- 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 exemption
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011