Posted by PAW/FL on May 14, 2009, 11:23 am, in reply to "Re: "Attorney Only" may be in jeopardy" This post is strictly the opinion of the author
24.26.7.45
--Previous Message--
: Could you explain this in kindergarten
: terms what this means?
It means, the way I read it, is that performing "witness only closings" (that's what the signing agents job is often called) is not the 'practice of law' the way the Massachusetts Bar Association and the MA Real Estate Bar Association define "UPL". In other words, notary signing agents hired by NREIS to do "witness only closings" were not guilty of UPL because the way the MA code was written, it unfairly impacts interstate commerce.
Whether or not the UPL wording in "attorney only states" will be reworded and continue to restrict NSAs from doing signings, or the UPL rulings and statutes currently in place will be deleted, allowing NSAs to do signings in those states that are currently restricted, is open for discussion. The legal process to change existing laws, statutes and orders can take years. But this court ruling is a start in getting states like MA and SC and GA to re-think their rulings about notary signings.
and may not reflect the opinion of the management nor of any other user of this forum.
Visit my website
Email me 
I am not an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Florida,
and I may not give legal advice or accept fees for legal advice.
Message Thread:
« Back to thread