123Notary

Notary Blog – Signing Tips, Marketing Tips, General Notary Advice – 123notary.com Control Panel

February 1, 2018

Third Judicial District Court of Utah. Notary Case.

Filed under: General Stories — admin @ 8:47 am

This is a court case involving one of our Notaries. If you think keeping proper records doesn’t matter because your state doesn’t require it — think again. Your journal is your only evidence in court. This is the beginning of a court case. I am not going to publish the entire thing because it is too long.

———————–

Regarding the plaintiffs’ general allegations, defendant admits that she lives in Salt Lake County, that the she is doing business in Salt Lake County, and did in fact witness plaintiffs signatures and notarize for the same.  Defendant has no knowledge concerning the other defendants and therefore denies the same.  Defendant further denies all other allegations not specifically admitted to therein.

Count One
1. Plaintiff’s petition fails to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
2. In response to allegations of paragraphs 16-22 Defendant has no personal knowledge of any of those items.
3. On February 8, 2007 Defendant Shaw did in fact go to the Plaintiff home to accommodate the loan signing. defendant denies the allegations set forth therein, and affirmatively alleges that she was not employed by the lender, the title company, nor any of their representatives, but was and is an independent notary public, and acted solely in that capacity. 
4. In response to allegations of paragraphs 24 & 25 of the complaint Defendant has no personal knowledge to actions by LSI Title . Defendant did provide a copy of document to the Plaintiff, Defendant did not represent LSI Title nor give any representation as to the accuracy of the document nor give any legal advice.
5. In response to allegations of paragraphs 26 Plaintiffs did have the option to not sign the documents. Defendant explained that documents are date sensitive and Plaintiffs Have a 3 day right to cancel as provided by federal law. Defendant did suggest Plaintiffs could sign the Document and discuss concerns with their Mortgage Broker at a time when the Broker could be reached. Plaintiffs decided to sign the documents of their own free will. See exhibit N in complaint.
6. Defendant has no knowledge of any allegation in paragraphs 27- 70 of the complaint.
Count Two: Breach of Contract

7. In response to allegations of count two: Defendant has no knowledge of any allegation in paragraphs 1-4 of the complaint.

8. In response to allegations of paragraph 5 Defendant did not represent LSI Title or give any representation as to the accuracy of the document defendant denies the allegations set forth therein, and affirmatively alleges that she was not employed by the lender, the title company, nor any of their representatives, but was, and is, an independent notary public, and acted solely in that capacity. 

9. In response to allegations of count two: Defendant has no knowledge of any allegation in paragraphs 6-7 of the complaint.

The case goes on and on, but here is the beginning.

Share
>

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment