrrd by afstuto.
896 ‘1004r09; Laughlin, page HonOra blo i .
In Deem vs. Eata, 114 14. C. 1D4, 12 .I. ii. 146, t&m Carolina held 5uptOrM Court Of h’orttl e r,otarial asel JWSJ thht oontrln the nwo ot the th0uc.h not m::uiroQ by rt,a- tuto.
tram them 8uthoritirs IO oonolaee that .rhlle no- tsrlal rral met In robataatial ooupllanoe dtll Artlole 5960 by ooatalnin~ ln8arlptlon thrrrin eat rorth, the ema i8 not hTelt8 ir 1:: 8dditiGn OOntUh8 the ZMIBO 0s no- tary publlo to whoa It belonp.8.
