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

Notary

Expand Messages
  • tnavyah
    Here in the State of Florida the county recorder would like you to believe that mortgages and other documents must be notarized. But that just is not so. A
    Message 1 of 19 , Sep 8, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Here in the State of Florida the county recorder would like you
      to believe that mortgages and other documents must be notarized.
      But that just is not so. A careful reading of the recording statute
      will verify this. If presented they will record the mortgage without
      the notary seal. Think about for a minute. If there was a situation
      where a notary was not available. Would that make your contracting
      impossibly?
    • *cat woman
      You are being told that a notary is necessary for any documents that you wish to record that involves real property because in February of 05 the Attorney
      Message 2 of 19 , Sep 13, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        You are being told that a notary is necessary for any documents that
        you wish to record that involves real property because in February of
        05 the Attorney General issued instructions to all clerks that was how
        is was supposed to be. I was provided with a copy of the memo when I
        questioned it.



        --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "tnavyah" <tedbear15@c...>
        wrote:
        > Here in the State of Florida the county recorder would like you
        > to believe that mortgages and other documents must be notarized.
        > But that just is not so. A careful reading of the recording statute
        > will verify this. If presented they will record the mortgage without
        > the notary seal. Think about for a minute. If there was a situation
        > where a notary was not available. Would that make your contracting
        > impossibly?
      • tedbear15
        Who cares what the attorney general says? His opinion are just opinions and his memos are just memos. His instructions to clerks are just instructions ; not
        Message 3 of 19 , Sep 13, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Who cares what the attorney general says? His opinion are just opinions and his memos are just memos. His instructions to clerks are just instructions ; not law.  
          Fla. statute  695.26 :Requirements for recording...... please note section (d) The name of any notary public or other officer authorized to take acknowledgments or proofs whose signature appears upon the instrument is legibly printed, etc.(emphasis mine) There is no statement that says it must appear, only if it does appear.  If a notary signature does not appear then this section could not apply. These people are  so sneaky. Please also see Fla. Stat.689.01 How real-estate conveyed . See attached ......in pertinent part,...unless it be by instrument signed in the presence of
          two subscribing witnesses .... Just remember if it came from the  government , you need to check it out for yourself. The final paragraph.
        • Paul Lowery
          tedbear; I noticed in subsection B of 695.26 the word natural person is stated and in 689.01 they mention the fact that corporations can convey property
          Message 4 of 19 , Sep 14, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            tedbear;
             
            I noticed in subsection B of 695.26 the word natural person is stated and in 689.01 they mention the fact that corporations can convey
            property stated. First time I have not seen a statute or code where natural person is used before. Does this support that there is a difference between natural persons and persons?
             
            Very Interesting,
             
             
            Paul Lowery
            Hermes Architects, Inc.
            713.785.3644

            >>> tedbear15@... 9/13/2005 12:53:54 PM >>>
            Who cares what the attorney general says? His opinion are just opinions and his memos are just memos. His instructions to clerks are just instructions ; not law.  
            Fla. statute  695.26 :Requirements for recording...... please note section (d) The name of any notary public or other officer authorized to take acknowledgments or proofs whose signature appears upon the instrument is legibly printed, etc.(emphasis mine) There is no statement that says it must appear, only if it does appear.  If a notary signature does not appear then this section could not apply. These people are  so sneaky. Please also see Fla. Stat.689.01 How real-estate conveyed . See attached ......in pertinent part,...unless it be by instrument signed in the presence of
            two subscribing witnesses .... Just remember if it came from the  government , you need to check it out for yourself. The final paragraph.
          • JD
            This section is a somewhat difficult section to interpret, as they are moving from paragraphs to subsections, etc. Natural person highlighted for convenience.
            Message 5 of 19 , Sep 14, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              This section is a somewhat difficult section to interpret, as they are moving from paragraphs to subsections, etc.  Natural person highlighted for convenience.
               
              26 USC Sec. 6049
              Sec. 6049. Returns regarding payments of interest
              (a) Requirement of reporting
                    Every person -
                      (1) who makes payments of interest (as defined in subsection (b)) aggregating $10 or more to any other person during any calendar year, or
                      (2) who receives payments of interest (as so defined) as a
              nominee and who makes payments aggregating $10 or more during any calendar year to any other person with respect to the interest so received,
              (2) Exceptions
                      For purposes of subsection (a), the term ''interest'' does not include -
              (A) interest on any obligation issued by a natural person,
              (B) makes payments of such interest to such second United States person,
              (4) Persons described in this paragraph
                      A person is described in this paragraph if such person is -
                        (A) a corporation,
                        (B) an organization exempt from taxation under section 501(a) or an individual retirement plan,
                        (C) the United States or any wholly owned agency or
              instrumentality thereof,
                        (D) a State, the District of Columbia, a possession of the
              United States, any political subdivision of any of the foregoing, or any wholly owned agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing,
                        (E) a foreign government, a political subdivision of a foreign government, or any wholly owned agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing,
                        (F) an international organization or any wholly owned agency or instrumentality thereof,
                        (G) a foreign central bank of issue,
                        (H) a dealer in securities or commodities required to register as such under the laws of the United States or a State, the District of Columbia, or a possession of the United States,
                        (I) a real estate investment trust (as defined in section
              856),
                        (J) an entity registered at all times during the taxable year
              under the Investment Company Act of 1940,
                        (K) a common trust fund (as defined in section 584(a)), or
                        (L) any trust which -
                          (i) is exempt from tax under section 664(c), or
                          (ii) is described in section 4947(a)(1).
               
               
              ----- Original Message -----
              Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 8:26 AM
              Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] Notary

              tedbear;
               
              I noticed in subsection B of 695.26 the word natural person is stated and in 689.01 they mention the fact that corporations can convey
              property stated. First time I have not seen a statute or code where natural person is used before. Does this support that there is a difference between natural persons and persons?
               
              Very Interesting,
               
               
              Paul Lowery
              Hermes Architects, Inc.
              713.785.3644

            • jtgltd@highstream.net
              Paul, the definition of a person in the statutes & regs is : a corporation, trust, estate & partneship. a natural person is a human being more correctly a
              Message 6 of 19 , Sep 14, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Paul, the definition of a person in the statutes & regs is : a corporation,
                trust, estate & partneship.

                a "natural person" is a human being more correctly a "living soul"

                the two words "person" have very different meaning and is done intentionally to
                confuse you into believing everything that says "person" applies to you a
                "living soul"

                check it out.

                Regards - Jon


                Quoting Paul Lowery <plowery@...>:

                > tedbear;
                >
                > I noticed in subsection B of 695.26 the word natural person is stated and in
                > 689.01 they mention the fact that corporations can convey
                > property stated. First time I have not seen a statute or code where natural
                > person is used before. Does this support that there is a difference between
                > natural persons and persons?
                >
                > Very Interesting,
                >
                >
                > Paul Lowery
                > Hermes Architects, Inc.
                > 713.785.3644
                >
                > >>> tedbear15@... 9/13/2005 12:53:54 PM >>>
                >
                > Who cares what the attorney general says? His opinion are just opinions and
                > his memos are just memos. His instructions to clerks are just instructions ;
                > not law.
                > Fla. statute 695.26 :Requirements for recording...... please note section
                > (d) The name of any notary public or other officer authorized to take
                > acknowledgments or proofs whose signature appears upon the instrument is
                > legibly printed, etc.(emphasis mine) There is no statement that says it must
                > appear, only if it does appear. If a notary signature does not appear then
                > this section could not apply. These people are so sneaky. Please also see
                > Fla. Stat.689.01 How real-estate conveyed . See attached ......in pertinent
                > part,...unless it be by instrument signed in the presence of
                > two subscribing witnesses .... Just remember if it came from the government
                > , you need to check it out for yourself. The final paragraph.
                >
                > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
                >
                > Visit your group "tips_and_tricks" on the web.
                > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > tips_and_tricks-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
              • Dave Miner
                Jon -- The definition of any word can change from statute to statute. There is no single definition of any word that remains unchanged from statute to statute
                Message 7 of 19 , Sep 14, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Jon --

                  The definition of any word can change from statute to statute. There is no
                  single definition of any word that remains unchanged from statute to statute
                  that I know of. For example, the definition of "person" in the Internal
                  Revenue Code is found in several locations.

                  Section 5690 Definition of the term "person".
                  The term "person", as used in this subchapter, includes an officer
                  or employee of a corporation or a member or employee of a partnership, who
                  as such officer, employee, or member is under a duty to perform the act in
                  respect of which the violation occurs.

                  Section 7343. Definition of the term "person".
                  The term "person" as used in this chapter includes an officer or
                  employee of a corporation, or a member or employee of a partnership, who as
                  such officer, employee, or member is under a duty to perform the act in
                  respect of which the violation occurs.

                  Section 7701. Definitions.
                  (a) When used in this title, where otherwise not distinctly expressed or
                  manifestly incompatible with the intent thereof --
                  (1) Person. The term "person" shall be construed to mean and
                  include an individual, trust, estate, partnership, association, company, or
                  corporation.

                  We need to be careful to understand the term and its specific location in a
                  statute when we make statements concerning its definition.

                  Yours in financial freedom,

                  Dave Miner
                  www.IRx-Solutions.com


                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
                  [mailto:tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of jtgltd@...
                  Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 5:25 PM
                  To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] Notary

                  Paul, the definition of a person in the statutes & regs is : a corporation,
                  trust, estate & partneship.

                  a "natural person" is a human being more correctly a "living soul"
                • Ed Siceloff
                  There is a rule of law that I ve read, but can t remember a cite, that also explains that in listing things of like character (definition), things that are
                  Message 8 of 19 , Sep 14, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    There is a rule of law that I've read, but can't remember
                    a cite, that also explains that in listing things of like
                    character (definition), things that are different are not included.
                    Corporation, trust, estate, partnership, are all fictitious entities
                    and so the list is only of fictitious entities.
                    A real flesh and blood person or living soul, can not be
                    included in this list because it is a list of fictitious entities. A
                    living soul would have to be listed in the list to be included.
                    He/she can not be inferred.

                    Ed Siceloff

                    Moderator: Ed, what you describe is ejusdem generis. Bear

                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: jtgltd@...
                    To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
                    Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 5:25 PM
                    Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] Notary


                    Paul, the definition of a person in the statutes & regs is : a corporation,
                    trust, estate & partneship.

                    a "natural person" is a human being more correctly a "living soul"

                    the two words "person" have very different meaning and is done intentionally to
                    confuse you into believing everything that says "person" applies to you a
                    "living soul"

                    check it out.

                    Regards - Jon
                  • paradoxmagnus@earthlink.net
                    And it s usage in Title 15 show how clear Congress can be when they want to be. The term person and any other word or term used to designate the applicant
                    Message 9 of 19 , Sep 14, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      And it's usage in Title 15 show how clear Congress can be when they want to be.
                       
                      "The term “person” and any other word or term used to designate the applicant or other entitled to a benefit or privilege or rendered liable under the provisions of this chapter includes a juristic person as well as a natural person. The term “juristic person” includes a firm, corporation, union, association, or other organization capable of suing and being sued in a court of law.
                       
                      The term “person” also includes the United States, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any individual, firm, or corporation acting for the United States and with the authorization and consent of the United States. The United States, any agency or instrumentality thereof, and any individual, firm, or corporation acting for the United States and with the authorization and consent of the United States, shall be subject to the provisions of this chapter in the same manner and to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity.
                       
                      The term “person” also includes any State, any instrumentality of a State, and any officer or employee of a State or instrumentality of a State acting in his or her official capacity. Any State, and any such instrumentality, officer, or employee, shall be subject to the provisions of this chapter in the same manner and to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity. "
                       
                       
                      The term “juristic person” includes a firm, corporation, union, association, or other organization capable of suing and being sued in a court of law.
                       
                      When they simply use the term PERSON because it's much easier for people ASSUME it includes a Man.
                       
                      Notice how they had to SPECIFICLY ADD the SOVEREIGNS (the people who are refered to as "natural persons", the United States & the States) to the DEFINITION of PERSON?
                       
                      That's because "Since, in common usage, the term 'person' does not include the sovereign, statutes employing the phrase are ordinarily construed to exclude it" UNITED STATES v. COOPER CORPORATION, 312 U.S. 600
                       
                      They count on people not understanding the RULES of STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.
                       
                      Ab initio un excluso. It is a RULE of STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION that what is NOT INCLUDED is EXCLUDED.
                       
                      Inclusio unis est esclusio alterius. This DOCTRINE decrees that where law EXPRESSLY describes the PARTICULAR situation to which it shall apply, an IRREFUTABLE INFERENCE MUST be drawn that what is OMITTED or EXCLUDED was INTENDED to be OMITTED or EXCLUDED.
                       
                      Note that they acknowledge that the States are DISTINCT ENTITIES from the UNITED STATES and are separate JURISDICTIONS.
                       
                      Patrick in California
                       
                      "It ain't what ya don't know that hurts ya. What really puts a hurtin' on ya is what ya knows for sure, that just ain't so." -- Uncle Remus
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.