Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 45-17-8 | Car Wreck Lawyer

TITLE 45 PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES

Section 17. Notaries Public, 45-17-1 through 45-17-34.

ARTICLE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS

45-17-8. Powers and duties generally.

  1. Notaries public shall have authority to:
    1. Witness or attest signature or execution of deeds and other written instruments;
    2. Take acknowledgments;
    3. Administer oaths and affirmations in all matters incidental to their duties as commercial officers and all other oaths and affirmations which are not by law required to be administered by a particular officer;
    4. Witness affidavits upon oath or affirmation;
    5. Take verifications upon oath or affirmation;
    6. Make certified copies, provided that the document presented for copying is an original document and is neither a public record nor a publicly recorded document certified copies of which are available from an official source other than a notary and provided that the document was photocopied under supervision of the notary; and
    7. Perform such other acts as they are authorized to perform by other laws of this state.
  2. No notary shall be obligated to perform a notarial act if he feels such act is:
    1. For a transaction which the notary knows or suspects is illegal, false, or deceptive;
    2. For a person who is being coerced;
    3. For a person whose demeanor causes compelling doubts about whether the person knows the consequences of the transaction requiring the notarial act; or
    4. In situations which impugn and compromise the notary's impartiality, as specified in subsection (c) of this Code section.
  3. A notary shall be disqualified from performing a notarial act in the following situations which impugn and compromise the notary's impartiality:
    1. When the notary is a signer of the document which is to be notarized; or
    2. When the notary is a party to the document or transaction for which the notarial act is required.
  4. A notary public shall not execute a notarial certificate containing a statement known by the notary to be false nor perform any action with an intent to deceive or defraud.
  5. In performing any notarial act, a notary public shall confirm the identity of the document signer, oath taker, or affirmant based on personal knowledge or on satisfactory evidence.
  6. The signature of a notary public documenting a notarial act shall not be evidence to show that such notary public had knowledge of the contents of the document so signed, other than those specific contents which constitute the signature, execution, acknowledgment, oath, affirmation, affidavit, verification, or other act which the signature of that notary public documents, nor is a certification by a notary public that a document is a certified or true copy of an original document evidence to show that such notary public had knowledge of the contents of the document so certified.

(Ga. L. 1863-64, p. 58, § 2; Code 1863, § 1451; Code 1868, § 1508; Code 1873, § 1502; Code 1882, § 1502; Civil Code 1895, § 503; Civil Code 1910, § 621; Code 1933, § 71-108; Ga. L. 1947, p. 1108, § 1; Ga. L. 1984, p. 1105, § 1; Ga. L. 1986, p. 1446, §§ 5, 6; Ga. L. 1987, p. 1113, § 1.)

Code Commission notes.

- Pursuant to Code Section 28-9-5, in 1986, "acknowledgments" was substituted for "acknowledgements" in paragraph (a)(2).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Authority to attest affidavits.

- At one time there appears to have been doubt as to the power of notaries to attest affidavits in this state. It was removed by the Act of 1863, codified in this section. That statute, however, was properly in part declaratory of a power already recognized. Simpson v. Wicker, 120 Ga. 418, 47 S.E. 965, 1 Ann. Cas. 542 (1904).

An affidavit to require bail in trover may be made before a notary public. Jowers v. Blandy, 58 Ga. 379 (1877).

An affidavit is sufficient as a basis for framing an accusation in a criminal court, although made before a commercial notary public; the question remains, however, whether such an affidavit would furnish a sufficient foundation for the issuance of an arrest warrant. Mitchell v. State, 126 Ga. 84, 54 S.E. 931 (1906).

Notaries public do not have authority to administer the oath required for an affidavit on which a dispossessory warrant is issued. Young v. Cowles, 128 Ga. App. 770, 197 S.E.2d 864 (1973).

Action not requiring a seal.

- In attesting an affidavit in forma pauperis, accompanying a bill of exceptions, a notary public need not fix a seal, since it is not such a material act, under this section, as requires a seal for its authentication. Collins v. State, 206 Ga. 95, 55 S.E.2d 599 (1949).

Notary also signing will as witness.

- It was error to grant summary judgment to a caveator in a will contest in which the first of three witnesses signed both as a witness and as a notary. Even if the first witness did not intend to act as a witness, if the first witness and a second witness signed the will in the decedent's presence, then O.C.G.A. § 53-4-20(b), requiring two witnesses, was satisfied even if a third witness signed outside the decedent's presence; furthermore, although O.C.G.A. § 45-17-8(c)(1) disqualified a witness from also acting as a notary, the first witness's disqualification as a notary was immaterial because the will was not a self-proving one requiring a notary. Land v. Burkhalter, 283 Ga. 54, 656 S.E.2d 834 (2008).

Conflict of interest disqualifies notaries.

- Having established themselves as active officers and spokespersons for a recall effort, notaries public became more than generally interested electors. Hence, any recall petition pages with affidavits notarized by the notaries or either of them were properly disregarded. Howell v. Tidwell, 258 Ga. 246, 368 S.E.2d 311 (1988).

A notary who circulated part of a nominating petition and also signed the petition was disqualified from notarizing circulators' affidavits on the petition, and it was proper to disqualify those pages with affidavits notarized by such person. Poppell v. Lanier, 264 Ga. App. 473, 448 S.E.2d 194 (1994).

Disqualification of notary.

- An affidavit, probating a mortgage, taken before the attorney of the mortgagee, who is a notary public, is not a legal affidavit, and a mortgage recorded on such probate is not legally recorded. Nichols v. Hampton, 46 Ga. 253 (1872).

No private civil cause of action.

- Bank did not have a viable civil cause of action under the notary statute against an attorney who allegedly falsely attested that guarantee agreements were signed in the attorney's presence as, even when combined with the general statutory principles of tort law, notaries had a duty to the public that did not support an actionable claim. Branch Banking & Trust Co. v. Morrisroe, 323 Ga. App. 248, 746 S.E.2d 859 (2013).

Cited in Dalton City Co. v. Haddock, 54 Ga. 584 (1875); Wright v. Davis, 120 Ga. 670, 48 S.E. 170 (1904); Shuler v. State, 125 Ga. 778, 54 S.E. 689 (1906); Singletary v. Watson, 136 Ga. 241, 71 S.E. 162 (1911); Peters v. Hyatt Legal Servs., 211 Ga. App. 587, 440 S.E.2d 222 (1993); Lewy v. Beazley, 270 Ga. 11, 507 S.E.2d 721 (1998); Sambor v. Kelley, 271 Ga. 133, 518 S.E.2d 120 (1999).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

A wife who is a notary may witness her husband's signature. 1970 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U70-213.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

1A Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Acknowledgments, § 2.

ALR.

- Proof of identity upon which officer certifying to an acknowledgment is justified in acting, 10 A.L.R. 871.

Right of notary who protests paper to change or contradict his certificate, 28 A.L.R. 543.

Sufficiency of certificate of acknowledgment, 29 A.L.R. 919.

Measure of damages for false or incomplete certificate by notary public, 13 A.L.R.3d 1039.

Disqualification of attorney, otherwise qualified, to take oath or acknowledgment from client, 21 A.L.R.3d 483.

Admissibility, in action against notary public, of evidence as to usual business practice of notary public of identifying person seeking certificate of acknowledgment, 59 A.L.R.3d 1327.

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 45-17-8

Total Results: 8  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Anthony v. Am. Gen. Fin. Servs., Inc., 697 S.E.2d 166 (Ga. 2010).

Cited 62 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jun 28, 2010 | 287 Ga. 448, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 2051

...[an] employee of a bank or other corporation" to engage in most notarial acts regarding the corporation). To the contrary, our notary statutes recognize the view this Court took in May v. Jones that notaries are public officials whose duties to the public are superior to any private duties to their employers. See OCGA § 45-17-8(b) *170 ("No notary shall be obligated to perform a notarial act if he feels such act is: (1) For a transaction which the notary knows or suspects is illegal, false, or deceptive; (2) For a person who is being coerced; (3) For a person whose demeanor causes compelling doubts about whether the person knows the consequences of the transaction requiring the notarial act; or (4) In situations which impugn and compromise the notary's impartiality. ..."); OCGA § 45-17-8(d) ("A notary public shall not execute a notarial certificate containing a statement known by the notary to be false nor perform any action with an intent to deceive or defraud.")....
...tification of a maximum fee that can be charged for a given act. See OCGA § 45-17-11. Here, the $350 notary fee was set out in a loan agreement drafted by American General; the notary public was not responsible for the content of the contract. OCGA § 45-17-8(f) (notary's signature does not evidence knowledge of document's contents)....
Copy

Howell v. Tidwell, 368 S.E.2d 311 (Ga. 1988).

Cited 11 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | May 26, 1988 | 258 Ga. 246

...If this court allowed these pages to be counted despite affidavits known to be false, that confidence in that process will be shattered. 2. The record also shows that some of the affidavits of the recall petition pages were notarized (required by OCGA § 21-4-7 (e)) by the appellants, who are notaries public. OCGA § 45-17-8 (c) provides: A notary shall be disqualified from performing a notarial act in the following situations which impugn and compromise the notary's impartiality: (1) When the notary is a signer of the document which is to be notarized; or *24...
Copy

Sambor v. Kelley, 518 S.E.2d 120 (Ga. 1999).

Cited 10 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | May 3, 1999 | 271 Ga. 133, 99 Fulton County D. Rep. 1767

...er for the giving of the oath is a violation of due process because there was no reasonable notice of this formality. Sambor argues that the only notice of the requirement is found in Carnes and that Carnes is not referenced in the citations to OCGA § 45-17-8, which defines the powers and duties of notaries....
Copy

Poppell v. Lanier, 264 Ga. 473 (Ga. 1994).

Cited 7 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Sep 22, 1994 | 448 S.E.2d 194

...tition and obtained signatures of others interested in having appellant’s name placed on the ballot. Ms. Poppell’s participation as a circulator of the nomination petition was sufficient to disqualify her from performing a notarial act, see OCGA § 45-17-8 (c), and thus appellees properly disregarded the pages with affidavits Ms....
Copy

In re Dorer, 819 S.E.2d 7 (Ga. 2018).

Cited 4 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Sep 10, 2018 | 304 Ga. 442

...with any state or local government agency) and OCGA § 16-10-20.1 (making it a felony to file false documents in a court of this state).1 Dorer entered a negotiated plea to the charges and pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor offense of violating OCGA § 45-17-8 (e) : "In performing any notarial act, a notary public shall confirm the identity of the document signer, oath taker, or affirmant based on personal knowledge or on satisfactory evidence."2 Dorer later filed this petition for voluntary dis...
...But no admission in the petition supports such a conclusion. Indeed, the petition is silent about whether Dorer had permission to sign the verification. Dorer does admit in the petition that he entered a plea of guilty to a criminal violation of OCGA § 45-17-8 (e), which requires the notary to confirm the identity of the document signer, oath taker, or affirmant. But that admission does not justify an inference that Dorer lacked the permission of his client to sign the verification, because OCGA § 45-17-8 (e) requires a notary merely to confirm the "identity of the document signer, oath taker, or affirmant" (emphasis supplied), and it says nothing about a notary confirming the authority of a person signing a document under a claim of authority....
...a Review Panel reprimand is not appropriate. I believe, however, that Dorer's admissions show that he violated Rule 8.4 (a) (4), and a Review Panel reprimand is an appropriate sanction. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent. Dorer pled guilty to OCGA § 45-17-8 (e),9 but he disclaimed any conduct involving moral turpitude in his petition for voluntary discipline. Rule 8.4 (a) (4) applies to professional conduct involving "dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation," like acts prohibited by OCGA § 45-17-8 (e)....
...See In the Matter of Nicholson , 299 Ga. 737, 741, 791 S.E.2d 776 (2016). "In performing any notarial act, a notary public shall confirm the identity of the document signer, oath taker, or affirmant based on personal knowledge or on satisfactory evidence." OCGA § 45-17-8 (e).
Copy

Lewy v. Beazley, 270 Ga. 11 (Ga. 1998).

Cited 4 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Oct 22, 1998 | 507 S.E.2d 721, 98 Fulton County D. Rep. 3477

...relief seeking to reverse an administrative denial of a nomination petition “may be taken within five days [from] the entry thereof to the Supreme Court.” Thus, this Court clearly has jurisdiction over this matter. OCGA § 21-2-183 (b). OCGA § 45-17-8 (c)....
Copy

In the Matter of David Thomas Dorer, 304 Ga. 442 (Ga. 2018).

Cited 3 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Sep 10, 2018

...th any state or local government agency) and OCGA § 16-10-20.1 (making it a felony to file false documents in a court of this state).1 Dorer entered a negotiated plea to the charges and pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor offense of violating OCGA § 45-17-8 (e): “In performing any notarial act, a notary public shall confirm the identity of the document signer, oath taker, or affirmant based on personal knowledge or on satisfactory evidence.”2 Dorer later filed this petitio...
...But no admission in the petition supports such a conclusion. Indeed, the petition is silent about whether Dorer had permission to sign the verification. Dorer does admit in the petition that he entered a plea of guilty to a criminal violation of OCGA § 45-17-8 (e), which requires the notary to confirm the identity of the document signer, oath taker, or affirmant. But that admission does not justify an inference that Dorer lacked the permission of his client to sign the verification, because OCGA § 45-17-8 5 (e) requires a notary merely to confirm the “identity of the document signer, oath taker, or affirmant” (emphasis supplied), and it says nothing about a notary confirming the authority of a person signing a document under a claim of authority....
...concomitantly, a Review Panel reprimand is not appropriate. I believe, however, that Dorer’s admissions show that he violated Rule 8.4 (a) (4), and a Review Panel reprimand is an appropriate sanction. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent. Dorer pled guilty to violating OCGA § 45-17-8 (e),9 but he disclaimed any conduct involving moral turpitude in his petition for voluntary discipline. Rule 8.4 (a) (4) applies to professional conduct involving “dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation,” like acts prohibited by OCGA § 45-17-8 (e). We have found the appropriate sanction for this type of violation of Rule 8.4 9 “In performing any notarial act, a notary public shall confirm the identity of the document signer, oath taker, or affirmant based on personal knowledge or on satisfactory evidence.” OCGA § 45-17-8 (e). (a) (4) is a Review Panel reprimand....
Copy

Land v. Burkhalter, 283 Ga. 54 (Ga. 2008).

Cited 3 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jan 28, 2008 | 656 S.E.2d 834, 2008 Fulton County D. Rep. 220

...Hopkins was a witness and if she and Ms. Couey signed the will in the presence of the Testatrix, then the fact that Mr. Land signed in the dining room is immaterial. OCGA § 53-4-20 (b) only requires two competent witnesses. Caveator correctly asserts that OCGA § 45-17-8 (c) (1) disqualifies Ms. Hopkins from serving as both a notary and a witness to the will’s execution. However, her disqualification as a notary is immaterial to her qualification to serve as a witness to the will. In fact, her disqualification under OCGA § 45-17-8 (c) (1) is not material to any aspect of the execution of this will, since the services of a notary were unnecessary because this was not a self-proving will as authorized by OCGA § 53-4-24. There is a dispute in the evidence as to wheth...