Howard J. Kaplan and Brenda L. Kaplan, et al. - Page 43

                                       - 43 -                                         
          executed prior to February 1, 2002, the effective date of the               
          2002 amendment, and was not acknowledged in the presence of, or             
          was not attested by, two witnesses, but was signed by the grantor           
          and acknowledged by the grantor before a judge or clerk of a                
          court of record in Ohio, or a county auditor, county engineer,              
          notary public, or a mayor, who certified the acknowledgment and             
          subscribed his or her name to the certificate of the acknowledg-            
          ment, as required by section 5301.01 of the Ohio Revised Code in            
          effect in 1999, inter alia, the instrument is deemed executed               
          properly and is presumed to be valid unless the signature of the            
          grantor was obtained by fraud.  Ohio Rev. Code Ann. sec. 5301.01            
          (LexisNexis Supp. 2005).                                                    
               On the record before us, we find that the bill of sale that            
          Mr. Kaplan executed on behalf of KQC on December 31, 1999, was              
          not properly executed in accordance with section 5301.01 of the             
          Ohio Revised Code in effect in 1999 and, as pertinent here, the             
          2002 amendment.  That is because the signing of the bill of sale            
          by Mr. Kaplan on behalf of KQC was not acknowledged by him on               
          behalf of KQC before a judge or clerk of a court of record in               
          Ohio, a county auditor, county engineer, notary public, or mayor,           
          who certified the acknowledgment and subscribed his or her name             
          to the certificate of the acknowledgment.                                   

               17(...continued)                                                       
          constitute a deed for purposes of Ohio law.  Thus, we shall                 
          proceed on the assumption that such document may constitute a               
          deed for purposes of Ohio law.                                              




Page:  Previous  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011