![]() ![]() Justice Christopher found that the parties’ acknowledgment was valid. Both acknowledgments use the past tense regarding the signing of the document. Dobi, 90 NY2d 127 (1997).Ĭontrary to the husband’s argument, Justice Christopher found that the language in the instant acknowledgment conformed substantially with the Uniform Form Certificate of Acknowledgment provided in Real Property Law §309-a. In pertinent part, the section reads “such acknowledgment can be made only by the person who executed the conveyance, and such proof can be made only by some other person, who was a witness of its execution, and at the same time subscribed his name to the conveyance as a witness.” Real Property Law §292 does not state that the notary must say in the acknowledgment that he witnessed the signature, Justice Christopher citing Matisoff v. However, as Justice Christopher noted, Real Property Law §292,titled “By whom conveyance must be acknowledged or proved,” differentiates between conveyances that are acknowledged and conveyances that are proved by use of a subscribing witness. In fact, the wife stated in her opposing affidavit that both parties were present before the notary at their local bank branch when they signed and the husband did not refute her claim in his reply. The husband’s argument went on: the notary used the past tense to state that the party “acknowledged that he has signed… the …Premarital Agreement.” He argued and that because of the use of the past tense “has signed” in the acknowledgment, the requirements of Real Property Law §292, that the notary witness the agreement’s execution and certify this fact in writing, had not been satisfied.Īlthough not determinative, the husband did not allege that either party failed to be present before the notary. He argued that Real Property Law §292 requires that the notary witness the signature and say so in the written certificate. In B.W., the husband sought to invalidate his prenuptial agreement by challenging the acknowledgment. in the year… before me, the undersigned, personally appeared…., personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to the be the individual(s) whose name(s) is (are) subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument, the individual(s), or the person upon behalf of which the individual(s) acted, executed the instrument. An acknowledgment, “must conform substantially with the form” set forth therein. ![]() The proper wording is found in Real Property Law §309-a. Given under my hand and notarial seal this 14th day of October, 2004. ![]() I,_, a Notary Public in and for said County, in the State aforesaid, do hereby certify that, personally known to me to be one of the persons whose names are subscribed to the foregoing Premarital Agreement, appeared before me this day in person and acknowledged that he has signed, sealed and delivered the foregoing Premarital Agreement as his free and voluntary act, for the uses and purposes therein set forth. In the case before her, the acknowledgment recited: R.F., Westchester County Supreme Court Justice Linda Christopher upheld a prenuptial agreement in which the notary’s “acknowledgment” used the wrong wording. What does “acknowledged or proven in the manner required to entitle a deed to be recorded” mean. New York’s Domestic Relations Law §236B(3) states “n agreement by the parties, made before or during the marriage, shall be valid and enforceable in a matrimonial action if such agreement is in writing, subscribed by the parties, and acknowledged or proven in the manner required to entitle a deed to be recorded.” Marital and divorce agreements have to be “notarized.” But does the notary have to be present and witness the actual signing? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |