A. A notarial act shall be evidenced by a certificate signed and dated by a notarial officer. The certificate shall include identification of the jurisdiction in which the notarial act is performed and the title of the office of the notarial officer and may include the official stamp or seal of office. If the officer is a notary public, the certificate shall also indicate the date of expiration, if any, of the commission of office, but omission of that information may subsequently be corrected. If the officer is a commissioned officer on active duty in the military service of the United States, it shall also include the officer's rank.

B. A certificate of a notarial act is sufficient if it meets the requirements of Subsection A of this section and it:

(1) is in the short form set forth in Section 8 [14-14-8 NMSA 1978] of the Uniform Law on Notarial Acts;

(2) is in a form otherwise prescribed by the law of this state;

(3) is in a form prescribed by the laws or regulations applicable in the place in which the notarial act was performed; or

(4) sets forth the actions of the notarial officer and those are sufficient to meet the requirements of the designated notarial act.

C. By executing a certificate of a notarial act, the notarial officer certifies that he has made the determinations required by Section 2 [14-14-2 NMSA 1978] of the Uniform Law on Notarial Acts.

History: Laws 1993, ch. 281, § 7.

Cross references. — For provisions relating to conveyances generally, see 47-1-1 NMSA 1978 et seq.

Acknowledgment not part of instrument. — Although an acknowledgment is required before an instrument may be filed, in the absence of a statute so providing, an acknowledgment is not a part of an instrument and is not necessary to its validity. Garrett Bldg. Ctrs., Inc. v. Hale, 1981-NMSC-009, 95 N.M. 450, 623 P.2d 570.

Recorded and filed lien, lacking acknowledgment, valid and binding. — A valid materialmen's lien which lacked an acknowledgment, but had been filed and recorded, was valid and binding as between the parties to an action on the lien. Garrett Bldg. Ctrs., Inc. v. Hale, 1981-NMSC-009, 95 N.M. 450, 623 P.2d 570.

Sufficiency of acknowledgment. — Substantial compliance with this section in regard to acknowledgment is sufficient. Byers Bros. & Co. Live Stock Comm'n Corp. v. McKenzie, 1925-NMSC-015, 30 N.M. 487, 239 P. 525.

The acknowledgment of a member of a copartnership was sufficient where form used expressed fact of acknowledgment being made, and also that the person making it was known to the official making the acknowledgment. Byers Bros. & Co. Live Stock Comm'n Corp. v. McKenzie, 1925-NMSC-015, 30 N.M. 487, 239 P. 525.

Substantial compliance. — Mortgagee substantially complied with the requirements for acknowledgment of a mortgage where the mortgage showed the name of the corporation appearing just above the form of acknowledgment and the only information not appearing was the state of incorporation of the acknowledging corporation. Security Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Commercial Inv., Ltd., 92 B.R. 488 (Bankr. D.N.M. 1988).

Insufficient compliance. — An acknowledgment in the following form: "This mortgage was acknowledged before me by O.G. Keysor, this 11th day of April, 1911," was invalid. It was not a substantial compliance with the statutory requirements. Vorenberg v. Bosserman, 1913-NMSC-005, 17 N.M. 433, 130 P. 438.

Missing recitals. — Where there was no recital that the mortgagor acknowledged that he executed the instrument, or that the person who appeared before the notary was the person described in and who executed the instrument, the acknowledgment was insufficient. Vorenberg v. Bosserman, 1913-NMSC-005, 17 N.M. 433, 130 P. 438.

Absence of confirmation of correctness. — Where claim of mechanic's lien filed by plumbing company was signed in the name of the company by a partner, an acknowledgment to the claim in the form provided was an insufficient compliance with the requirements of verification under 48-2-6 NMSA 1978 where there was a total absence of any words confirming correctness, truth or authenticity by affidavit, oath, deposition or otherwise. Home Plumbing & Contracting Co. v. Pruitt, 1962-NMSC-075, 70 N.M. 182, 372 P.2d 378.

Limitation on acknowledgment to mechanic's lien. — Acknowledgment to a mechanic's lien in the form provided by this section insufficient to comply with the verification requirement of 48-2-6 NMSA 1978. N.M. Properties, Inc. v. Lennox Indus., Inc., 1980-NMSC-087, 95 N.M. 64, 618 P.2d 1228.

Law reviews. — For article, "Attachment in New Mexico - Part I," see 1 Nat. Resources J. 303 (1961).

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 1 Am. Jur. 2d Acknowledgments § 26; 23 Am. Jur. 2d Deeds § 106.

Necessity and sufficiency of officer's jurat or certificate as to oath, 1 A.L.R. 1568, 116 A.L.R. 587.

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

Formal acknowledgment of instrument by one whose name is signed thereto by another as an adoption of the signature, 57 A.L.R. 525.

Option in lease for extension of term or for a new lease as creating necessity for acknowledgment, 161 A.L.R. 1094.

Sufficiency of certificate of acknowledgment, 25 A.L.R.2d 1124.

1A C.J.S. Acknowledgments §§ 6, 69, 71.