CHEIKH ANTA DIOP DAKAR UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF LEGAL AND POLITICAL SCIENCES

LEGAL
ENGLISH
MASTER DEGREE
NOTARIAL AND
PROCESSUAL LAW
2014-2015

By Mr. Daouda THIAM

ASSOCIATE TEACHER
 Private law

Private law is that part of a civil law legal system which is part of the jus commune that
involves relationships between individuals, such as the law of contracts or torts (as it is
called in the common law), and the law of obligations (as it is called in civil legal
systems). It is to be distinguished from public law, which deals with relationships
between both natural and artificial persons (i.e., organizations) and the state, including
regulatory statutes, penal law and other law that affects the public order. In general
terms, private law involves interactions between private citizens, whereas public law
involves interrelations between the state and the general population.

Private law in common law jurisdictions

The concept of private law in common law countries is a little more broad, in that it also
encompasses private relationships between governments and private individuals or
other entities. That is, relationships between governments and individuals based on
the law of contract or torts are governed by private law, and are not considered to be
within the scope of public law.

Areas of private law

 Civil law
 Contract law or law of obligations
 Law of torts
 Property law
 Family law family-related issues and domestic relations including, but not limited
to marriage, civil unions, divorce, spousal abuse, child custody and visitation,
property, alimony, and child support awards, as well as child abuse issues, and
adoption.
 Succession, estate, probate, and testamentary laws
 Law of agency
 Labour law
  Commercial law
 Corporations law
 Competition law

Tort Law

A tort, in common law jurisdictions, is a civil wrong. Tort law deals with situations where
a person's behavior has unfairly caused someone else to suffer loss or harm. A tort is
not necessarily an illegal act but causes harm. The law allows anyone who is harmed to
recover their loss. Tort law is different from criminal law, which deals with situations
where a person's actions cause harm to society in general. A claim in tort may be
brought by anyone who has suffered loss. Criminal cases tend to be brought by the
state, although private prosecutions are possible.

Tort law is also differentiated from equity, in which a petitioner complains of a violation
of some right. One who commits a tortious act is called a tortfeasor. The equivalent of
tort in civil law jurisdictions is delict. Tort may be defined as a personal injury; or as "a
civil action other than a breach of contract."

A person who suffers a tortious injury is entitled to receive compensation for "damages",
usually monetary, from the person or people responsible — or liable — for those
injuries. Tort law defines what is a legal injury and, therefore, whether a person may be
held liable for an injury they have caused. Legal injuries are not limited to physical
injuries. They may also include emotional, economic, or reputational injuries as well as
violations of privacy, property, or constitutional rights. Tort cases therefore comprise
such varied topics as auto accidents, false imprisonment, defamation, product liability
(for defective consumer products), copyright infringement, and environmental pollution
(toxic torts), among many others.

In much of the common law world, the most prominent tort liability is negligence. If the
injured party can prove that the person believed to have caused the injury acted
negligently – that is, without taking reasonable care to avoid injuring others – tort law
will allow compensation.

However, tort law also recognizes intentional torts, where a person has intentionally
acted in a way that harms another, and "strict liability" or quasi-tort, which allows
recovery under certain circumstances without the need to demonstrate negligence.

Etymology

According to Webster, the word's origin is Middle English, injury, from Anglo-French,
from Medieval Latin tortum, from Latin, neuter of tortus twisted, from past participle
of torquēre First Known Use: 1586

The word "torture" shares the same linguistic origin, though its present meaning
diverged in a very different direction.

Categories of torts

Torts may be categorized in several ways: one such way is to divide them into
Negligence, Intentional Torts, and Quasi-Torts.

The standard action in tort is negligence. The tort of negligence provides a cause of
action leading to damages, or to relief, in each case designed to protect legal rights,
including those of personal safety, property, and, in some cases, intangible economic
interests. Negligence actions include claims coming primarily from car accidents and
personal injury accidents of many kinds, including clinical negligence, worker's
negligence and so forth. Product liability cases, such as those involving warranties, may
also be considered negligence actions, but there is frequently a significant overlay of
additional lawful content.

Intentional torts include, among others, certain torts arising from the occupation or use
of land. The tort of nuisance, for example, involves strict liability for a neighbor who
interferes with another's enjoyment of his real property. Trespass allows owners to sue
for entrances by a person (or his structure, such as an overhanging building) on their
land. Several intentional torts do not involve land. Examples include false imprisonment,
the tort of unlawfully arresting or detaining someone, and defamation (in some
jurisdictions split into libel and slander), where false information is broadcast and
damages the plaintiff's reputation.

In some cases, the development of tort law has spurred lawmakers to create alternative
solutions to disputes. For example, in some areas, workers' compensation laws arose
as a legislative response to court rulings restricting the extent to which employees could
sue their employers in respect of injuries sustained during employment. In other cases,
legal commentary has led to the development of new causes of action outside the
traditional common law torts. These are loosely grouped into quasi-torts or liability
torts.

Negligence

Negligence is a tort which depends on the existence of a breaking of the duty of care
owed by one person to another. One well-known case is Donoghue v Stevenson where
Mrs. Donoghue consumed part of a drink containing a decomposed snail while in a
public bar in Paisley, Scotland and claimed that it had made her ill. The snail had not
been visible, as the bottle of beer in which it was contained was opaque. Neither the
friend who bought the bottle for her, nor the shopkeeper who sold it, were aware of the
snail's presence. The manufacturer was Mr. Stevenson, whom Mrs. Donoghue sued for
damages for negligence. She could not sue Mr. Stevenson for damages for breach of
contract because there was no contract between them. The majority of the members of
the House of Lords agreed (3:2 ratio) that Mrs. Donoghue had a valid claim, but
disagreed as to why such a claim should exist. Lord MacMillan thought this should be
treated as a new product liability case. Lord Atkin argued that the law should recognize
a unifying principle that we owe a duty of reasonable care to our neighbors. He quoted
the Bible in support of his argument, specifically the general principle that "thou shalt
love thy neighbor." Negligence is a breach of legal duty to take care resulting in damage
to the plaintiff. This definition of negligence can be divided into four component parts
that the plaintiff must prove to establish negligence. The legal burden of proving these
elements falls upon the plaintiff. The elements in determining the liability for negligence
are:

 The plaintiff was owed a Duty of care

 There was a Dereliction or breach of that duty

 The tortfeasor Directly caused the injury [but for the defendant's actions, the
plaintiff would not have suffered an injury].

 The plaintiff suffered Damage as a result of that breach

 The damage was not too remote; there was proximate cause.

Duty of care

The first element of negligence is the legal duty of care. This concerns the relationship
between the defendant and the plaintiff, which must be such that there is an obligation
upon the defendant to take proper care to avoid causing injury to the plaintiff in all the
circumstances of the case. There are two ways in which a duty of care may be
established:

 the defendant and plaintiff are within one of the 'special relationships'; or

 outside of these relationships, according to the principles developed by case law.

There are a number of situations in which the courts recognize the existence of a duty
of care. These usually arise as a result of some sort of special relationship between the
parties. Examples include one road-user to another, employer to employee,
manufacturer to consumer, doctor to patient and solicitor to client.

Dereliction or breach of that duty

Dereliction of duty generally refers to a failure to conform to rules of one's job, which will
vary by tasks involved. It is a failure or refusal to perform assigned duties in a
satisfactory manner. Dereliction of duty on the part of an employee may be cause for
disciplinary action, which will vary by employer. It may refer to a failure by an
organization member to abide by the standing rules of its constitution or by-laws or
perform the duties of the position appointed to.

Injury directly caused by the tort feasor

The negligent act of the tort feasor must be connected to the injuries suffered.

Damage as a result of that breach

For many torts, damage is a necessary part of the tort. Thus, it is not enough to
demonstrate that you have suffered the wrong in order to win a tort case, you must also
have legally recognized damages that were directly or indirectly caused by the
tortfeasor as a result of the tort, and be able to prove the extent of those damages.

Proximate cause

Proximate cause means that you must be able to show that the harm was caused by
the tort you are suing for.

The defense may argue that there was a prior cause or a superseding intervening
cause. A common situation where a prior cause becomes an issue is the personal injury
auto accident, where the person re-injures an old injury. For example someone who has
a bad back is injured in the back in an auto accident. Years later they are still in pain.
They must prove the pain is caused by the auto accident, and not the natural
progression of the previous problem with the back. A superseding intervening cause
happens shortly after the injury. For example, if after the accident the doctor who works
on you commits malpractice and injures you further, the defense can argue that it was
not the accident, but the incompetent doctor who caused your injury.
Statutory torts

A statutory tort is like any other, in that it imposes duties on private or public parties,
however they are created by the legislature, not the courts. One example is in consumer
protection, with theProduct Liability Directive in the European Union, where businesses
making defective products that harm people must pay for any damage resulting. Liability
for bad or not working products is strict in most jurisdictions. The theory of risk
spreading provides support for this approach. Since manufacturers are the 'cheapest
cost avoiders', because they have a greater chance to seek out problems, it makes
sense to give them the incentive to guard against product defects. Another example
is occupiers' liability, which was seen as overly complex and illogical, so many
jurisdictions replaced the common law rules for occupiers' liability with statutory torts.
Statutory torts also spread across workplace health and safety laws and health and
safety in food.

Such torts as often grouped in with quasi-torts.

Nuisance

Legally, the term “nuisance” is traditionally used in three ways: (1) to describe an activity
or condition that is harmful or annoying to others (example- indecent conduct, a rubbish
heap or a smoking chimney); (2) to describe the harm caused by the before-mentioned
activity or condition (example- loud noises or objectionable odors); and (3) to describe a
legal liability (responsibility) that arises from the combination of the two. The law of
nuisance was created to stop such bothersome activities or conduct when they
unreasonably interfered either with the rights of other private landowners (example-
private nuisance) or with the rights of the general public (example-public nuisance).

The tort of nuisance allows a claimant (formerly plaintiff) to sue for most acts that
interfere with their use and enjoyment of their land. A good example of this is in the
case of Jones v Powell. A brewery made stinking vapors which wafted onto a neighbor's
property, damaging his papers. As he was a landowner, the neighbor sued in nuisance
for this damage. But Whitelocke J, speaking for the Court of the King's Bench, said that
because the water supply was contaminated, it was better that the neighbor's
documents were risked. He said "it is better that they should be spoiled than that the
common wealth stand in need of good liquor." Nowadays, interfering with neighbors'
property is not looked upon so kindly. Nuisance deals with all kinds of things that spoil a
landowner's enjoyment of his property.

A subset of nuisance is known as the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher, where a dam burst
into a coal mine shaft. So a dangerous escape of some hazard, including water, fire, or
animals means strict liability in nuisance. This is subject only to a remoteness cap,
familiar from negligence when the event is unusual and unpredictable. This was the
case where chemicals from a factory seeped through a floor into the water table,
contaminating East Anglia's water reservoirs.

Free market environmentalists would like to expand tort damage claims into pollution
(example-toxic torts) and environmental protection.

Defamation

Defamation is tarnishing the reputation of someone; it has two

varieties, slander and libel. Slander is spoken defamation and libel is printed or
broadcast defamation. The two otherwise share the same features: making a factual
assertion for which evidence does not exist. Defamation does not affect or hinder the
voicing of opinions, but does occupy the same fields as rights to free speech in the First
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, or Article 10 of the European
Convention of Human Rights. Related to defamation in the U.S. are the actions for
misappropriation of publicity, invasion of privacy, and disclosure. Abuse of process and
malicious prosecution are often classified as dignitary torts as well.

Intentional torts

Intentional torts are any intentional acts that are reasonably foreseeable to cause harm
to an individual, and that do so. Intentional torts have several subcategories:
 Torts against the person include assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional
infliction of emotional distress, and fraud.

 Property torts involve any intentional interference with the property rights of the
claimant (plaintiff). Those commonly recognized include trespass to land, trespass
to chattels (personal property), and conversion.

An intentional tort requires an overt act, some form of intent, and causation. In most
cases, transferred intent, which occurs when the defendant intends to injure an
individual but actually ends up injuring another individual, will satisfy the intent
requirement. Causation can be satisfied as long as the defendant was a substantial
factor in causing the harm.

Economic torts

Economic torts protect people from interference with their trade or business. The area
includes the doctrine of restraint of trade and has largely been submerged in the
twentieth century by statutory interventions on collective labor law and modern antitrust
or competition law. The "absence of any unifying principle drawing together the different
heads of economic tort liability has often been remarked upon."

Through a recent development in common law, beginning with Hedley Byrne v Heller in
1964, a victim of negligent misstatement may recover damages for pure economic loss
caused by detrimental reliance on the statement. Misrepresentation is a tort as
confirmed by Bridge LJ in Howard Marine and Dredging Co. Ltd. v A Ogden & Sons

Modern competition law is an important method for regulating the conduct of businesses
in a market economy. A major subset of statutory torts, it is also called 'anti-trust' law,
especially in the United States, articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of
the European Union, as well as the Clayton and Sherman Acts in the U.S., which create
duties for undertakings, corporations and businesses not to distort competition in the
marketplace. Cartels are forbidden on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. So is the abuse
of market power by monopolies (sole producers in a market) or the substantial
lessening of competition through a merger, takeover, acquisition or concentration of
enterprises. A huge issue in the EU is whether to follow the U.S. approach of private
damages actions to prevent anti-competitive conduct.

Liability, defenses, and remedies

Vicarious liability

The word 'vicarious' derives from the Latin word for 'change' or 'alternation' or 'stead'
and in tort law refers to the idea of one person being liable for the harm caused by
another, because of some legally relevant relationship. An example might be a parent
and a child, or an employer and an employee. You can sue an employer for the damage
to you by their employee, which was caused "within the scope of employment." This is
called respondent superior. For example, if a shop employee spilled cleaning liquid on
the supermarket floor, and you slipped and fell, suffering injuries, you could sue the
employee who actually spilled the liquid, or sue the employers. In the aforementioned
case, the latter option is more practical as they are more likely to have more money.
The law replies "since your employee harmed the claimant in the course of his
employment, you bear responsibility for it, because you have the control to hire and fire
him, and reduce the risk of it happening again." There is considerable academic debate
about whether vicarious liability is justified on no better basis than the search for a
solvent defendant, or whether it is well founded on the theory of efficient risk allocation.

Defences

A successful defence absolves the defendant from full or partial liability for damages.

Apart from proof that there was no breach of duty, there are three principal defenses to
tortious liability.

Consent
Typically, one cannot hold another liable in tort for actions to which one has consented.
This is frequently summarized by the phrase "volenti non fit injuria" (Latin: "to a willing
person, no injury is done" or "no injury is done to a person who consents"). It operates
when the claimant either expressly or implicitly consents to the risk of loss or damage.
For example, if a spectator at an ice hockey match is injured when a player strikes the
puck in the ordinary course of play, causing it to fly out of the rink and hit him or her, this
is a foreseeable event and spectators are assumed to accept that risk of injury when
buying a ticket. A slightly more limited defence may arise where the defendant has been
given a warning, whether expressly to the claimant or by a public notice, sign or
otherwise, that there is a danger of injury. The extent to which defendants can rely on
notices to exclude or limit liability varies from country to country. This is an issue of
policy as to whether (prospective) defendants should not only warn of a known danger,
but also take active steps to fence the site and take other reasonable precautions to
prevent the known danger from befalling those foreseen to be at risk.

Contributory negligence

This is either a mitigatory defence or, in the United States, it may be an absolute
defence. When used as a mitigatory defence, it is often known in the U.S. as
comparative negligence. Under comparative negligence a plaintiff/claimant's award is
reduced by the percentage of contribution made by the plaintiff to the loss or damage
suffered. Thus, in evaluating a collision between two vehicles, the court must not only
make a finding that both drivers were negligent, but it must also apportion the
contribution made by each driver as a percentage, e.g. that the blame between the
drivers is 20% attributable to the plaintiff/claimant: 80% to the defendant. The court will
then quantify the damages for the actual loss or damage sustained, and then reduce the
amount paid to the plaintiff/claimant by 20%. While contributory negligence retains a
significant role, an increasing number of jurisdictions, particularly within the United
States, are evolving toward a regime of comparative negligence. All but four US states
now follow a statutorily created regime of comparative negligence.
Contributory negligence has been widely criticized as being too draconian, in that a
plaintiff whose fault was comparatively minor might recover nothing from a more
egregiously irresponsible defendant. Comparative negligence has also been criticized,
since it would allow a plaintiff who is recklessly 95% negligent to recover 5% of the
damages from the defendant, and often more when a jury is feeling sympathetic.
Economists have further criticized comparative negligence, since under the Learned
Hand Rule it will not yield optimal precaution levels. In response, many places now have
a 50% rule where the plaintiff recovers nothing if the plaintiff is more than 50%
responsible.

Illegality

Ex turpi causa non oritur actio is the illegality defence, the Latin for "no right of action
arises from a despicable cause." If the claimant is involved in wrongdoing at the time the
alleged negligence occurred, this may extinguish or reduce the defendant's liability.
Thus, if a burglar is verbally challenged by the property owner and sustains injury when
jumping from a second story window to escape apprehension, there is no cause of
action against the property owner even though that injury would not have been
sustained but for the property owner's intervention.

Remedies

The main remedy against tortious loss is compensation in 'damages' or money. In a

limited range of cases, tort law will tolerate self-help, such as reasonable force to expel
a trespasser. This is a defence against the tort of battery. Further, in the case of a
continuing tort, or even where harm is merely threatened, the courts will sometimes
grant an injunction. This means a command, for something other than money by the
court, such as restraining the continuance or threat of harm. Usually injunctions will not
impose positive obligations on tortfeasors, but some Australianjurisdictions can make an
order for specific performance to ensure that the defendant carries out their legal
obligations, especially in relation to nuisance matters.
Theory and reform

Scholars and lawyers have identified conflicting aims for the law of tort, to some extent
reflected in the different types of damages awarded by the
courts: compensatory, aggravated and punitive. InThe Aims of the Law of Tort (1951),
Glanville Williams saw four possible bases on which different torts rested:
appeasement, justice, deterrence and compensation.

From the late 1950s a group of legally oriented economists and economically oriented
lawyers emphasized incentives and deterrence, and identified the aim of tort as being
the efficient distribution of risk. They are often described as the law and
economics movement. Ronald Coase, one of the movement's principal proponents,
submitted, in his article The Problem of Social Cost (1960),that the aim of tort should be
to reflect as closely as possible liability where transaction costs should be minimized.

Calls for reform of tort law come from diverse standpoints reflecting diverse theories of
the objectives of the law. Some calls for reform stress the difficulties encountered by
potential claimants. Because not all people who have accidents can find solvent
defendants from which to recover damages in the courts, P. S. Atiyah has called the
situation a "damages lottery." Consequently, in New Zealand, the government in the
1960s established a no-fault system of state compensation for accidents. Similar
proposals have been the subject of Command Papers in the UK and much academic
debate.

However, in the U.S. calls for reform have tended to be for drastic limitation on the
scope of tort law, a minimisation process on the lines of economic analysis. Anti-
trust damages have come under special scrutiny, and many people believe the
availability of punitive damages generally are a strain on the legal system.

Theoretical and policy considerations are central to fixing liability for pure economic
loss and of public bodies.

Overlap with criminal law

There is some overlap between criminal law and tort, since tort, a private action, used to
be used more than criminal laws in the past. For example, in English law an assault is
both a crime and a tort (a form of trespass to the person). A tort allows a person, usually
the victim, to obtain a remedy that serves their own purposes (for example by the
payment of damages to a person injured in a car accident, or the obtaining of injunctive
relief to stop a person interfering with their business). Criminal actions on the other hand
are pursued not to obtain remedies to assist a person – although often criminal courts
do have power to grant such remedies – but to remove their liberty on the state's behalf.
That explains why incarceration is usually available as a penalty for serious crimes, but
not usually for torts.

The more severe penalties available in criminal law also means that it requires a
higher burden of proof to be discharged than the related tort. For example, in the O. J.
Simpson murder trial, the jury was not convinced beyond reasonable doubt that O. J.
Simpson had committed the crime of murder; but in a later civil trial, the jury in that case
felt that there was sufficient evidence to meet the standard of preponderance of the
evidence required to prove the tort of wrongful death.

Many jurisdictions, especially the US, retain punitive elements in tort damages, for
example in anti-trust and consumer-related torts, making tort blur the line with criminal
acts. Also there are situations where, particularly if the defendant ignores the orders of
the court, a plaintiff can obtain a punitive remedy against the defendant, including
imprisonment. Some torts may have a public element – for example, public nuisance –
and sometimes actions in tort will be brought by a public body. Also, while criminal law
is primarily punitive, many jurisdictions have developed forms of monetary
compensation or restitution which criminal courts can directly order the defendant to pay
to the victim.

Tort by legal jurisdiction

Legal jurisdictions whose legal system developed from the English common law have
the concept of tortious liability. There are technical differences from one jurisdiction to
the next in proving the various torts

In addition, other legal systems have concepts comparable to torts. See, for instance,
the rabbinic category of Damages (Jewish law) (note though that while a few aspects of
this law are incorporated into Israeli law, tort law in Israel is technically similar to English
tort law - as enacted by British Mandate of Palestine authorities in 1944 and taking
effect in 1947, a year before Israel became a state).

Bibliography

 Deakin, Johnston and Markesinis (2008). Markesinis & Deakin's Tort Law.
Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-928246-3.

 Mark Lunney, Ken Oliphant, Tort Law - Texts, Cases (2003) 2nd Ed. Oxford
University Press, ISBN 0-19-926055-9

 van Gerven, W. et al. (eds) (2001). Cases, Materials and Text on National,
Supranational and International Tort Law. Oxford: Hart Publishing. ISBN 1-84113-
139-3.
 government code 31
(e) The certificate of authorization shall be designed to prevent forgeries and shall contain
a sequential identification number.
(f) This section shall become operative on January 1, 1992.
§ 8207.3. Certificates of authorization; authorization to provide seal; lost, misplaced,
damaged or otherwise unworkable seal
(a) The Secretary of State shall issue certificates of authorization with which a notary public
can obtain an official notary seal.
(b) A vendor or manufacturer is authorized to provide a notary with an official seal only
upon presentation by the notary public of a certificate of authorization.
(c) A vendor of official seals shall note the receipt of certificates of authorization and
sequential identification numbers of certificates presented by a notary public upon a certificate
of authorization.
(d) A copy of a certificate of authorization shall be retained by a vendor and the original, which
shall contain a sample impression of the seal issued to the notary public, shall be submitted to
the Secretary of State for verification and recordkeeping. The Secretary of State shall develop
guidelines for submitting certificates of authorization by vendors.
(e) Any notary whose official seal is lost, misplaced, destroyed, broken, damaged, or is
rendered otherwise unworkable shall immediately mail or deliver written notice of that fact
to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State, within five working days after receipt of the
notice, if requested by a notary, shall issue a certificate of authorization which a notary may
use to obtain a replacement seal.
(f) This section shall become operative on January 1, 1992.
§ 8207.4. Violations; penalties
(a) Any person who willfully violates any part of Section 8207.1, 8207.2, 8207.3, or 8207.4
shall be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500) for
each violation, which may be recovered in a civil action brought by the Attorney General or
the district attorney or city attorney, or by a city prosecutor in any city and county.
(b) The penalty provided by this section is not an exclusive remedy, and does not affect any
other relief or remedy provided by law.
(c) This section shall become operative on January 1, 1992.
§ 8208. Protest of bill or note for nonacceptance or nonpayment
The protest of a notary public acting in the course and scope of employment by a financial
institution, under his or her hand and official seal, of a bill of exchange or promissory note for
nonacceptance or nonpayment, specifying any of the following is prima facie evidence of the
facts recited therein:
(a) The time and place of presentment.
(b) The fact that presentment was made and the manner thereof.
(c) The cause or reason for protesting the bill.
(d) The demand made and the answer given, if any, or the fact that the drawee or acceptor
could not be found.
§ 8209. Resignation, disqualification or removal of notary; records delivered to clerk;
misdemeanor; death; destruction of records
(a) If any notary public resigns, is disqualified, removed from office, or allows his or her
appointment to expire without obtaining reappointment within 30 days, all notarial records and
papers shall be delivered within 30 days to the clerk of the county in which the notary public’s
current official oath of office is on file. If the notary public willfully fails or refuses to deliver
all notarial records and papers to the county clerk within 30 days, the person is guilty of a
misdemeanor and shall be personally liable for damages to any person injured by that action
or inaction.
Table of Contents
32 government code

(b) In the case of the death of a notary public, the personal representative of the deceased
shall promptly notify the Secretary of State of the death of the notary public and shall deliver
all notarial records and papers of the deceased to the clerk of the county in which the notary
public’s official oath of office is on file.
(c) After 10 years from the date of deposit with the county clerk, if no request for, or reference
to such records has been made, they may be destroyed upon order of court.
§ 8211. Fees
Fees charged by a notary public for the following services shall not exceed the fees prescribed
by this section.
(a) For taking an acknowledgment or proof of a deed, or other instrument, to include the seal
and the writing of the certificate, the sum of ten dollars ($10) for each signature taken.
(b) For administering an oath or affirmation to one person and executing the jurat, including
the seal, the sum of ten dollars ($10).
(c) For all services rendered in connection with the taking of any deposition, the sum of
twenty dollars ($20), and in addition thereto, the sum of five dollars ($5) for administering the
oath to the witness and the sum of five dollars ($5) for the certificate to the deposition.
(d) No fee may be charged to notarize signatures on vote by mail ballot identification
envelopes or other voting materials.
(e) For certifying a copy of a power of attorney under Section 4307 of the Probate Code the
sum of ten dollars ($10).
(f) In accordance with Section 6107, no fee may be charged to a United States military veteran
for notarization of an application or a claim for a pension, allotment, allowance, compensation,
insurance, or any other veteran’s benefit.
§ 8212. Bond; amount; form
Every person appointed a notary public shall execute an official bond in the sum of fifteen
thousand dollars ($15,000). The bond shall be in the form of a bond executed by an admitted
surety insurer and not a deposit in lieu of bond.
§ 8213. Bonds and oaths; filing; certificate; copy of oath as evidence; transfer to new
county; name changes; fees
(a) No later than 30 days after the beginning of the term prescribed in the commission, every
person appointed a notary public shall file an official bond and an oath of office in the office of
the county clerk of the county within which the person maintains a principal place of business
as shown in the application submitted to the Secretary of State, and the commission shall not
take effect unless this is done within the 30-day period. A person appointed to be a notary
public shall take and subscribe the oath of office either in the office of that county clerk or
before another notary public in that county. If the oath of office is taken and subscribed before
a notary public, the oath and bond may be filed with the county clerk by certified mail. Upon
the filing of the oath and bond, the county clerk shall immediately transmit to the Secretary
of State a certificate setting forth the fact of the filing and containing a copy of the official
oath, personally signed by the notary public in the form set forth in the commission and shall
immediately deliver the bond to the county recorder for recording. The county clerk shall
retain the oath of office for one year following the expiration of the term of the commission
for which the oath was taken, after which the oath may be destroyed or otherwise disposed
of. The copy of the oath, personally signed by the notary public, on file with the Secretary of
State may at any time be read in evidence with like effect as the original oath, without further
proof.
(b) If a notary public transfers the principal place of business from one county to another,
the notary public may file a new oath of office and bond, or a duplicate of the original bond
with the county clerk to which the principal place of business was transferred. If the notary
public elects to make a new filing, the notary public shall, within 30 days of the filing, obtain

Table of Contents
 government code 33
an official seal which shall include the name of the county to which the notary public has
transferred. In a case where the notary public elects to make a new filing, the same filing and
recording fees are applicable as in the case of the original filing and recording of the bond.
(c) If a notary public submits an application for a name change to the Secretary of State,
the notary public shall, within 30 days from the date an amended commission is issued, file a
new oath of office and an amendment to the bond with the county clerk in which the principal
place of business is located. The amended commission with the name change shall not take
effect unless the filing is completed within the 30-day period. The amended commission
with the name change takes effect the date the oath and amendment to the bond is filed with
the county clerk. If the principal place of business address was changed in the application
for name change, either a new or duplicate of the original bond shall be filed with the county
clerk with the amendment to the bond. The notary public shall, within 30 days of the filing,
obtain an official seal that includes the name of the notary public and the name of the county
to which the notary public has transferred, if applicable.
(d) The recording fee specified in Section 27361 of the Government Code shall be paid
by the person appointed a notary public. The fee may be paid to the county clerk who shall
transmit it to the county recorder.
(e) The county recorder shall record the bond and shall thereafter mail, unless specified to
the contrary, it to the person named in the instrument and, if no person is named, to the party
leaving it for recording.
§ 8213.5. Change in location or address of business or residence; notice
A notary public shall notify the Secretary of State by certified mail within 30 days as to any
change in the location or address of the principal place of business or residence. A notary
public shall not use a commercial mail receiving agency or post office box as his or her principal
place of business or residence, unless the notary public also provides the Secretary of State
with a physical street address as the principal place of residence. Willful failure to notify the
Secretary of State of a change of address shall be punishable as an infraction by a fine of not
more than five hundred dollars ($500).
§ 8213.6. Name changes; application; filing
If a notary public changes his or her name, the notary public shall complete an application
for name change form and file that application with the Secretary of State. Information on
this form shall be subject to the confidentiality provisions described in Section 8201.5. Upon
approval of the name change form, the Secretary of State shall issue a commission that reflects
the new name of the notary public. The term of the commission and commission number shall
remain the same. Willful failure to notify the Secretary of State of a name change shall be
punishable as an infraction by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500).
§ 8214. Misconduct or neglect
For the official misconduct or neglect of a notary public, the notary public and the sureties
on the notary public’s official bond are liable in a civil action to the persons injured thereby
for all the damages sustained.
§ 8214.1. Grounds for refusal, revocation or suspension of commission
The Secretary of State may refuse to appoint any person as notary public or may revoke or
suspend the commission of any notary public upon any of the following grounds:
(a) Substantial and material misstatement or omission in the application submitted to the
Secretary of State to become a notary public.
(b) Conviction of a felony, a lesser offense involving moral turpitude, or a lesser offense
of a nature incompatible with the duties of a notary public. A conviction after a plea of nolo
contendere is deemed to be a conviction within the meaning of this subdivision.
(c) Revocation, suspension, restriction, or denial of a professional license, if the revocation,
suspension, restriction, or denial was for misconduct based on dishonesty, or for any cause
substantially relating to the duties or responsibilities of a notary public.
Table of Contents
34 government code

(d) Failure to discharge fully and faithfully any of the duties or responsibilities required of
a notary public.
(e) When adjudicated liable for damages in any suit grounded in fraud, misrepresentation,
or for a violation of the state regulatory laws, or in any suit based upon a failure to discharge
fully and faithfully the duties as a notary public.
(f) The use of false or misleading advertising wherein the notary public has represented that
the notary public has duties, rights, or privileges that he or she does not possess by law.
(g) The practice of law in violation of Section 6125 of the Business and Professions Code.
(h) Charging more than the fees prescribed by this chapter.
(i) Commission of any act involving dishonesty, fraud, or deceit with the intent to
substantially benefit the notary public or another, or substantially injure another.
(j) Failure to complete the acknowledgment at the time the notary’s signature and seal are
affixed to the document.
(k) Failure to administer the oath or affirmation as required by paragraph (3) of subdivision
(a) of Section 8205.
(l) Execution of any certificate as a notary public containing a statement known to the notary
public to be false.
(m) Violation of Section 8223.
(n) Failure to submit any remittance payable upon demand by the Secretary of State under
this chapter or failure to satisfy any court-ordered money judgment, including restitution.
(o) Failure to secure the sequential journal of official acts, pursuant to Section 8206, or
the official seal, pursuant to Section 8207, or willful failure to report the theft or loss of the
sequential journal, pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 8206.
(p) Violation of Section 8219.5.
(q) Commission of an act in violation of Section 6203, 8214.2, 8225, or 8227.3 of the
Government Code or of Section 115, 470, 487, subdivision (a) of Section 487a, or Section
530.5 of the Penal Code.
(r) Willful failure to provide access to the sequential journal of official acts upon request
by a peace officer.
§ 8214.15. Civil penalties
(a) In addition to any commissioning or disciplinary sanction, a violation of subdivision (f),
(i), (l), (m), or (p) of Section 8214.1, or a willful violation of subdivision (d) of Section 8214.1,
is punishable by a civil penalty not to exceed one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500).
(b) In addition to any commissioning or disciplinary sanction, a violation of subdivision (h),
(j), or (k) of Section 8214.1, or a negligent violation of subdivision (d) of Section 8214.1 is
punishable by a civil penalty not to exceed seven hundred fifty dollars ($750).
(c) The civil penalty may be imposed by the Secretary of State if a hearing is not requested
pursuant to Section 8214.3. If a hearing is requested, the hearing officer shall make the
determination.
(d) Any civil penalties collected pursuant to this section shall be transferred to the General
Fund. It is the intent of the Legislature that to the extent General Fund moneys are raised by
penalties collected pursuant to this section, that money shall be made available to the Secretary
of State’s office to defray its costs of investigating and pursuing commissioning and monetary
remedies for violations of the notary public law.
§ 8214.2. Fraud relating to deed of trust; single-family residence; felony
(a) A notary public who knowingly and willfully with intent to defraud performs any notarial
act in relation to a deed of trust on real property consisting of a single-family residence
containing not more than four dwelling units, with knowledge that the deed of trust contains
any false statements or is forged, in whole or in part, is guilty of a felony.

Table of Contents
 government code 35
(b) The penalty provided by this section is not an exclusive remedy and does not affect any
other relief or remedy provided by law.
§ 8214.21. Failure to provide access to the sequential journal of notarial acts; civil
penalties
A notary public who willfully fails to provide access to the sequential journal of notarial acts
when requested by a peace officer shall be subject to a civil penalty not exceeding two thousand
five hundred dollars ($2,500). An action to impose a civil penalty under this subdivision may
be brought by the Secretary of State in an administrative proceeding or any public prosecutor
in superior court, and shall be enforced as a civil judgment. A public prosecutor shall inform
the secretary of any civil penalty imposed under this section.
§ 8214.23. Failure to obtain thumbprint; civil penalties; limitations
(a) A notary public who fails to obtain a thumbprint, as required by Section 8206, from a
party signing a document shall be subject to a civil penalty not exceeding two thousand five
hundred dollars ($2,500). An action to impose a civil penalty under this subdivision may be
brought by the Secretary of State in an administrative proceeding or any public prosecutor in
superior court, and shall be enforced as a civil judgment. A public prosecutor shall inform the
secretary of any civil penalty imposed under this section.
(b) Not withstanding any other limitation of time described in Section 802 of the Penal Code,
or any other provision of law, prosecution for a violation of this offense shall be commenced
within four years after discovery of the commission of the offense, or within four years after
the completion of the offense, whichever is later.
§ 8214.3. Hearing prior to denial or revocation of commission or imposition of civil
penalties; law governing; exceptions
Prior to a revocation or suspension pursuant to this chapter or after a denial of a commission,
or prior to the imposition of a civil penalty, the person affected shall have a right to a hearing on
the matter and the proceeding shall be conducted in accordance with Chapter 5 (commencing
with Section 11500) of Part 1 of Division 3, except that a person shall not have a right to a
hearing after a denial of an application for a notary public commission in either of the following
cases:
(a) The Secretary of State has, within one year previous to the application, and after
proceedings conducted in accordance with Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 11500) of
Part 1 of Division 3, denied or revoked the applicant’s application or commission.
(b) The Secretary of State has entered an order pursuant to Section 8214.4 finding that the
applicant has committed or omitted acts constituting grounds for suspension or revocation of
a notary public’s commission.
§ 8214.4. Resignation or expiration of commission not a bar to investigation or
disciplinary proceedings
Notwithstanding this chapter or Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 11500) of Part 1 of
Division 3, if the Secretary of State determines, after proceedings conducted in accordance
with Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 11500) of Part 1 of Division 3, that any notary
public has committed or omitted acts constituting grounds for suspension or revocation of a
notary public’s commission, the resignation or expiration of the notary public’s commission
shall not bar the Secretary of State from instituting or continuing an investigation or instituting
disciplinary proceedings. Upon completion of the disciplinary proceedings, the Secretary of
State shall enter an order finding the facts and stating the conclusion that the facts would or
would not have constituted grounds for suspension or revocation of the commission if the
commission had still been in effect.
§ 8214.5. Revocation of commission; filing copy with county clerk
Whenever the Secretary of State revokes the commission of any notary public, the Secretary
of State shall file with the county clerk of the county in which the notary public’s principal place

Table of Contents
36 government code

of business is located a copy of the revocation. The county clerk shall note such revocation
and its date upon the original record of such certificate.
§ 8214.8. Revocation upon certain convictions
Upon conviction of any offense in this chapter, or of Section 6203, or of any felony, of a
person commissioned as a notary public, in addition to any other penalty, the court shall revoke
the commission of the notary public, and shall require the notary public to surrender to the
court the seal of the notary public. The court shall forward the seal, together with a certified
copy of the judgment of conviction, to the Secretary of State.
§ 8216. Release of surety
When a surety of a notary desires to be released from responsibility on account of future
acts, the release shall be pursuant to Article 11 (commencing with Section 996.110), and not
by cancellation or withdrawal pursuant to Article 13 (commencing with Section 996.310), of
Chapter 2 of Title 14 of Part 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. For this purpose the surety shall
make application to the superior court of the county in which the notary public’s principal place
of business is located and the copy of the application and notice of hearing shall be served on
the Secretary of State as the beneficiary.
§ 8219.5. Advertising in language other than English; posting of notice relating to legal
advice and fees; translation of notary public into Spanish; suspension
(a) Every notary public who is not an attorney who advertises the services of a notary public
in a language other than English by signs or other means of written communication, with the
exception of a single desk plaque, shall post with that advertisement a notice in English and
in the other language which sets forth the following:
(1) This statement: I am not an attorney and, therefore, cannot give legal advice about
immigration or any other legal matters.
(2) The fees set by statute which a notary public may charge.
(b) The notice required by subdivision (a) shall be printed and posted as prescribed by the
Secretary of State.
(c) Literal translation of the phrase “notary public” into Spanish, hereby defined as “notario
publico” or “notario,” is prohibited. For purposes of this subdivision, “literal translation” of a
word or phrase from one language to another means the translation of a word or phrase without
regard to the true meaning of the word or phrase in the language which is being translated.
(d) The Secretary of State shall suspend for a period of not less than one year or revoke the
commission of any notary public who fails to comply with subdivision (a) or (c). However,
on the second offense the commission of such notary public shall be revoked permanently.
§ 8220. Rules and regulations
The Secretary of State may adopt rules and regulations to carry out the provisions of this
chapter.
The regulations shall be adopted in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act
(Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3).
§ 8221. Destruction, defacement or concealment of records or papers; misdemeanor;
liability for damages
(a) If any person shall knowingly destroy, deface, or conceal any records or papers belonging
to the office of a notary public, such person shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and be liable in
a civil action for damages to any person injured as a result of such destruction, defacing, or
concealment.
(b) Notwithstanding any other limitation of time described in Section 802 of the Penal Code,
or any other provision of law, prosecution for a violation of this offense shall be commenced
within four years after discovery of the commission of the offense, or within four years after
the completion of the offense, whichever is later.
Table of Contents
 government code 37
(c) The penalty provided by this section is not an exclusive remedy and does not affect any
other relief or remedy provided by law.
§ 8222. Injunction; reimbursement for expenses
(a) Whenever it appears to the Secretary of State that any person has engaged or is about to
engage in any acts or practices which constitute or will constitute a violation of any provision
of this chapter or any rule or regulation prescribed under the authority thereof, the Secretary
of State may apply for an injunction, and upon a proper showing, any court of competent
jurisdiction has power to issue a permanent or temporary injunction or restraining order to
enforce the provisions of this chapter, and any party to the action has the right to prosecute an
appeal from the order or judgment of the court.
(b) The court may order a person subject to an injunction or restraining order provided for
in this section to reimburse the Secretary of State for expenses incurred in the investigation
related to the petition. The Secretary of State shall refund any amount received as reimbursement
should the injunction or restraining order be dissolved by an appellate court.
§ 8223. Notary public with expertise in immigration matters; advertising status as
notary public; entry of information on forms; fee limitations
(a) No notary public who holds himself or herself out as being an immigration specialist,
immigration consultant or any other title or description reflecting an expertise in immigration
matters shall advertise in any manner whatsoever that he or she is a notary public.
(b) A notary public qualified and bonded as an immigration consultant under Chapter 19.5
(commencing with Section 22440) of Division 8 of the Business and Professions Code may
enter data, provided by the client, on immigration forms provided by a federal or state agency.
The fee for this service shall not exceed ten dollars ($10) per individual for each set of forms.
If notary services are performed in relation to the set of immigration forms, additional fees
may be collected pursuant to Section 8211. This fee limitation shall not apply to an attorney,
who is also a notary public, who is rendering professional services regarding immigration
matters.
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to exempt a notary public who enters data
on an immigration form at the direction of a client, or otherwise performs the services of an
immigration consultant, as defined by Section 22441 of the Business and Professions Code,
from the requirements of Chapter 19.5 (commencing with Section 22440) of Division 8 of
the Business and Professions Code. A notary public who is not qualified and bonded as an
immigration consultant under Chapter 19.5 (commencing with Section 22440) of Division 8
of the Business and Professions Code may not enter data provided by a client on immigration
forms nor otherwise perform the services of an immigration consultant.
§ 8224. Conflict of interest; financial or beneficial interest in transaction; exceptions
A notary public who has a direct financial or beneficial interest in a transaction shall not
perform any notarial act in connection with such transaction.
For purposes of this section, a notary public has a direct financial or beneficial interest in a
transaction if the notary public:
(a) With respect to a financial transaction, is named, individually, as a principal to the
transaction.
(b) With respect to real property, is named, individually, as a grantor, grantee, mortgagor,
mortgagee, trustor, trustee, beneficiary, vendor, vendee, lessor, or lessee, to the transaction.
For purposes of this section, a notary public has no direct financial or beneficial interest
in a transaction where the notary public acts in the capacity of an agent, employee, insurer,
attorney, escrow, or lender for a person having a direct financial or beneficial interest in the
transaction.
Table of Contents
38 government code

§ 8224.1. Writings, depositions or affidavits of notary public; prohibitions against proof

or taking by that notary public
A notary public shall not take the acknowledgment or proof of instruments of writing executed
by the notary public nor shall depositions or affidavits of the notary public be taken by the
notary public.
§ 8225. Improper notarial acts, solicitation, coercion or influence of performance;
misdemeanor
(a) Any person who solicits, coerces, or in any manner influences a notary public to perform
an improper notarial act knowing that act to be an improper notarial act, including any act
required of a notary public under Section 8206, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
(b) Notwithstanding any other limitation of time described in Section 802 of the Penal Code,
or any other provision of law, prosecution for a violation of this offense shall be commenced
within four years after discovery of the commission of the offense, or within four years after
the completion of the offense, whichever is later.
(c) The penalty provided by this section is not an exclusive remedy, and does not affect any
other relief or remedy provided by law.
§ 8227.1. Unlawful acts by one not a notary public; misdemeanor
It shall be a misdemeanor for any person who is not a duly commissioned, qualified, and
acting notary public for the State of California to do any of the following:
(a) Represent or hold himself or herself out to the public or to any person as being entitled
to act as a notary public.
(b) Assume, use or advertise the title of notary public in such a manner as to convey the
impression that the person is a notary public.
(c) Purport to act as a notary public.
§ 8227.3. Unlawful acts by one not a notary public; deeds of trust on single-family
residences; felony
Any person who is not a duly commissioned, qualified, and acting notary public who does
any of the acts prohibited by Section 8227.1 in relation to any document or instrument affecting
title to, placing an encumbrance on, or placing an interest secured by a mortgage or deed of
trust on, real property consisting of a single-family residence containing not more than four
dwelling units, is guilty of a felony.
§ 8228. Enforcement of chapter; examination of notarial books, records, etc.
The Secretary of State or a peace officer, as defined in Sections 830.1, 830.2, and 830.3 of
the Penal Code, possessing reasonable suspicion and acting in his or her official capacity and
within his or her authority, may enforce the provisions of this chapter through the examination
of a notary public’s books, records, letters, contracts, and other pertinent documents relating
to the official acts of the notary public.
§ 8228.1. Willful failure to perform duty or control notarial seal
(a) Any notary public who willfully fails to perform any duty required of a notary public
under Section 8206, or who willfully fails to keep the seal of the notary public under the direct
and exclusive control of the notary public, or who surrenders the seal of the notary public to
any person not otherwise authorized by law to possess the seal of the notary, shall be guilty of
a misdemeanor.
(b) Notwithstanding any other limitation of time described in Section 802 of the Penal Code
or any other provision of law, prosecution for a violation of this offense shall be commenced
within four years after discovery of the commission of the offense, or within four years after
the completion of the offense, whichever is later.
(c) The penalty provided by this section is not an exclusive remedy, and does not affect any
other relief or remedy provided by law.

Table of Contents
 government code 39
§ 8230. Identification of affiant; verification
If a notary public executes a jurat and the statement sworn or subscribed to is contained in
a document purporting to identify the affiant, and includes the birthdate or age of the person
and a purported photograph or finger or thumbprint of the person so swearing or subscribing,
the notary public shall require, as a condition to executing the jurat, that the person verify the
birthdate or age contained in the statement by showing either:
(a) A certified copy of the person’s birth certificate, or
(b) An identification card or driver’s license issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles.
For the purposes of preparing for submission of forms required by the United States
Immigration and Naturalization Service, and only for such purposes, a notary public may
also accept for identification any documents or declarations acceptable to the United States
Immigration and Naturalization Service.
* * *
§ 1360. Necessity of taking constitutional oath
Unless otherwise provided, before any officer enters on the duties of his office, he shall take
and subscribe the oath or affirmation set forth in Section 3 of Article XX of the Constitution
of California.
§ 1362. Administration by authorized officer
Unless otherwise provided, the oath may be taken before any officer authorized to administer
oaths.
§ 6100. Performance of services; officers; notaries public
Officers of the state, or of a county or judicial district, shall not perform any official services
unless upon the payment of the fees prescribed by law for the performance of the services,
except as provided in this chapter.
This section shall not be construed to prohibit any notary public, except a notary public
whose fees are required by law to be remitted to the state or any other public agency, from
performing notarial services without charging a fee.
§ 6106. Pensions
Neither the State, nor any county or city, nor any public officer or body acting in his official
capacity on behalf of the State, any county, or city, including notaries public, shall receive any
fee or compensation for services rendered in an affidavit, or application relating to the securing
of a pension, or the payment of a pension voucher, or any matter relating thereto.
§ 6107. Veterans
(a) No public entity, including the state, a county, city, or other political subdivision, nor
any officer or employee thereof, including notaries public, shall demand or receive any fee or
compensation for doing any of the following:
(1) Recording, indexing, or issuing certified copies of any discharge, certificate of service,
certificate of satisfactory service, notice of separation, or report of separation of any member
of the Armed Forces of the United States.
(2) Furnishing a certified copy of, or searching for, any public record that is to be used in an
application or claim for a pension, allotment, allowance, compensation, insurance (including
automatic insurance), or any other benefits under any act of Congress for service in the Armed
Forces of the United States or under any law of this state relating to veterans’ benefits.
(3) Furnishing a certified copy of, or searching for, any public record that is required by the
Veterans Administration to be used in determining the eligibility of any person to participate
in benefits made available by the Veterans Administration.
(4) Rendering any other service in connection with an application or claim referred to in
paragraph (2) or (3).
Table of Contents
40 government code

(b) A certified copy of any record referred to in subdivision (a) may be made available only
to one of the following:
(1) The person who is the subject of the record upon presentation of proper photo
identification.
(2) A family member or legal representative of the person who is the subject of the record
upon presentation of proper photo identification and certification of their relationship to the
subject of the record.
(3) A county office that provides veteran’s benefits services upon written request of that
office.
(4) A United States official upon written request of that official. A public officer or employee
is liable on his or her official bond for failure or refusal to render the services.
§ 6108. Oaths of office; claim against counties
No officer of a county or judicial district shall charge or receive any fee or compensation for
administering or certifying the oath of office or for filing or swearing to any claim or demand
against any county in the State.
§ 6109. Receipt of fees; written account; officer liability
Every officer of a county or judicial district, upon receiving any fees for official duty or
service, may be required by the person paying the fees to make out in writing and to deliver
to the person a particular account of the fees. The account shall specify for what the fees,
respectively, accrued, and the officer shall receipt it. If the officer refuses or neglects to do so
when required, he is liable to the person paying the fees in treble the amount so paid.
§ 6110. Performance of services following payment; officer liability
Upon payment of the fees required by law, the officer shall perform the services required.
For every failure or refusal to do so, the officer is liable upon his official bond.
§ 6203. False certificate or writing by officer
(a) Every officer authorized by law to make or give any certificate or other writing is guilty
of a misdemeanor if he or she makes and delivers as true any certificate or writing containing
statements which he or she knows to be false.
(b) Notwithstanding any other limitation of time described in Section 802 of the Penal Code,
or any other provision of law, prosecution for a violation of this offense shall be commenced
within four years after discovery of the commission of the offense, or within four years after
the completion of the offense, whichever is later.
(c) The penalty provided by this section is not an exclusive remedy, and does not affect any
other relief or remedy provided by law.
§ 6800. Computation of time in which act is to be done
The time in which any act provided by law is to be done is computed by excluding the first
day, and including the last, unless the last day is a holiday, and then it is also excluded.
§ 27287. Acknowledgment of execution or proof by subscribing witness required before
recording; exceptions
* * * before an instrument can be recorded its execution shall be acknowledged by the person
executing it, or if executed by a corporation, by its president or secretary or other person
executing it on behalf of the corporation, or, except for any power of attorney, quitclaim deed,
grant deed, mortgage, deed of trust, security agreement, or other document affecting real
property, proved by subscribing witness or as provided in Sections 1198 and 1199 of the Civil
Code, and the acknowledgment or proof certified as prescribed by law. This section shall not
apply to a trustee’s deed resulting from a decree of foreclosure, or a nonjudicial foreclosure
pursuant to Section 2924 of the Civil Code, or to a deed of reconveyance.

Table of Contents
 government code 41
§ 66433. Content and form; application of article
The content and form of final maps shall be governed by the provisions of this article.
§ 66436. Statement of consent; necessity; exceptions; nonliability for omission of
signature; notary acknowledgment
(a) A statement, signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in
the subdivided real property, consenting to the preparation and recordation of the final map is
required, * * *
(c) A notary acknowledgment shall be deemed complete for recording without the official
seal of the notary, so long as the name of the notary, the county of the notary’s principal
place of business, and the notary’s commission expiration date are typed or printed below or
immediately adjacent to the notary’s signature in the acknowledgment.

Table of Contents
2 Traian Pop – „Drept procesual penal ”, vol I, introductory part, Tipografia Naţională S.A. Cluj, 1946,
p. 298;
3 The criminal processual principles have been defined as general orientations of the criminal case which
reflect the conception and the criminal processual policy principles of the state at a certain period of its
development (Dicţionar de procedură penală, George Antoniu, Nicolae Volonciu and Nicolae Zaharia,
Editura Ştiinţifică şi Enciclopedică, Bucureşti, 1988, p. 217);
4 Ion Tanoviceanu – „Tratat de drept şi procedură penală ”, vol. IV, Editura Curentul Judiciar, 1927, p
26;
5 Traian Pop – op. cit., p. 298;
6 Nicolae Volonciu – „Drept procesual penal ” - Editura Didactică şi Pedagogică Bucureşti, 1972, p. 45;
7 Grigore Teodoru – „Drept procesual penal ”, general part, Tiparul Universităţii Alexandru loan Cuza
din Iaşi, 1986, p. 38;
8 Vintilă Dongoroz and others – „Explicaţii teoretice ale Codului de procedura penală ”, vol I, general
part, Editura Academiei R.S.R, Bucureşti, 1975, p 40;
9 Ion Neagu – „Drept procesual penal ”, Treaty, Editura GLOBAL LEX, 2002, p. 83;
10 Adrian Ştefan Tulbure şi Angela Maria Tatu – „Tratat de drept procesual penal ” - Editura ALL
BECK, 2001, p 25;
11 Nicolae Volonciu – „Tratat de procedură penală ”, general part, vol. I,second edition, Editura
PAIDEIA, p. 76;
12
Vasile Păvăleanu - „Drept procesual penal ”- general part, Editura Lumina Lex, 2001, p. 50;
13
Ion Tanoviceanu - op. cit. , p. 26;
14
Traian Pop - op. cit., p. 298;
15
Ion Tanoviceanu - op. cit., p. 26;
16
Vicenzo Manzini - lawyer, university professor of law and criminal procedure at several Italian
universities (Udine, Veneţia, Ferrara, Sassari, Siena, Pavia, Torino şi Padova). He was a man of strong
moral principles, associated to a traditional and uncompromising ethics. He elaborated the project of the
criminal procedure code . Together with Arturo Roco he was a founder member of the Technical-
juridical Direction and demonstrated in his works the importance of the history of the criminal law. He
was a co-director of << Annals of Law and Criminal Procedure >>.He wrote several treaties and courses
of criminal law and procedure;
17
Vicenzo Manzini – Treaty of Italian Processual Criminal Law, Torino, Editura Uniunea Tipografică,
1931 - 1932, vol. I, p. 184-214;
18
Eugenio Florian – lawyer and university professor of criminal law and criminal procedure in Italy,
author of several traties and courses of criminal processual law (Criminal Processual Law, second
edition, Torino, 1939);
19
Eugenio Florian – Criminal Processual Law, second edition ,Unione Tipografico Editrice Torinese,
1938,p. 52-54;
20
Traian Pop - op. cit., p. 299;
21
Gheorghe Stroie – „Regulile de bază ale procesului penal român în lumina exigenţelor europene ”,
Revista de drept penal nr.1/2000, p. 104 –106;
22
Art. 5 index 1 has been introduced by law nr. 32 from 16-th of November 1990, published in the
OfficialGazette nr. 128 from 17-th of November 1990 << Any person who is in the course of a criminal
pursuit or case must be treated with the respect of his human dignity. The submission of such person to
torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatments is punished by the law >>;
23
Art. 11 – International and internal law (1) The Romanian state pledges itself to comply exactly and
appropriately with the incumbent obligations from the membership treaties. (2) The treaties ratified by
the Parliament are part of the internal law, according to the rules in force.
24
Nicolae Volonciu – „Drept procesual penal ”, Editura didactică şi pedagogică, Bucureşti, 1972, p. 73;
25
Constantin Mitrache „Drept penal român”, general part, four-th edition, Casa de editură si presă Şansa,
Bucureşti, 2000, p. 30.

212