- 11 - claim the dependency exemption deductions, due to the absence of the language “will not claim” from the settlement agreement. We find that Ms. Johnmeyer’s notarized signature indicates more than a mere acknowledgment of the form of the settlement agreement. The certification of her signature by a notary public imports prima facie truth of its own pertinent recitals. See Estate of Williams v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1955-321. The notary certification not only affirms that Ms. Johnmeyer did in fact state “that she is the Petitioner in the above-entitled cause” when she signed the settlement agreement, but also that she “executed the foregoing Agreement as her free act and deed”, thereby agreeing that petitioner would have the dependency exemption deductions when court ordered and monitored child support payments were up to date. We find that the custodial parent’s certified signature on the settlement agreement signifies her sworn agreement to the settlement agreement’s contents, including petitioner’s entitlement to the dependency exemption deductions. See Miller v. Commissioner, supra at 193. But, even the proper execution of a Form 8332, which includes the literal language “agree not to claim”, is no guarantee that the custodial parent does not intend to claim a dependency exemption deduction when he or she has agreed that the noncustodial parent is entitled to the deduction, and thus avoid involving the Service and this Court in a dependency exemptionPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011