[WSBAPT] Questions re notary blocks for trust

Mon Dec 21 16:31:16 PST 2020

Doug:

You’re right that a trust agreement, as a contract, is not required to be acknowledged. Nevertheless, it has always been my practice to acknowledge trust agreements and financial powers of attorney whenever there is the possibility the fiduciary would need to record the instrument in connection with a real estate conveyance. Title companies often require the instrument authorizing the fiduciary to be recorded with the same formality as the deed. 

John J. Sullivan 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 21, 2020, at 4:04 PM, Doug Schafer <schafer at pobox.com> wrote:
> 
>  I'm aware of no rule that requires signatures on a declaration of trust or a trust agreement to be notarized. If such a rule exists, please cite it. I recognize that some third parties might mistakenly believe that the trust is not "legal" unless signatures are notarized, but ...
> 
> Doug Schafer, in Tacoma.
> 
> 
> On 12/21/2020 15:13, Setareh Mahmoodi wrote:
>> I agree with Joshua. I think so long as you are having the trustmaker sign as the trustmaker and trustee and the son-in-law as the co-trustee, there are no issues with one notary block so long as everyone is properly identified with their roles/capacity in that notary block. If you do separate blocks, they can definitely be on separate pages. You can use dashes at the bottom of the pages to show continuity as well as page x of y format for the page numbers and/or have the trustmaker initial the pages if you are concerned. Sometimes I include the total number of pages in the notary block as well if the circumstances warrant it. However, similar to Joshua, I have not had anyone raise any issues with notary blocks being on separate pages etc. This often happens in deed signings as well. 
>> 
>> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 2:07 PM Joshua McKarcher <josh at mckarcherlaw.com> wrote:
>>> Suzanne,
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> I’m unaware of any rule that requires a notary block (or certificate) to be on the same page as the signature acknowledged. Indeed, a notary certificate would ordinarily (or “in the old days”) be affixed to the document containing the acknowledged signature. I personally use Word’s “Keep With Next” paragraph formatting to keep the lines of an entire notary block (from STATE OF through line containing notary expiration date below signature) “together” on the same page. But for that notary block to be on the page following the signer’s signature is unexceptional to me. I’ve never had even a Notorious Big Bank give me trouble on that one.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Also, given the relationship of the two parties, I personally would have them sign separate signature lines and notarize their signatures in separate notary blocks. I don’t know that a notary block is “invalid” if you tried to put them both in one block, but you’d have to very careful to recite exactly the capacity in which each is signing (“by, as, of,” following the lovely short form acknowledgement). And, besides that, it would just strike me as odd visually to have a person and her son-in-law in one notary block, as I ordinarily would only do that for a married couple (or “maybe” two representatives of the same entity signing in straightforward representative capacities, I suppose).
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Else, it seems perfectly fine to set it up for grantor to sign (presumably as both grantor and co-trustee), then co-trustee to sign as co-trustee; and then to have successive notary blocks for one and then the other, even if one or both is on the page following signatures.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> I hope that helps. All the best, Josh
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Joshua D. McKarcher
>>> 
>>> McKarcher Law PLLC
>>> 
>>> 537 6th Street
>>> 
>>> Clarkston, WA 99403
>>> 
>>> (509) 758-3345
>>> 
>>> (509) 758-3314 (fax)
>>> 
>>> josh at mckarcherlaw.com
>>> 
>>> www.mckarcherlaw.com
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Suzanne Lieberman
>>> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 12:07 PM
>>> To: wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com
>>> Subject: [WSBAPT] Questions re notary blocks for trust
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> We are doing a revocable living trust for a client who is the trustor, but who will serve as co-trustee with her son-in-law. 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Where is the rule or guidance indicating that two notary blocks are needed (one for each co-trustee signature), and should the notary blocks be placed side-by-side or can the block for the second signature be placed on a second page if there is insufficient space on the first?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sincerely, 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Suzanne Lieberman
>>> 
>>> CMS Law Firm LLC
>>> 
>>> 811 Kirkland Ave. Suite 201 (please note new address!)
>>> 
>>> Kirkland, WA 98033
>>> 
>>> 206-383-6484 (Cell Phone)
>>> 
>>> 206-659-1512 (Main Office)
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Legal stuff I have to put in... To ensure compliance with Treasury Department and IRS regulations, we inform you that, unless expressly indicated otherwise, any federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written by CMS Law Firm LLC to be used, and cannot be used by the taxpayer, for the purpose of: (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer under the Internal Revenue Code; or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein (or any attachments).
>>> 
>>> ***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.***
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WSBAPT mailing list
>>> WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com
>>> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Best regards, 
>> 
>> Setareh Mahmoodi 
>> Attorney at Law 
>> 18222 104th Ave NE, Suite 103
>> Bothell, WA 98011
>> Phone: 425-806-1500
>> Fax: 425-489-4142 (Please email documents if at all possible)
>> Email: SM at LawOfficesofSM.com
>> Website: http://www.lawofficesofsm.com/
>> 
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email message and any attachments is a transmission from the law firm and is intended for the recipient only.  It may contain information that is confidential and legally protected by the attorney-client, work product and/or other privileges.  If you are not the designated or intended recipient, please destroy the message without disclosing any of its contents and notify us immediately by reply email or by calling (425) 806-1500.
>> Pursuant to U.S. Treasury Department Regulations, we are now required to advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice contained in this communication, including attachments and enclosures, is not intended or written to be used, and may not be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.
>> 
>> 
>> ***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.***
>> _______________________________________________
>> WSBAPT mailing list
>> WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com
>> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
> 
> 
> 	Virus-free. www.avg.com
> ***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.***
> _______________________________________________
> WSBAPT mailing list
> WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20201221/78875a57/attachment.html>