Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Czechlist] Re: sroubovane souveti, aspon pro mne

Expand Messages
  • Alena Rysková 2e
    Thank all of you! and especially Michael!! for efforts and explanation. And you are right, it came from State of California, County of Santa Clara . Another
    Message 1 of 15 , Apr 23, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Thank all of you! and especially Michael!! for efforts and explanation. And you are right, it came from "State of California, County of Santa Clara".
      Another day under antiallergic blanket. One can choose between being languid due to pills or due to half-night cough hindering sleep...
      Alena


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Michael
      To: Czechlist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 6:53 PM
      Subject: [Czechlist] Re: sroubovane souveti, aspon pro mne





      --- In Czechlist@yahoogroups.com, "Michael" <tritt002@...> wrote:
      << None of the 50 states and no agency of the U.S. government prescribes that language. >>

      I was wrong. One section of California's Civil Code has a very similar "by signature . . . executed" bit. The odd wording may have first appeared in 1990, if http://www.clrc.ca.gov/pub/1990/M90-122s1.pdf was a reaction to a recent change. Whatever the date, it's the work of legislators, not lawyers. If you translate it as though it read "and that he or the entity for which he acted intended his signature to make the instrument legally effective" you'll be close enough to the intended meaning.





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.